Most of you probably already know, Purdue is in the top-5, according to the AP, for the first time in along time. The Coaches don't think Purdue did anything deserving of a higher ranking...but Duke did (note: Purdue beat the 11th-ranked team on a neutral site...Duke beat the 13th-ranked team on a neutral site).
Sagarin has Purdue at 7th, Pomeroy has our Boilers at 6th. Droids and humans both have strong feelings for Matty's club.
I, like you, realize that none of this is too important...at this point.
6 comments:
A point I read on other blogs, which I frankly agree with right now, is that both Duke and Purdue have very similar teams to last season. While you can't compare too much to the past, you have to wonder if we are 20 points better than we were this time last December (Big 10/ACC Challenge).
I don't have a problem with Duke being ahead of us. They looked good for the most part against UConn, and would probably be able to beat us again... right now. Let's hope our freshmen mature and we are an improved team come March and we can defend this high early ranking.
It is early, and we really shouldn't read too much into the fact that Sagarin has Indiana at 191st (up about 12 spots from last week) playing the 310th-toughest schedule so far.
Okay, seriously, that's definitely affected by last year. (Sagarin's ratings are still in their Bayesian stage, meaning Sanctions is still dragging them down a touch.) But it's nice to know that our performance last year and so far this year has us in everyone's Top 10. That's rarely been the case before.
I'm still under the wisdom of lets hide under the radar. The rest of the Big Ten lost a game and no one cares for the non-state named non-private team in the Big10. I believe when the resumes come to the committee there should be evidence for 1 or 2 seed come tourney time.
They will have to win the Big Ten and probably the Big Ten tournament (at least make it to the final) to get a 1 seed.
Margin of victory might have something to do with it. Opponent perceptions might as well. We squeaked by an SEC team by 1, Duke beat a member of the universe's best conference by 9. Ergo, we're not as good.
Frankly, except for the universe's best conference part, I agree. I'm proud of Painter and the team, but I also didn't see a dominant team on the floor against Tennessee. I saw a good solid team. Hopefully it is a team that becomes dominant.
BTW, Duke got the sole #1 vote not given to Kansas. Who was it? List of suspects below. Discuss. ;-)
The USA TODAY/ESPN Board of Coaches is made up of 31 head coaches at Division I institutions. All are members of the National Association of Basketball Coaches. The board for the 2009-10 season: Mike Adras, Northern Arizona; Dana Altman, Creighton; Tommy Amaker, Harvard; Tevester Anderson, Jackson State; Ronnie Arrow, South Alabama; Randy Bennett, Saint Mary's; Eddie Biedenbach, North Carolina-Asheville; Jim Boeheim, Syracuse; Rick Byrd, Belmont; Charlie Coles, Miami (Ohio); Steve Fisher, San Diego State; Greg Graham, Boise State; Rob Jeter, Wisconsin-Milwaukee; Billy Kennedy, Murray State; Billy Lange, Navy; Dan Leibovitz, Hartford; Fran McCaffery, Siena; Mike McConathy, Northwestern State; Bob McKillop, Davidson; Phil Martelli, Saint Joseph's; Ron "Fang" Mitchell, Coppin State; Matt Painter, Purdue; Tom Pecora, Hofstra; John Pelphrey, Arkansas; Mike Rice, Robert Morris; Doc Sadler, Nebraska; Herb Sendek, Arizona State; Scott Sutton, Oral Roberts; Bob Williams, UC-Santa Barbara; Gary Williams, Maryland; Doug Wojcik, Tulsa.
The reason Duke passed us in the Coaches' Poll is pretty simple: they were ONE VOTE behind us in the previous poll.
Their win over UCONN was probably slightly more impressive than our win over Tennessee, although I think that Tennessee is easily a better team than UCONN. Plus they're Duke, so, you know. I was expecting it.
Post a Comment