Each season is its own entity. What you did two years ago or even last year has very little bearing on the current year. Players have changed coaches have changed and there's a thing called injuries. They have more impact on your season then perception. That's what Rutgers is really fighting. Laziness by the media to really look into each program and see what's really going on. Illinois is young and has a new coach. They will have issues throughout the season. Still you haven't heard much about that. Indiana also has a new coach. Nebraska is a clear example of underachieving while pouring millions into their program. Historically they have not been better than Rutgers. It's time to stop looking at the name on the front of the jersey and look at the meat and potatoes of each program to get an accurate picture of them.
I don't claim to be an expert in basketball, but the preseason polls that had Nebraska, Illinois and Indiana ahead of Rutgers might have been premature. There is a chance those schools may meet their expectations, but right now they're playing some bad basketball. Can anyone give solid evidence why they were picked to finish ahead of Rutgers? Are they clearly superior to Rutgers or is it more about perception of Rutgers in comparison to a Nebraska, Illinois or Indiana? I need real answers.
We love to point out what Rutgers' problems are, but fail to mention the problems of others. Nebraska look like sh*t against St. Johns, but hey that's not an issue for some on here. Indiana has a lot of holes in their game, but it gets overlooked because of the name on the front of the jersey. Illinois is a classic example of underachieving by a team that is suppose to be good based on recruiting rankings. Illinois was that close to going to the dance, but allowed a lesser team (Rutgers) to punch them in the face. All the superior Illinois did was walk away with their tail between their legs.
they have a new coach and at some point their next level talent is gonna gel.
I'm not claiming to an expert in basketball. I last played basketball in HS under the same coach who coached Greg Vetrone. I get the fundies of the game, but what I do understand are the principles of sports. I have close to 35 years of experience as a coach and player of football and baseball. The key to success in all sports is about development, coaching and match-ups.
I hear what Doug is saying but Doug you have to keep Illinois out of the discussion. BRAD Underwood is now their coach. He is a stud coach unlike Croce before him. I will be surprised if they are not much improved this year. I agree with Digger that he was an excellent hire
I know Illinois made a great hire, but based off their performance the last few years I was just judging them in the same way how people judge Rutgers. What have you done for me lately? Rutgers made a great hire too.
Winning league games changes perception.Nobody that matters really cares about losing programs until it reaches a stage where the head coach is fired.Pikiell and staff give Rutgers the best chance to break the cycle of losing seasons .Until that happens the media won't be impressed as demonstrated in preseason rankings.
I don't know if they'll beat anyone by 20 but, I'm keeping my eye on them for late season improvement.
I think you miss the whole point of the debate. The preseason polls, without seeing personnel or viewing things closely, just automatically pegged Rutgers for last. I wasn't trying to degrade other schools, but I was trying to make a point how perception overrides reality. In reality you do have some teams like Nebraska that may be much worse than Rutgers.
Who rip the fans? And nobody said it was the fans fault. If anything people are being critical of the media for how they just pick teams without even knowing the makeup of them.
We should beat up on Nebraska. We're probably at par with Illinois; Ohio State and possibly Indiana - games that we should and need to win at home as I believe we play all 4 home this season.I don't claim to be an expert in basketball, but the preseason polls that had Nebraska, Illinois and Indiana ahead of Rutgers might have been premature. There is a chance those schools may meet their expectations, but right now they're playing some bad basketball. Can anyone give solid evidence why they were picked to finish ahead of Rutgers? Are they clearly superior to Rutgers or is it more about perception of Rutgers in comparison to a Nebraska, Illinois or Indiana? I need real answers.