earlier Big Ten pr..."/> earlier Big Ten pr..."/>

Indy Star Writer’s Logic Still Not Adding Up


The Boiling Point: Indy Star writer Terry Hutchens tries to defend his earlier Big Ten predictions.

Terry Hutchens is back, trying to defend himself after hearing all sorts of criticism about his earlier blog post where he predicted Purdue would finish seventh and IU sixth in the Big Ten this season. As with last time, when he said it all comes down to Robbie Hummel, then predicted him to be an All-Big Ten player, then said Purdue finishes behind IU, despite his first comment, Hutchens has some logic that doesn’t add up again in this new post.

Let’s begin.

"“When I look at the Big Ten, I think the conference is not going to be as strong as it was a year ago. I see the Big Ten in kind of a 1-4-5-2 breakdown.”"

OK, not a bad start for Hutch. I can see it breaking down like this as well, though a 1-5-3-3 lineup may happen as well. Or a 2-4-3-3. Or whatever. This isn’t worth debating this early.

He goes on to predict Ohio State will win the Big Ten, something most people seem to agree on right now. So we’ll skip ahead to his next group, the “4” in the second pack of teams. (Bolding added by me.)

"“In the next group of four, I have Michigan State, Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois. I think all four are a little bit better than the other seven in the conference. Now, you could make an argument that Purdue belongs in this group and it would be hard to argue against that sentiment. The Boilers have been really good in recent years and perhaps losing last year’s big two won’t be that big of a deal in West Lafayette. Probably the best ammunition for this argument is Matt Painter, who I think is a great coach. Not a good coach, but a great coach. And perhaps that alone will push Purdue higher in the standings. I honestly think that has been the case with Tom Izzo and Bo Ryan in recent years, to name a couple of excellent coaches. But for right now, just understand that in my original way of thinking I saw Michigan State, Wisconsin, Michigan and Illinois in that next grouping.”"

OK, so here Hutch is saying Purdue doesn’t belong in this group, though they could make an argument for it based simply on coaching. That’s a valid point I guess. I assume that means he has Purdue in sixth, right outside of this pack, since he just said they COULD be in it.

I’d be wrong:

"“That takes us to the next five: Indiana, Purdue, Northwestern, Iowa and Minnesota. I really think this grouping could shake out in just about any order. Some think Northwestern is going to be better this year. Iowa and Minnesota can make their claims, too. I thought Indiana and Purdue belonged at the top of this list. And like I said, I could have gone either way it but I decided to put the Hoosiers at No. 6 and the Boilers at No. 7. I hate to put that much pressure on Cody Zeller but I really believe he gives IU basketball a completely different look than it has had in recent years. Because of that I gave the Hoosiers a slight edge. Not surprisingly, the black and gold crowd is calling me an idiot, a homer, and various other words that may not be fit to print.”"

"“But if I had picked Purdue to finish sixth and IU to finish anywhere above about ninth, I was going to hear those names any way. So the name calling doesn’t really concern me. I get that.”"

Alrighty, so once again Hutch says something and then goes completely against it and picks IU ahead again. Awesome, Hutch. I think at this point you just give up and let people go with their thoughts that you’re a homer or whatever and stop digging this hole you’re in even deeper.