Penn State, Purdue fall back; Michigan State is the new favorite

Picking a preseason Big 10 favorite has never been easy, but it is usually simple. Penn State or Purdue? Purdue or Penn State? Flip a coin. There are frequently other good teams, but the race is usually for third place.

In 2004, however, the world has changed. Penn State and Purdue will again be good, of course. Either could wind up at the top of the standings, but neither is the pick to do so. In fact, I see them finishing fourth and fifth. Shocking I realize, but there are some excellent teams in the Big 10 this season whose names don't start with 'p'.

As is frequently the case, the Big 10 seems to break down into groups of teams. This season, more than in others, the divide between those groups is large. Michigan State, Minnesota, Ohio State, Penn State and Purdue are the clear favorites for the top five. Any could win the championship, although more would have to go right for Penn State than for the other four. All five should make the NCAA tournament.

Iowa, Michigan and Wisconsin are very young teams with some excellent freshmen and all three will have to have their freshmen make significant contributions. Those three should compete for postseason WNIT berths. Finally, Illinois, Indiana and Northwestern simply look like bad teams. None of those three may win a game against the top eight in the conference this season.

Injuries, however, are always the great unknown, and 2004 is starting out to be a season when they will play an even bigger role than usual. After only a week of practice, four players have knee injuries of note. Indiana's Jenny DeMuth and Wisconsin's Lesha Jones will miss the season with acl injuries. Both were counted on to be key players for their teams. Iowa's Lindsay Richards, last season's starter at point guard, may be back by Jan. 1 from her summer ACL injury. But she may not. Purdue's Aya Traore, who is counted on to pick up much of the slack left by the graduation of Shereka Wright, had arthroscopic knee surgery just prior to practice. She is expected back early in the season and she will be needed early in the year.

But let's cut to the chase: Who's going to win the Big 10 in 2004?

1. Michigan State (22-9, 10-6 in the Big 10)

Key Returnees: Lindsay Bowen, 5-7 senior: Two-time second team all-Big 10 selection. Averaged 13.5 points and 2.4 assists a game. Liz Shimek 6-1 junior: Third team all-Big 10. Averaged 10.8 points and 8.1 rebounds a game.

Key Newcomers: Courtney Davidson, a three-time first team all-state honoree in Ohio. Averaged 19 points, 8.5 assists, 5.9 rebounds and 3.2 steals a year as a senior.

In 2003, coach Joanne P. McCallie and her Spartans unquestionably made progress in their quest to become a topflight program. For most of the season, they sat near the top of the Big 10 standings before they faltered and lost three of their last four conference games. The Spartans won by playing a style of basketball that is becoming their hallmark under McCallie: They are physical, aggressive, fundamentally solid and unspectacular. They play defense and rebound the ball better than almost anyone they played.

They did all this while having one of the youngest squads in the league -- McCallie only had one senior on her roster. While she did lose one more player to transfer, she was not a significant contributor. Of course the advantage to having a good young team is that the following season you should have a veteran even better squad. That is the situation McCallie finds herself in. The Spartans return 86% of their points, 80% of their rebounds and 80% of their assists from last season.

In addition, when the 2003 season concluded, Michigan State was one of the top defensive teams in the league. In all games, the Spartans held opponents to 55.2 points and 37.4 field goal percentage. Both were best in the league. In league play, MSU slipped slightly but still finished third in both categories. At its best, McCallie's defense is oppressive. At its weakest it is still very good.

The defense is not flashy, but it is a sound fundamentally as possible. The Spartans don't use a lot of gimmicks -- instead they play the passing lanes and pressure the ball. The defense wears teams down mentally by punishing opponents for every error. They also basically do it without fouling. Only two Spartans fouled out in 2003. Teams have to earn every point that they manage against Michigan State and it is this defense that makes the Spartans FCP's favorites to win the Big 10 in 2004.

Michigan State also brings its defensive work ethic to the boards. It is not a big team but it excels on the boards, especially on the offensive side. Liz Shimek is only 6-1 but Janel McCarville of Minnesota may be the only player in the league who is stronger. In her first two years at MSU, Shimek has averaged 8.6 rebounds a game and is already ranked number 15 in school history in that category. Senior Kelli Roehrig joins Shimek as a returning starting in the post. The 6-4 Roehrig can be dominating when she is on top of her game, but she also has spells when her production falters. If she is again inconsistent this season, freshman Laura Hall should step in. Hall is an excellent athlete in a big body who should make Michigan State even more formidable in the middle.

While the Spartan offense lags behind its defense, they are slowly building a team that will be above average offensively. Junior Lindsay Bowen led the team in scoring last season with 13.5 ppg. Shimek was the only other Spartan in double figures with a 10.8 per game average. Bowen is primarily a three-point shooter while Shimek, and last season's third scorer, Roehrig, are both post players who get many of their points near the basket. What MSU has lacked has been the ability to penetrate and hit the midrange jumper. Last season's top freshman, Rene Haynes brings that ability to the team. This year's top freshman, Courtney Davidson, also has the skills to expand the Spartan offense. Davidson, though, brings more than scoring to the table. Senior Kristin Haynie has started at point guard her entire career and she will again this season. Davidson will have a year to learn the position before she steps into the starting lineup. While Haynie has been a solid point guard, Davidson has the potential to be better than Haynie as she is a proven scorer and an excellent ballhandler.

McCallie has made it clear that she plans to build her program on defense and rebounding. The Spartans feel that they can improve in both areas this season. They are especially concentrating on offensive rebounding. If they can do that, they will be able to generate more points from their defense and rebounding. Also look for the Spartan defense to be more complex this season. McCallie has built her program from the bottom up and this season, with the defensive base firmly in place, the Spartans will likely add defensive twists that will make it even more difficult for teams to score against them.

But if the Spartans are to take the next step, it will likely not be because of changes in their defensive scheme. Like all programs without a strong history of success, Michigan State is still learning to win. At times last season, the Spartans were inconsistent. They lost at Penn State after leading by 12 in the second half. Perhaps most damaging, they lost a surprisingly non-competitive home game to Iowa. When they reached the NCAA tournament, they appeared intimidated and played poorly in their loss at Texas.

McCallie talks a lot about being tough and she has taught her team to by physically tough. If she succeeds in improving their mental toughness, 2004 will be the most successful year in MSU history. And the Spartans will do it with a team that is still one of the youngest teams in the Big 10, which does not bode well for Big 10 teams in the future.

2. Ohio State (21-10, 11-5)

Key Returnees: Caity Matter, 5-9 senior: second Team all-Big 10. Averaged 14.8 points and 3.8 rebounds a game. Jessica Davenport, 6-5 sophomore: Named 2004 Big 10 Freshman of the Year by the media after averaging 12.5 points, 5.7 rebounds 2.6 blocks a game.

Key Newcomers: Marscilla Packer, McDonald's and WBCA all-American. Second team Parade all-American. Averaged 22.1 points, 5.8 rebounds and 3.1 assists a game as a senior.

In three short years at Ohio State, coach Jim Foster has established himself as one of the top recruiters in the country and now he has a team that has as much talent as anyone around. He has put together a squad that has as much if not more talent than other team in the conference so if Michigan State falters at all, or if the Buckeyes come together more quickly than expected, Foster could find his team at the stop of the standings at season's end.

The 2003 Ohio State team had a well-balanced offense and an aggressive defense, but the Buckeyes were not a good rebounding team. They have the potential to improve in all three areas in 2004. They lose post player LaToya Turner who averaged 13.8 points and 6.5 rebounds a game, but they return all the other players who started a game. They also add another talented freshman class.

Leading the returnees are a pair of sophomores who should make the Buckeyes a national force before they graduate. Powerful 6-5 Jessica Davenport was the media selection as Freshman of the Year. She led the Big 10 in field goal percentage and blocked shots. Davenport has excellent hands and plays with surprising finesse. Other than Minnesota's Janel McCarville, there is not a player in the conference that can guard her one on one. Five-nine guard Brandi Hoskins is an excellent athlete and one of the most well-rounded players to enter the Big 10 in years. Hoskins is an excellent passer and rebounder. She has a quick first step and can drive to the basket. She also has a solid jump shot. Foster's offense is patient and halfcourt, and that is not the type of ball that Hoskins is best suited for. Part of his job will be to develop enough wrinkles in the offense to allow Hoskins to use all her athleticism and skills.

The Buckeyes have perfect complements to the sophs. Senior Caity Matter is one of the best three-point shooters in Big 10 history and she keeps teams from collapsing on Davenport. Incoming freshman Marscilla Packer is a virtual scoring machine. Packer can hit from three-point range, drive the basket or pull up for a midrange jumper.

Ohio State was a very good offensive team last season but somehow, the feeling persists that the Buckeyes should be better. They have tremendous weapons and few apparent weaknesses. Point guard Kim Wilburn is a true point and one of the league's best. The team shot the ball better than any other Big 10 team in 2003. While 68 points a game is not bad, four teams scored more and the Buckeyes looked like they should have also. The addition of Packer should make this an overpowering offensive squad.

The one obvious offensive weakness is free-throw shooting. The Buckeyes finished last in the conference after they hit only 65% of their freebies. That needs to improve.

Defensively, Ohio State was also solid. The Buckeyes held opponents to 58.7 points and 38.6 field goal percentage. The Buckeyes use primarily a halfcourt defense that does not put great pressure on the ball and as a result, they only forced 16 turnovers a game. This is not a team that presses a lot. With the Buckeyes' speed and athleticism it would seem that they are built to press. As with the offense, it seems that Ohio State should be better defensively.

The main weakness, though, was rebounding. Despite having two excellent post players in Turner and Davenport, Ohio State only outrebounded opponents by .7 of a board a game. The Buckeyes usually have three guards on the floor, but those guards could rebound better. They lost one of their two rebounders to graduation and there are no freshmen to replace her. The Buckeyes are very athletic, but, as a team, they are very small. Among the players that will see the floor, only Davenport is over six feet. Much of the responsibility for maintaining, if not improving, Ohio State's rebounding performance will fall to 6-0 power forward Michelle Munoz. She will have to step in and make a significant contribution on the boards.

In 2003, the Buckeyes were an inconsistent team. At their best, they were very, very good. At their worst, they were still pretty good. Experience should bring more consistency. The available talent should make their playing level very high.

Jim Foster has won many, many basketball games. He has done it with a certain style. He will continue to win many games at Ohio State. This is a team that will be very, very good in 2004 and beyond. If the Buckeyes reach their potential, they could well finish on top of the Big 10. If they are to reach their potential, however, Foster will have to make some changes in his system. These aren't likely to be major changes, just ways to better utilize his team's athleticism.

3. Minnesota (25-9, 9-7)

Key Returnees: Janel McCarville, first Team Kodak all-American, first team all-Big 10 coaches and media, 16.1 points, 10.8 rebounds a game.

Key Newcomers: Natasha Williams, 6-3 center: Named fourth team all-American by Parade magazine and sixtg team all-American by Street and Smith. Averaged 15.5 points and 11.5 rebounds a game. Ranked number 25 by the Blue Star Report and 78 by the All-Star Girls Report.

What does a coach do following the most magical season in school history and the graduation of the best player in school history? If you're Minnesota's Pam Borton, you look around and see the most dominating player in the Big 10 and one of the best recruiting classes around. They you get your team ready to have more fun.

In 2003, Lindsay Whalen, who was unquestionably the best player in Minnesota history, led the Gophers to their first Final Four berth. Whalen finished her Minnesota career with 2,285 points (first all-time) and 578 assists (second all-time). She did this despite missing seven games in her senior season with a broken hand. Whalen proved her talent by moving to point guard and leading the Connecticut Sun to the Finals in the WNBA season that just ended.

Whalen's injury proved costly to the Gophers' title hopes in 2003. They lost four of six games without her and finished with a deceiving 9-7 league record. But the time without Whalen was not without value. The players got a taste of life without Whalen and Janel McCarville learned how to carry a team. Both lessons should help Minnesota greatly this season.

McCarville, especially, grew during the time without Whalen. If one game can be a turning point in a career, that happened to McCarville in the last game the Gophers played without Whalen. In the Big 10 tournament, McCarville had 23 points, 11 rebounds and 10 steals as the Gophers almost beat Ohio State. The 2004 Gophers will be built around McCarville, who should be the most dominant player in the league in years.

But, while McCarville will be the center of the offense, she will not be its only component. Junior Shannon Schonrock returns as the starting point guard. Schonrock is primarily a three-point shooter who will help keep defenses from collapsing on McCarville.

Before Borton arrived on the scene, Minnesota was a running team that was not strong defensively. Borton has continued the emphasis on the uptempo game and the 2004 Gophers will again run and gun at every opportunity. While they will not have the creativity of Whalen, the Gophers will have a deeper, more balanced offense. Transfers April Calhoun and Katie Alsdurf will be eligible and will provide depth at guard. Alsdurf especially will contribute. She's a very good three-point shooter and can also penetrate. Alsdurf may take Whalen's spot as the starting shooting guard, and if she doesn't start she will be the third guard.

The real depth, and the real offensive firepower, will come from the post. McCarville will be joined by a pair of highly touted 6-3 freshmen. Natasha Williams was a Parade all-American who is a powerful and versatile post player. Lauren Lacey is more athletic and may be more effective as a power forward. Both players will be tutored by McCarville and should make immediate and significant contributions.

While Pam Borton has continued the offensive style begun by her predecessor, she has brought in her own defensive philosophy and it is here that she may have had her biggest impact. Under Borton, Gophers' opponents' scoring average has dropped by 11 points a game. This has happened without Minnesota slowing down the game to limit possessions. Last season, Minnesota was not a good defensive team, but was average and that was an improvement.

In 2003, Minnesota held Big 10 teams to 59.7 points a game and 41.8% shooting. With the added depth and athleticism she will have, Borton will extend the defense and put in some wrinkles that should make the Gopher defense more effective. Those wrinkles should include a full-court press and increased ball pressure on the perimeter. This would provide two significant benefits. First, it should force more of the kind of turnovers that lead to easy baskets. Second, it will improve the weakest area of the Gopher defense. Last season, Minnesota allowed Big 10 teams to hit a league-worst 37.8% of their three point attempts. The Gophers' inside strength will force teams to shoot more from the outside and the perimeter defense has to improve enough to not allow teams to take advantage of this.

In a few short seasons, Minnesota has gone from one of the league's worst teams to one of its best. The talent is clearly there to keep the Gophers in the upper division for the next few seasons but they have to prove that they have learned how to win. This isn't always as easy as fans assume. In fact, it is here that programs on the rise frequently stop. Lindsay Whalen was the heart of the team. When she was injured last season, the team floundered. When she returned, the Gophers recovered and made the Final Four. They will enter the 2004 season without Whalen but with sky-high expectations and the pressure that accompanies them.

Minnesota has a legitimate all-American, a solid core of returning players, an excellent freshmen class and a coach who has done little wrong since she arrived. If Borton can continue to put the pieces together and the entire program learned from its time without Whalen last season, this is a team that can contend for a Big 10 championship. McCarville is the only senior on the squad, so it may be another year away from its peak. With some breaks, the potential this season is unlimited.

4. Purdue (29-4, 14-2)

Key Returnees: Katie Gearlds, 6-1 soph: Named Big 10 Freshman of the Year by the coaches. Averaged 10.8 points a game. Erin Lawless, 6-2 soph: Member of the all-Freshman team. Averaged 6.7 points and 3.4 rebounds a game.

Key Newcomers: Lindsay Wisdom-Hylton 6-2 forward: Named honorable mention all-American after averaging 15 points, 10.6 rebounds 5.2 blocks and 4.9 steals as a senior. Ranked number 44 by the All Star Girls Report and 45 by the Blue Star Index.

Some things in life are constant. Death and taxes are the cliche absolutes. Purdue finishing near the top of the Big 10 standings is not quite as certain, but doesn't miss by much.

Every season coach Kristy Curry puts together a team that is one of the nation's best. Every year a new crop of high school arrive on the Purdue campus to carry on the tradition -- and this season is no exception.

Purdue lost two of the best players in its storied history after the 2003 season. Forward Shereka Wright led the conference in scoring and finished third all-time in Purdue scoring history with over 2,200 points. Point guard Erika Valek finished fifth in al- time assists at Purdue and scored over 1,000 points in her career.

Replacing those two will obviously be the major challenge facing the Purdue coaches this season. Even though she was the more accomplished player, Wright's shoes may be easier to fill than Valek's. In her Purdue career, Valek was the coach on the floor who ran the Purdue offense as well as it could be run. At times she was an inconsistent scorer, but her decision-making was usually excellent. The easiest way to evaluate her contribution is to look at the numbers. With Valek starting at point, and she started every game in which she was healthy in her four years, the Boilers consistently ranked high in every team scoring category. And they won over 80% of the games Valek started.

Filling that vital point guard spot will be the top priority facing Curry and her staff this season. With Valek running the point, there were not a lot of minutes for her backups. The result is that there is no clear successor to her in sight. The first player to be given the chance will be 5-9 junior Sharika Webb. Although she is a junior, Webb does not have much experience. She only averaged nine minutes a game in 2003. If Webb struggles, the Boilers will look to freshman Brina Pollack. Katie Gearlds may also get some minutes at point this season, but none of these players are proven. Although all have potential, they also all have question marks. How successful Curry is in filling the point guard spot will go a long way to determining how successful the Boilers will be this season.

Purdue does seem to have answers to its other main questions. Shereka Wright's graduation leaves a huge hole. It's a hole that won't be filled by one player. But junior college transfer Aya Traore should pick up the biggest chunk of the numbers. Traore is a 6-1 athlete who can drive to the basket or put up a three-point shot. When looking at new players in the league, the temptation is to stop with the freshmen, but that really would be a mistake here. Traore will have as big an impact as any freshman, if she can stay healthy. The word 'if' may be the key in that sentence. She missed last season with a torn PCL. She underwent further surgery to clean out the other knee shortly before practice started. The Boilers hope to have her healthy by the start of the season.

A pair of sophomores will also pick up a chunk of Wright's numbers. Gearlds was the coach's choice as Freshman of the Year last season and did nothing to diminish her standing as the next great Boiler. Gearlds is an extremely versatile player who could get minutes everywhere but at the post. Six-two Erin Lawless provided excellent frontcourt play from the bench last season and should be above average as a starter this year.

For the past several seasons, Purdue has been hurt by a lack of size in the middle. While Curry was unable to recruit any true centers, they did bring in two forwards who will bring size and rebounding to the team. Six-four Natasha Bogdanova and 6-2 Lindsay Wisdom-Hylton both have the potential to step in and contribute immediately near the basket. Wisdom-Hylton in particular has the strength to immediately improve Purdue's post game.

The 2004 Purdue Boilermakers will look different and the same as previous squads. The new players will bring different strengths and weaknesses than their predecessors, but Kristy Curry has proven to be the best all-around coach in the conference. The Boilermakers will continue to play the style of ball she loves: aggressive. They are a good rebounding team, but a team that sends all five players to the boards to allow them to be good.

They are not, however, going to be an experienced team. Curry started the same five players all of last season and four of the five have graduated. On paper, Purdue has the players to replace them. While games aren't won on paper, the Purdue history indicates that the players will step up and do what is needed.

Picking Purdue fourth seems strange. The fact that that's the prediction speaks more to the overall strength of the league than to any weaknesses in the Purdue program. The Boilers are young and they have a huge question mark at point mark. If their youngsters grow up fast and if they get above-average play at the point spot, the Boilers could finish higher, perhaps even first. If those things don't happen, Purdue could drop a spot or two -- but don't bet on that.

5. Penn State (28-6, 15-1)

Key Returnees: Tanisha Wright, 5-11 senior: Two-time Big 10 Defensive Player of the Year. Two-time first team all-Big 10. Averaged 14.8 points, 4.7 rebounds, and 4.1 assists a game.

Key Newcomers: Romana Vynuchalova, 6-4 center and a member of the Slovakian junior national team.

Graduation is a fact of college sports, and transfers are becoming one. The defending Big 10 champions experienced both since the end of last season. Graduation is expected and a good coach plans for it. Transfers come as a surprise and often leave coaches unprepared.

All-American scoring machine Kelly Mazzante graduated after scoring 2,919 points for the Lady Lions. Also graduating was under-appreciated Jess Brungo who took her 1,142 points to the WNBA. Replacing 4,000+ career points is obviously extremely difficult, but Portland is a top coach and, while no single player or two could replace the duo, she had recruited players who have the potential to score from the outside.

The transfer of center Reicina Russell to Georgia, however, was unexpected. Although Russell's numbers were not close to either of the seniors, her loss may hurt more.

Portland has a definite style and that style has produced 649 wins at the collegiate level. She is a coach whose teams are guard-centered, aggressive and always good. Portland again has a team loaded with talented guards, but it is a team that is short of proven post players. Portland had planned to focus more on Russell this season and those plans are be out the window.

But, as always, the Lady Lions will have one of the top guard corps in the conference, and perhaps the nation. Point guard Jess Strom is heady, fundamentally sound and executes Portland's offense to perfection. Strom, who will likely finish second on the all-time assist list at Penn State, is an exceptional ballhandler who has a career assist/turnover ratio of 2.2. She is also a good scorer who averaged 10.8 points a game and hit 37.5% of her three point attempts. Her running mate at guard is another of the league's top players, 5-11 Tanisha Wright. Wright has twice been named Big 10 Defensive Player of the Year. She is an athletic, slashing guard who averaged 14.8 points on 48% field goal shooting. Despite the awards Mazzante earned, Wright was likely the best all-around basketball player on the team last season. Those two will be the centerpiece of the offense this season and should put up big numbers.

Portland always runs a three-guard offense. The third guard, and the person taking Mazzante's spot, will be sophomore Jen Harris. Harris was a scoring machine when she was a high school all-American and she will be counted on to pick up much of the scoring that graduated. The Penn State offense will allow Harris to be as effective offensively as she can.

That three-guard set will allow the Lady Lions to again score well. Last year, they averaged just under 70 points a game. Even with Mazzante's departure, they may well be close to that number in 2004.

Where they are going to have to come up answers is on defense and on the boards. Russell did not score much but she averaged 7.6 rebounds a game and had over half of the Lady Lions' league leading 5.1 blocks a game. In short, she was the defensive stopper near the basket that teams depend on -- but Russell transferred after her freshman season. The departure was unexpected and it will hurt. Portland has had many players leave her program early over the years and she routinely professes indifference to the transfers. But Russell's departure was so potentially harmful that Portland went to her home to try and talk her into staying. She wasn't successful and she will have to find someone to fill the gap.

Portland admits that the signing of Vynuchalova was done out of necessity. The Slovakian player should provide depth at post but will not likely be the answer Portland seeks. The player who will have to step up the most is 6-4 sophomore Amanda Brown. In 2003, her scoring was comparable to Russell's but she was not as effective defensively or as a rebounder. The Penn State guards have always been decent rebounders and will likely be so again this year. But good Penn State teams have had one player in the middle who has been dominant. If that is to happen this season, it will have to be Brown. She will have to step up and be a force on the boards and a defensive presence. She had a solid freshman season, but she will have to make more improvement than a player normally makes in one season. Portland loves to run and the Lady Lions will have to be able to rebound well enough to get the break going.

The Penn State perimeter defense should be excellent. Wright is one of the most disruptive one on one defenders in the country, Strom is fundamentally solid and Harris has the athleticism to be good defensively. The question again will be the interior defense.

Rene Portland is not a coach who lacks confidence, and that may actually hurt her squad this season. Despite the loss of Mazzante, she has put together a non-conference schedule that is one of the most difficult around. The Lady Lions will play at Texas, Duke, Baylor and Texas Tech. They will host North Carolina and Old Dominion. If they lose four or five non-conference games, they will put themselves in a position of having to finish near the top of the Big 10 to win a NCAA bid. That will put additional pressure on the team early.

No matter what the roster looks like, any team coached by Rene Portland should never be overlooked. The preseason pick here is fifth, but if things go well, especially if Amanda Brown develops quickly, the Lions could again challenge for the top spot.

6. Wisconsin (10-17, 4-12)

Key Returnees: Stephanie Rich, 5-11 senior: two-time honorable mention all-Big 10, 10.3 points, 4.9 rebounds, 5.8 assists a game. Ashley Josephson, 5.8 junior: 12.3 points a game.

Key Newcomers: Janese Banks, 5-10 guard: Named Gatorade Player of the Year in Indiana after averaging 25.3 points, 9.2 rebounds, 3.0 assists and 2.8 steals a game as a senior. Jolene Anderson 5-10 guard: Leading scorer in the history of Wisconsin girls' basketball with 2,881 points. Averaged 37.1 points, 15 rebounds, 8 assists and 8 steals a game as a senior.

Although basketball, like all sports, is measured in wins and losses, Lisa Stone's first season at Wisconsin can't be measured in those simple terms. There weren't as many wins as Stone hoped, but the lessons learned may pave the for more Ws in the future.

The Badgers entered the 2003 season as a team with many question marks. Some of those questions found positive answers. Others didn't. First among the questions was how the team would react to the new coaching staff. Former coach Jane Albright had been popular with her players and most were not happy to see her fired. Stone and her staff handled the transition as well as possible and the result was a team that immediately bought into her system.

And it was also a team that got consistently better as the year went on. Unfortunately for Stone, she did not inherit a team with great talent and there were several key injuries as the season went on. The result was the worst Big 10 record since the Mary Murphy days in Madison.

The 2003 Badgers were a decent defensive team and a slightly better-than-average rebounding squad. As the season went on, they learned to compete, especially when they were playing at home. Offensively, however, Wisconsin was horrible. There is no nicer word that could apply. In conference games they only scored 55.6 points on 37.7% shooting. The Badgers did not break 40 points in two of their games.

Going into 2004, it is obvious that the team will have to score more. Wisconsin's top two post players, 6-5 Emily Ashbaugh and 6-7 Lello Gebisa, have both graduated. Those two scored one-third of Wisconsin's points last season. The Badgers return everyone else who started and several of them have shown that they can score. Shooting guard Ashley Josephson led the team in scoring with a 12.3 average and is the leading three-point shooter in Wisconsin history. Her confidence grew as the season went on and she should take another step up this season. Her running mate at guard, Stephanie Rich, has been named honorable mention all-Big 10 for the past two seasons. Rich is a heady player with a solid all-around game. She has not been able to shoot with any consistency in her time at Wisconsin so it's probably not realistic to expect that she will suddenly find a shooting stroke that's been missing for three seasons.

The other returnee who should increase her contribution is 6-1 post Jordan Wilson. Although she is undersized, Wilson is a physical player with a nice array of post moves. She moved into the starting lineup half way through the season and improved significantly by the end of the year.

Any other offensive improvement will have to come from freshmen and Wisconsin has a very solid freshman class that will make the team better. They have already taken a blow, however, as the top incoming frosh, 6-4 Lesha Jones, was unable to rehab a torn ACL in time to play this season. But several other freshmen should make significant contributions to the Badgers this season.

Janese Banks will almost certainly start at a wing position and should have the biggest impact. Banks brings athleticism and a solid all-around game to the floor. She's a proficient scorer who can hit a jump shot or drive to the basket. She is also an excellent defender and will see major minutes for Wisconsin.

The other freshman who will be counted on to score is Jolene Anderson. Anderson's high school numbers have to be taken in context. She played in the smallest school division and simply overmatched most of her opponents. That won't be happening any time soon in the Big 10. Anderson can shoot the ball but how quickly she can adjust to the much higher caliber play will determine how much she contributes.

The freshmen bring another needed aspect to the Wisconsin team: As a group, they are much more athletic than the other players. Wisconsin will go from being one of the slowest teams in the league to one with adequate speed and quickness. That improvement will allow Stone to press and run, which is the style of basketball she prefers.

If Wisconsin is to improve, the Badgers will have to be better both offensively and defensively and they will have to do so while going from being on of the league's tallest teams to being one of its shortest. That will have an impact on the rebounding. Stone will have better athletes to work with so they may be able to grab some rebounds by outworking people, but they are unlikely to be a good rebounding team.

In 2003, Stone played with a small roster that was made smaller by injuries. By the end of the season, she only had six scholarship players available. She will have more depth to work with this year. That will allow her to make more adjustments as the game goes on, as well as give some players rest when they need it.

In short, Wisconsin will be better in 2004 than they were in 2003. They should compete with Iowa for the sixth and seventh slots in the conference and may be able to grab a post-season WNIT bid. To do that, the freshman will have to live up to their potential.

7. Iowa (16-13, 10-6)

Key Returnees: Jamie Cavey, 6-3 senior: Named third team all-Big 10 by the coaches and media. Averaged 16.8 points and 4.8 rebounds a game.

Key Newcomers: Abby Emmert, 5-10 point guard: Two-time first-team all state in Iowa.

Entering the 2003, Iowa was expected to be an average team. The Hawkeyes were a veteran team, but so was virtually everyone else in the league. Lisa Bluder had two solid players but question marks after them. She also had a team that was weak defensively and on the boards. The Hawks have always scored and Bluder is an excellent coach, so a middle of the pack finish was expected.

But Bluder has had her teams exceed expectations before, and they did again. The Hawks were near the top of the standings late in the season before finishing in a tie for fourth place. They also received a bid to play in the NCAA tournament. This is not to say that all the preseason questions were answered positively. A key to the season was the emergence of then-junior Jamie Cavey in the middle. Cavey ended up leading Iowa in scoring with a 16.8 per game average. But the Hawkeyes improved only slightly on the boards and they again were one of the weakest defensive teams in the conference. In fact, their defense was embarrassing in their second round NCAA loss to Virginia Tech.

As they start the 2004 season, expectations for Iowa may be lower than they were in 2003. Three players -- Cavey, Lillis and Faulkner -- accounted for 68% of Iowa's points and only Cavey returns. The Hawks ranked ninth in rebounding margin in conference games and Lillis was their best on the boards. And the defense ...

To make matters worse, starting point guard Lindsay Richards tore her ACL for the second time this past summer. Initially, Iowa hoped to have her back by the start of the Big 10 season, but that is looking less likely now.

Looking to 2004, Bluder faces more uncertainty than perhaps any time since she has been at Iowa. Currently, the roster stands at 10 players and four of those are freshmen. Of the six veterans, only Cavey has really established herself as a better than average Big 10 player, and she did it with opponents concentrating on Lillis. In the past few seasons, Iowa was able to count on an above-average offense offsetting weaknesses on the boards and defensively. In the frontcourt, at least, the Hawkeyes have the potential to again score well. Juniors Johanna Solverson and Tiffany Reedy will likely join Cavey on the front line. Both were highly thought of coming out of high school and they finished as second and third leading returning scorers this year. Solverson, in particular, seems to have a game that should allow her to take a step up -- however, she only shot 33% from the field last season. That has to improve significantly for her to make the type of contribution needed. The three will be joined in the rotation by 6-2 freshman Krista VandeVenter, the Minnesota Gatorade Player of the Year. VandeVenter is a powerful player who should give the Hawks immediate help on the boards as well as a defensive presence in the middle.

The Iowa backcourt looks shakier. The graduation of Kristi Faulkner and Richards' injury leave the Hawks with no experience at point guard and very little proven scoring. Junior Crystal Smith will likely start at shooting guard. She is one of the more athletic players in the Big 10, but she has been used primarily as a defensive stopper for her first two years. In 2003, she only averaged only 3.7 points in over 16 minutes a game. Richards' replacement at point guard is 5-9 freshman Abby Emmert, who faces a double dilemma. Not only will she have to make learn the college game as a starting point guard, she will do so in an offense that is unsettled. All the Hawks will be learning their roles as they go. Beyond those two will be a senior with little game experience and a freshman. Last season, Iowa got 26.5 points from its guards. It's difficult to see how the Hawkeyes can come close to that number in 2004.

With all the uncertainty, it seems unlikely that Iowa will repeat as the highest scoring team in the Big 10. The Hawkeyes will have to be a better rebounding and defensive team. They appear to have to players to improve somewhat on the boards. Solverson and Cavey both have the ability to grab more boards and VandeVenter should have an immediate impact in that area.

That leaves defensem which has been the Achilles' heel of this program for several seasons. It's hard to understand why the Hawks are so porous defensively as they always work hard and play with great heart. Iowa's players always compete as well as anyone. But they have not been even average defensively since Bluder has been the coach. They are less athletic than most teams in the league but that should only account for part of the problem. Prior to the 2003 season, Bluder talked about improving her defense. That didn't happen. If it doesn't happen in 2004, the Hawks will struggle to stay in the middle of the pack.

Under Bluder, Iowa teams have overachieved in the past. The Hawkeyes have a solid enough core of players, especially on the front line, to allow them to be a good, if unspectacular, team. They are very young and thin, with only 10 players on the roster. They can't afford an injury, a player not living up to expectations or a run of bad luck. Most especially, they cannot afford to continue to be one of the conference's weakest defensive teams.

8. Michigan (14-17, 6-10)

Key Returnees: Tabitha Pool, 6-1 senior: Averaged 13.3 points and 7.8 rebounds a game in 2003 and was named honorable mention all-Big 10.

Key Newcomers: Becky Flippin, Krista Clement and Katie Dierdorf.

How do you start a program from scratch? That is almost the job facing second year Michigan coach Cheryl Burnett this season. At the end of last season, there were eight Wolverines with eligibility remaining. Five of the eight decided to leave Burnett's program, so the three returnees will be joined by seven freshmen and form Burnett's second Michigan team.

Although it's obviously a very thin roster, it is a roster that is much more suited to playing the type of basketball that Burnett loves. In 2003, center Jennifer Smith emerged as one of the league's top players. As a result of her performance, the team evolved into a half-court post-centered offense. Burnett, of course, has risen to the top by playing an aggressive fast-paced game. With the influx of new players, she has added the athleticism that will allow her to play her style of basketball. This essentially new squad will allow Burnett to mold her program into one that fans of Southwest Missouri will recognize.

One of the three players to not leave the program early is the player Burnett could have least afforded to lose. Six-one forward Tabitha Pool was named honorable mention all-Big 10 as a junior after she averaged 13.3 points and 6.3 rebounds a game. Pool is an excellent athlete who can hit the three-point shot and slash to the basket. She is the type of player who could absolutely explode if given the freedom to create that Burnett typically gives her players.

The other returning starter is sophomore swing player Kelly Helvey. Helvey is a nice athlete with a solid all-around game but she only averaged 3.5 points a game last season and will have to make a greater contribution. Senior Breanne McPhilamy is the other returning player. The 6-2 forward has never averaged more than six minutes a game and will likely not be a significant player for the Wolverines.

That leaves freshmen to handle every other spot on the floor. The key to that effort will be guards Becky Flippin and Krista Clement. Flippin is 5-6 point guard who should step into the starting lineup right away while Clement is 5-9 and more of a shooting guard. Clement was named Miss Michigan basketball last season and has impressed in preseason drills. Michigan has not had adequate play at the point guard position since Ann Thorius graduated in 2001 but Flippin has the credentials, and the athleticism, to play the point in Burnett's system. She also brings a solid knowledge of that system. She grew up three houses from Burnett's when the coach was at Southwest Missouri State and served as a ball girl there.

Clement is a pure scorer who will be counted on to put up points from the outside. She averaged over 24 points a game as a senior in high school and will have to consistently hit from the outside. Jessica Starling, who is more of a penetrator than either Flippin or Clement, will be the third guard and may get minutes at small forward.

The other freshman of note is 6-0 post player Katie Dierdorf. Although undersized, Dierdorf should fit nicely into the Wolverines uptempo style. She is physically strong, athletic and has a jump shot to 15 feet. She could well be the third freshman to start this season.

Obviously, the Wolverines' success will be totally dependent on how quickly the freshmen can adapt to college ball. Burnett's offensive is aggressive and fast paced and it requires players to make quick decisions, and everymone must be able to adjust on the fly. Her defense also is similar. This is not easy for freshmen under the best of circumstances and when the virtually the entire team is learning as they go, it makes it even harder.

It's likely that Michigan will go through significant growing pains this season. There will be flashes of what can be along with periods of what shouldn't be. But Burnett appears to have brought in a class that will let her elevate her program. They are more athletic than the players on the Michigan team last season and perhaps more important, they are much better competitors than their predecessors. Burnett quickly established that some of the lackadaisical effort given by previous Michigan teams would not be tolerated. That shouldn't be a problem in the future.

This is not a team that will contend for a first division spot and a NCAA bid. Depending on how quickly the freshmen develop, a postseason WNIT appearance is possible. Burnett's a proven coach and her initial efforts indicate that her team will be a force in the Big 10 sooner rather than later.

9. Illinois (10-18, 4-12)

Key Returnees: Angelina Williams, 6-0 senior: Named third team all-Big 10 by the media and honorable mention by the coaches. Averaged 15.7 points, 5.2 rebounds a game. Tiffanie Guthrie, 5-10 senior: honorable mention all-Big 10 by the media. Averaged 14.1 points, 7.3 rebounds a game.

Key Newcomers: The Illinois women's basketball team brings to mind one of the more annoying commercials of all time. After several seasons of staggering, they have fallen. They may well not be able to get up.

Turmoil has been the almost constant companion of this program since Theresa Grentz arrived. She has managed to overcome player defections and problems until recently. But the mass defections from her program have had an effect, and a huge one, on her recruiting. It has become almost impossible for her to recruit in the state of Illinois and the out-of-state players she has brought do not have the ability of her previous players.

Put bluntly, the Fighting Illini may have less talent on their roster than any team in the conference.

Entering the 2003 season, Grentz' group hoped to build on the NCAA bid they received the previous season. Those hopes were quickly dashed. The Illini won their first game and then lost the next four. Once the Big 10 season started, the Illini quickly established their position near the bottom of the standings. Other than one three-game winning streak against some of the league's other bottom teams, the season just kept spiraling downward.

Illinois' weaknesses were plenty and the strengths few. As the Illini look ahead to 2004, they see a roster without two of their top players and a freshman class that shows little promise of being able to fill the holes. In a nutshell, the Illini are weak offensively, weak defensively, average on the boards and have questionable attitudes. That doesn't leave many strengths.

Since Grentz came to Illinois, they have been below-average defensively. Her teams are athletic on the perimeter and they rely on that athleticism to control the outside while a usually strong post player handles the inside game. The players are normally athletic, but they are not fundamentally sound defensively. They tend to be off balance or out of position. With the exception of Tauja Catchings, they have not been good one-on-one defenders. In 2003, the Illini were somewhat better defensively than they had been. They gave up slightly fewer points and held opponents to a lower shooting percentage. But their defense was hurt when Aminata Yanni, likely their best on-ball defender, went down with an ACL. But even though they were better, they were still a weak defensive team.

It's difficult to see how there can be any defensive improvement in 2004. Yanni is gone, as is post player Cindy Dallas. The perimeter will be essentially the same players (minus Yanni) who were not good last season. But the real dropoff should come in the post. Freshman Danyel Crutcher is the likely starter at center and she appears to have decent credentials, but she's only 6-2 and it's not realistic to expect that she can give the team close to what Dallas did.

The shortcomings of the defense will hurt the squad even more this season because the offense won't be much better. In fact, it should be even weaker in 2004 than it was in 2003 -- and in 2003 it wasn't good. In league games last season, the Illini averaged 11 points a game less than they did in 2002. They finished seventh in field goal percentage, down from 43.3 to 39.4, 11th in free throw percentage, down from 74.5 to 64.6 and tenth in three-point percentage, down from 35.5 to 24.4. In short, Illinois can't shoot the ball and their two best shooters have graduated. And they really can't shoot jump shots. They take, and make, far fewer three-point shots than any team in the league.

Grentz teams have depended on athletes penetrating and beating people off the dribble, but the lack of consistent jump shooting allows teams to pack a zone. Illinois does not have a Big 10 caliber point guard and their passing is below average so they have difficulty breaking down a zone with ball movement. As the talent has declined, fewer players are able to score one-on-one. With Dallas likely being replaced by a freshman, and little incoming help on the perimeter, there is no reason to assume that the offense will get better this season.

Grentz, of course, made her name first as a dominating post player for Immaculta. As a coach, she has consistently put a strong post game on the floor. It's going to take an exceptional job from her to do that again this season. Cindy Dallas left as the only woman in Big 10 history to lead the league in rebounding for three consecutive seasons. Even with her, Illinois was only an average rebounding team. With only a freshman to replace her, it's hard to see them not getting worse.

Teams can minimize weaknesses with hard work and effort but those qualities were not apparent in Illinois last season. By the end of the season, the team appeared to be doing little more than going through the motions. Their last home game was an embarrassing blowout loss to Iowa that was characterized by an overall lack of effort. Dallas was the hardest working player on the team and the one with the most heart and there doesn't appear to be anyone to step into that role.

If the Illini surprises, they will be led by seniors Angelina Williams and Tiffanie Guthrie. Williams is a small forward with the talent to be one of the league's best players and she led the team in scoring last year and was second in assists and third in rebounding. Guthrie was third in scoring and second in rebounding and assists. Those two will have to carry most of the burden this year. When they graduate, they will leave a future that can only be described as bleak.

10. Indiana (12-17, 4-12)

Key Returnees: Jenny DeMuth, 5-10 senior: Named second team all-Big 10 by the media and third team by the coaches. Averaged 18.3 points and 7.7 rebounds a game. Cyndi Valentin 5-8 junior: Named honorable mention all-Big 10 by the coaches. Averaged 15.5 points a game.

Key Newcomers: Nikki Smith 5-9 guard: Averaged 10.2 points as a senior after putting up 20 points a game as a junior.

It's a truism that a team takes on the personality of its coach. When Kathi Bennett took the job at Indiana she brought with her an intense, strong personality. She took over a team that was not known for either its intensity or its work ethic. Hoosier fans hoped that the team would play more like Bennett did -- and it did. Almost immediately, the Hoosiers began playing harder and with more heart. That has stuck. This is a squad that is not going to outworked.

But Bennett is not one-dimensional and another part of her personality is playing a part now. Bennett is intense and driven. She is not patient. She has won wherever she has been. The 2003 Indiana team was very young and inexperienced. Prior to the season, Bennett said that she wouldn't get down as long as her team worked hard. They did but she didn't. By the end of the season, Bennett was clearly discouraged. She spent one late-season game sitting on the bench, at times appearing to be uninterested. It's difficult to imagine that not having an effect on the players.

As she enters 2004, Bennett may be facing more of the same. The Hoosiers were to return the entire team, so they expected some improvement. But it was never at all clear if there is enough talent on the team to bring about a significant improvement in the record. However, the Indiana season may have effectively ended within the first few minutes of the first practice. At that time last season's top scorer, and the unquestioned center of the team, Jenny DeMuth, went down with a torn ACL.

DeMuth and fellow guard Cyndi Valentin should have been the centerpieces of the team. They're the only proven scorers on the team -- in fact, the two scored over 54% of Indiana's points in 2003. Both are able to get their own shots. This is vital because the Hoosiers haven't run an effective offense in Bennett's first four years in Bloomington. The offense usually involves three or passes that leave the last receiver in no better position than the first passer. In order for Indiana to score, players have to create shots for themselves. The rather predictable result is that the Hoosier offense is, well, offensive.

Only Northwestern scored fewer points in conference games than Indiana and no one shot the ball as badly. DeMuth and Valentin did a fine job of stepping up and scoring, but there was no third scoring threat on the team. Valentin finished second on the team in scoring with 15.5 points a game to DeMuth's 18.3. The third-leading scorer, Angela Hawkins, only scored 6.4 a game and no one else was over six. In fact, LeeAnn Stephenson and Brigett Branson each averaged over 15 minutes a game but neither averaged two points. Now, with DeMuth out, scoring becomes even more problematic for Indiana.

If a team is this weak offensively, it has to rebound and play defense better than average. Bennett built her reputation as a defensive coach and her team was stronger defensively in 2003 than in 2002. But it was still only average. The Hoosiers had the best three-point shot defense but were only seventh overall in shooting percentage defense. That is indicative of a main problem with the Hoosiers. They have one of the league's weakest post games. The perimeter players play solid, aggressive defense, but if a team gets the ball inside, scoring becomes much easier.

The post game was not just defensively weak -- Indiana was not a good rebounding team. In conference games, the Hoosiers were outrebounded by over three a game. As further proof of the axiom that rebounding is hard work, 5-10 swing player DeMuth led the team on the boards, and it is not a coincidence that she is the team's hardest worker.

The Hoosiers in 2004 will field virtually the same team that they did in 2003, although their best player will watch from the bench as she rehabs her ACL. Jamie Gathing returns after tearing her ACL and freshman Nikki Smith joins the team, but neither is likely to be a significant addition, although Gathing may be able to provide some help on the boards.

It isn't likely that Valentin will be able to make a much bigger contribution than she did in 2003. It's also not likely that Kathi Bennett will be able to suddenly develop a potent offense, so any improvement will have to come from players who can take a step up. It is obviously needed most in the post.

If Indiana is to be any better, the Hoosiers will have to have to get significant contributions from their bigs. At the start of the 2003 season, Bennett was saying that her post players had much potential. By season's end, she was obviously discouraged and talked openly about how much work her post players have yet to do. That is not exactly confidence-inspiring behavior. It's not clear how good the Hoosier post players can be but it cannot help the players' development to have their coach be so openly down on them.

Even though no one graduated, Indiana is still a very young team. Only Gathing is a senior this year, so there will continue to be growing pains. Bennett is going to have to find a way to remain positive if her players are to reach their potential.

This is not the only area where Bennett needs to look at herself. By not having an effective offensive scheme, the coach takes away much of the team's margin for error. They have to be excellent on defense and they have to be very strong on the boards. If they aren't, the offensive weakness will doom them. There is really no excuse for the Hoosiers to be as weak offensively as they are. Valentin is an excellent scorer to build around and an even average offensive game would make Indiana significantly improved. This is the main challenge that Bennett faces.

When Kathi Bennett was hired, she brought both an impressive lineage and resume. She is running out of time before she is declared to be the latest in a long line of coaches who could not make a successful transition from mid-major to major Division 1 coaching. The betting here is that she will join them sooner rather than later as without DeMuth, the Hoosiers could struggle to stay ahead of Northwestern and out of the basement of the Big 10.

11. Northwestern (8-20, 1-15)

Key Returnees: Sarah Kwasinski: 8.7 points, 5.2 rebounds a game. Samantha McComb: 11.2 points a game.

Key Newcomers: coach Beth Combs.

Beth Combs must be a woman who is up for a challenge. If she weren't, she would never have considered moving from Colgate to Northwestern -- but she took the job and she arrived with all the enthusiasm that a new coach can bring to a task.

Perhaps the one consolation that Combs has is that things can't get much worse for the Wildcats. Last season Northwestern averaged a league-worst 48.4 points a conference game and gave up 67.6. Only Iowa allowed more points in conference games. For the math-challenged, Northwestern was outscored by an average of 19.2 points in Big 10 games in 2003. Statistically, in conference games the Wildcats were last in points scored, scoring margin, field goal percentage defense, rebounding offense, rebounding margin, turnover margin, offensive rebounds and defensive rebounds. They didn't finish much higher in other categories. And, sadly, they were definitely an improved team in 2003. In the last five seasons, Northwestern's highest finish was a tie for 10th and their 7-73 conference record includes two seasons with no league wins.

So, obviously, Combs has a lot of room for improvement and she does have some talent to work with. First, she has to begin to introduce her system to the program, but even if she succeeds in turning around thinga around at Northwestern, it will not be a quick transformation. This is definitely a team that needs building from the ground up.

A good place for her to start is with the player conditioning, which is another area that has been obviously lacking in the Wildcat program recently. The players do not appear to be in great shape and as a group, have typical Big 10 bodies. While several of the players are well built, they arrived on campus that way. The conditioning has adversely affected the players in several ways. The squad has been injury prone for the last several seasons. Under Olkowski, the team played exclusively a halfcourt offense and defense. Despite their lack of running, the Wildcats frequently couldn't stay with better-conditioned teams. They consistently wore down as the game went on. Individual players were also hurt. Sarah Kwasinski is a slender post player with above average skills, but she has never learned to handle the physical play in the middle and has not come close to reaching her potential.

Conditioning aside, Combs faces weaknesses wherever she looks though she also has areas that could be developed into strengths. But they will only develop into strengths if she can significantly improve her team's fundamentals as this team is fundamentally the unsoundest in the Big 10.

The Cats have the potential to have a decent inside-outside offense as the one category where Northwestern did not rank near the bottom of the Big 10 was assists. The Wildcats ranked fourth in 2003 with over 14 assists a game. Kwasinski is an excellent passer who finished second on the teams in assists and she should be one of the better centers in the conference. She is tall and has good hands. She can hit a 15-foot jump shot and has a nice hook. If Kwasinski can get a little stronger, she should be a consistent scorer inside.

The Northwestern guards return and are decent. Samantha McComb led the team in scoring last year. She is not an athletic player but she has a good jump shot and is consistent from three-point land. She's a good passer who should be able to work well with Kwasinski. At forward, Northwestern has another player who has not come close to her potential. Five-ten junior Ifeoma Okonkwo is the best athlete on the team and is the only penetrator on the squad. Those skills have not been used in her first two years on the roster. Combs needs to find a way to involve her more in the offense because she will need the versatility that Okonkwo brings.

Northwestern's defense in recent years can only be described as passive and bad fundamentally. The Wildcats haven't pressed or put much pressure on the ball. They don't play the passing lanes well: In conference games last year, the Wildcats only forced 12.8 turnovers a game and allowed their opponents to shoot a league-worst 44.1%. Since defense is more a matter of work than of talent, Combs should be able to upgrade the Wildcats' defense. =This is a veteran team that should be willing to put the work in to be more effective defensively.

Last season, Northwestern was outrebounded by almost eight boards a game. The Wildcats only grabbed 29 rebounds a game. There really is no reason that should happen. Kwasinski and Okonkwo each averaged more than five rebounds and both should post higher numbers. There are other players on this team that have the physical capabilities to average four to five rebounds a game. This may be the area where the team's bad fundamentals hurt it the most.

Beth Combs has a skewed roster. Her 11 players include four seniors and five freshmen. She has some talent, but it is talent badly in need of developing. Not since the 1998-99 season has a team finished below Northwestern in the standings. If Combs could take advantage of the veteran experience she has and improve her team's skill level, she could finish ahead of Indiana. Regardless, the success or failure of this team will be measured by its performance and improvement, not its won-loss record.

10/26/05

---

---