Aaron

Not really. Especially with all the second-tier international players infiltrating college soccer. It's why random mid-majors have suddenly become elite.

11 teams in men vs. all 18 in women. Both exclude about same number of teams for this year. Men was top-eight till now but was condensed down to four for some reason this fall.

Totally different. In 2013, IU had to win the Big Ten Tournament to make the NCAA Tournament and was the only time finishing below .500 overall since going varsity in 1973. They then lost in the first round on the road and one of only three times they were not seeded in the last couple of decades and only time since 2001 without at least one home game in the postseason. This time, they will absolutely be seeded with a top-10 RPI and undefeated in non-conference. The only question is if they can get a top-8 seed and get that second home game for the Sweet 16. The round of 32 is a locked-in home game. The year you should compare not to 2013 but one year later, in 2014. In 2014, they ran the table in the non-conference and were mid-pack in the Big Ten, but got a very high NCAA seed off the non-conference games, which will happen again. However, don't want to repeat the NCAA results as the Hoosiers were upset by Xavier in the round of 32, and this is the last time they didn't win a postseason game and make at least the Sweet 16. Could literally see the squad use their scoring to get to the college cup, or the struggling backline and goalie knock them out in the first game. Both outcomes are equally likely for this iteration of the team. You may have also meant 2012 when the team struggled down the stretch, but won their last national title by getting hot in the postseason. That team was the final one earning a seed at no. 16. I expect them to be inside the top-10 this time, if not top-8, for that second home game to be guaranteed.

See everyone for the NCAA Tournament. IU will still host at least one game and maybe two, as they are right on the fringe of the top eight. The Big Ten Tourney has zero to do with NCAA seeding. In general, though, college soccer is not fun to watch right now. The talent drain and basically no defense across the board feels like watching the FIFA Video game instead of real soccer, with the amount of scoring and easy shots. While I love cheering for IU, watching the sport at the college level is painful. Either the sport needs to listen to the USA Soccer Federation and work with them to take their recommendations to get the top talent again, or fold up shop. Right now product is unbearable, and this is no fault of Indiana. They get the top talent of those making it to college, but that starts pretty far down the rankings.

Michigan is most relevant and equivalent example in Big Ten right now.

That could be a reason and legitimate. However, would you have dropped if team was ranked and won nearly 30 games. If you were going to drop anyways you may have hit on a factor. If being less then excellent caused you not to renew and would have otherwise, that is something you are certainly entitled to do but that behavior (better or worse) sheds some light on how fan base thinks. Don't blame you for your specific case. We would need to hear from others and cross reference with other schools to find the smoking gun for this pattern but your particular case def sheds a tiny bit of light.

Michigan has all the buffet of sports options as Indiana and lost no season ticket holders for its women's basketball program after one good season that was slightly less than others. Its a conundrum that the athletic department has to figure out. Nowhere else loses 30-40% of ticket holders over a women's season like last.

This survey is important since no other school wins 20 games and loses mass numbers of season ticket holders. There is clearly something unique about our fan base being more front running than others. Our athletic department needs to get to bottom of it if it does not want to lose a large percentage of season ticket holders after good but not great seasons when nowhere else does.

Exactly when we were ranked and times were the most sunny attendance grew and grew. Now one 20-13 season loses 40% of season ticket holders. Iowa with similar success recently has sold out last two seasons even without Caitlin Clark. Michigan whose path has mirrored IU each season recently including last, lost no season ticket holders last year and Michigan's sports options are no different than Indiana's. This proves my point that our fan base even in equivalent spots in equivalent sports has always had more frontrunners.

Totally agree with all of that. However, no program like women's basketball should have to endure losing nearly 40% of its season ticket holders over a 20-13 team with an NCAA appearance. That doesn't happen at most if any other places after five straight years of being ranked each week and then one solid top-30 season not ranked. This is where the problem comes in and is not an issue at most schools. Michigan women had a worse season than usual last year and equivalent rise of IU before that and lost almost no season ticket holders. Meanwhile, Iowa has sold out its next two non-Caitlin Clark seasons recently that saw similar results to IU last year. I get IU is competing with more sports here, but it shows our fans priority for our fan base in general.

A five year run of being ranked each and every week is pretty 'elite' and matched only 1-2 others. Iowa has sold out season tickets post Caitlin Clark each of the last two seasons and their recent run is similar to IU. A 20-13 season does not warrant losing 40% of season ticket holders and would not anywhere else. Attendance absolutely is tied to winning but definition of 'winning' needs to be upped by our lot of fans if we want constant success in any program. Losing nearly 40% of season ticket holders in IU women tells me our fans view of what constitutes 'winning' is not consistent with elsewhere.

Again I agree with most of what you are saying and hope you are right and I am wrong. Proof will be in pudding though and history says otherwise. Really hope football's likely eight win season next yr is a new leaf for our fan base but past precedent says otherwise. Really hope you turn out right. No one more than me is rooting for that.

And you are entitled to that opinion, but it answers why last night was sparse and 3k season ticket holders were lost in offseason. There is a big different between hoping for 23-24 wins and less than 10 losses (which is perfectly acceptable) and considering not getting there with only 20 wins a failure and losing nearly 40% of ticketholders. This is where problem is. Not "hoping for more' which every rational fan absolutely should and zero reason to lower expectations.

Don't disagree with a lot of you are saying. However, it does mean a lot more work to get butts in seats at IU compared to most, hence the empty ones seen last night. There is nothing in the women's b-ball product last year that should have caused team to lose roughly 3k of its 8k season ticket holders. No where else loses nearly 40% of its season ticket holders from last years products and generally maintains steady or gains. Yes its still light years ahead of past, but if you bleed at this number or even half of it over 2-3 more 20 win seasons, it is no higher than Pre-Moren. Hopefully the most front running fans were weeded out, but if a similar season to last loses another 1-2k which is possible my point is well proven. Almost any other school with two 20-win seasons with NCAA appearance with an 8k ticket base would hold steady or gain not shrink by nearly half. Here it is considered a failure and bleeds support. We need a lot more people in this fan base to stop considering these 20-win seasons (or in football's case 8 wins) not enough. You want long sustained success for a program outside soccer? A big part of it is not losing 40% of a fan base over a top-30 NCAA appearance. You will see my point when next years eight-win 'rebuilding' football season wins 8 games and loses 20-40% of season ticket holders which will absolutely happen here and not anywhere else. Prove me wrong. I hope I am wrong, but every historical perspective here including with Mallory, and now with women's basketball and more recently baseball, makes me very skeptical you won't lose thousands of ticket holders over a solid season which does not happen elsewhere.

And this attitude proves my point. In any other fan bases world, constant 20 win seasons is celebrated, not asking for more. You are entitled to feel that way but this attitude answers my question in my mind even if some might disagree.