TrueHoosier62

ESPN Reminds me a bit of MTV. When MTV started, it was all about music videos. Then, as time went by, they began to add "shows", and the total number of videos began to diminish. Eventually, the channel became almost devoid of music videos, but had tons of shows that very few of the original viewers cared to watch. At one time, everyone loved ESPN because unlike one's local news, where one had to wait until 5:25 in the evening to catch the scores and highlights, ESPN gave those to you 24/7, and the focus was on the games and highlights. Then it started to become more about the on-air personalities, and human interest stories. As the years have gone by, the format has changed to the point where scores and highlights are almost secondary to stories of various content, most of which are uninteresting, manipulative, or redundant. The announcers all vie to see who can either be the funniest or shocking in their commentary, and as someone else here said, "can coin the next catch phrase". Lately, I see where they've decided to try and educate the masses about politics, giving us yet another source for classic northeast liberal dogma. I'd like to think that the only thing they're good for these days is watching an actual game, but then I remember that their court side "analysts" are just extensions of the same morons found in the studio in Bristol, so one has to endure those blathering fools while trying to follow play. It's getting more and more difficult to just "watch a game" these days.

:biggrin:

For once, I had to agree with Dakich. No team benefited more than Indiana did from having Yogi; and it's not even close.

Of course. Although, when one uses the phrase, "all aboard", someone will invariably use the "train wreck" analogy. I won't; but someone could. :-)

Indeed.

Listen, I'm as happy as anyone that we won last night. In Iowa City. On senior night. Big win. But really, raise your hand if you uttered the phrase, "Jesus Christ", at least once during the second half? Frankly, I uttered this phrase so many times that my wife thought I was starting a church in our living room. Stepping on the inbound, no pump fakes, no lean ins, unforced turnovers, defensive lapses, mental errors. A fourteen point lead can evaporate of course, but as is usually the case with Crean's teams, it's "us" giving the lead back, not "them" taking it from us. And as is my habit, I also consider the fact that Iowa, for all their great wins, haven't been winning much lately, having dropped several straight. They were also playing for the second time in 48 hours. Yet, (and despite his heroic three), Yogi looked dead on his feet at the 4:00 mark, consistently hitting the front end of the rim. Much to be happy about, but too many questions for it being this late in the season.

I don't get the reasoning behind anyone who would come to a "Fire Tom Crean" thread, and demand that it be closed down? The more logical approach would be, don't come to the thread. 

x 1,0000

I don't know that he should be fired if he loses tonight, but there's no denying that a loss to Iowa would reinforce in many people's minds, (mine included), that he's about at the ceiling of his capabilities. He is the poster boy for the "Peter Principle". The fact is, there are a LOT of coaches out there, like Crean, who're very good, but only to a point, and no further. Lou Henson was one. Gene Keady was one. Thad Matta is one. Bo Ryan was one. Ray Meyer was one. Bob Huggins is one. All very good coaches, but with limitations that keep them from winning it all. And at Indiana, it's about winning it all. Not just games, not just BTTs, not the NIT, but the whole thing. Until he wins one, there will always be a "Fire Crean" thread, and really, there should be.

I hope you just made a typo, and didn't actually mean to refer to some of us as "pasty" banner-head fans as a form of derision. And by "pasty", I assume you mean old, white, Bob Knight lovin', national championship flag wavin', bologna sandwich eating, coke drinking, rowdy IU fans; yes? Come to think of it, I should thank you, if that's what you meant. I'm all of those things. Not sure how others here might take that though. Some of them probably don't like bologna. 

A true Hoosier fan does not hate Tom Crean. Tom Crean is just a man trying his best to win a title here, and there's nothing to hate about that. No, a true Hoosier hates there being nearly 30 years in between titles. A true Hoosier hates watching a product that despite 20 plus wins, still exhibits too many flaws to seriously challenge an end to that drought. A true Hoosier hates being told that all is right, when they know better. Again, I understand your point of view, and I respect it. I just don't agree with it.

15:1

And for the record, I don't know what it takes to win a title, but I know greatness when i see it, and so do you. We're fans of the greatest University in America, and we saw that greatness displayed on the court it in 76' and 80'. And It's not living in the past to use a matrix of championship traits to measure current teams by; it's wisdom. Crean's teams are competitive, and at times, exhilarating to watch, but they don't cover enough of their shortcomings to be a National Champion.

We're all real IU fans. You, me, everyone, or we wouldn't be here. We just look at things from different perspectives.   Peace.

Fair enough; I give him exactly one ounce of credit for having taken a decimated program, at a storied University, who's built in ability to draw superior talent is the envy of the Big Ten, and created a competitive basketball team. Unfortunately, it takes a combined pound of effort, knowledge, insight, game planning, orchestration, oversight, discipline and drive to win a National Championship; which leaves Tom Crean approximately 15 ounces short of the mark.

lol

And thank god that you do, or I might feel as if life isn't worth the living.

You don't honestly think his behind was ever not saved do you? My friend, as long as there's a Fred Glass at IU, we'll always be able to count on seeing Tom Crean court side, deliriously clapping his heart out. They're like the moon and the tides, forever  dependent upon the other for their very existence.

I've no doubts at all. He's not a coach who's capable of winning a National Championship. Not this year, not next year, not ten years from now. Once it became obvious to me that this was the case, I no longer needed to consider the impact of "next year's recruits" or stress out over wins and losses and how they might impact our standings or seeding, etc. Of course I support IU, and would like nothing better than to see another banner hoisted to the rafters, but I won't allow myself to get caught up in the moment. One need only look at the man pacing the side of the court to be reminded of the futility of that exercise.

Stu, what I'm saying is that our margin for error is razor thin, (thinner than most). This is what happens when you have a team that relies so heavily on its three point accuracy to overcome turnovers, (too many of which are unforced), poor defense, (improving, but still not great), questionable substitutions, poor strategies and a general lack of fundamentals. And we should not forget our annoying habit of mentally checking out at the worst possible times. We're the classic "dangerous" team that could get beat in the first round or make it to the final four. That's not saying we're a terrible team, just that we have to shoot lights out unless every other part of our game is clicking, (which doesn't happen consistently).

I was only referring to a single game against Penn State. My point was to show that we are, perhaps, more capable of beating ourselves than any other team that might make the NCAA field. Our bench is good, and compared to other Big Ten teams, it's towards the top. But "MadaboutIU"s assertion dealt with how it might play in the NCAA and/or the larger field, and in that context, it's only average. Duke, UNC, Kentucky, Kansas, all have considerably deeper benches, with more talent than we do.

Just a single game of course. I may have taken his assertion incorrectly.

Jesus, I'm not even sure where to begin....but I'll try.   "Teams that have played better than Indiana during the conference season":   Penn State, Wisconsin & Michigan State come to mind. There are too many teams outside the conference for me to mention them all, but yes, Villanova, UNC, Kansas, Xavier, just to name a few, and there are probably, at least, another 10-15 teams, outside of our conference, who've played better ball than IU during the conference portion of our season.   "We have a deep, complete team and the NCAA is a crapshoot":   I might agree that we have a deep team, but that depends on what level of play you expect out of the bench. Ours is fair, decent, but hardly anything to hang your hat upon. And while the NCAA tournament involves a modicum of luck, it's hardly a crap shoot. To win six straight games against varying styles of play, athleticism and coaching, on neutral and sometimes not so neutral courts, you've got to be far more than just good, and a helluva lot more than lucky. That you think we can win it all simply because you perceive the tournament to be a crapshoot, says more about your own perception of our chances than I do.   "There's always room for debate but you'd have to be ignorant or stupid to keep questioning whether Indiana has a tough team this year. It's as plain as day that this team is having a ball playing together"   I consider myself neither stupid nor ignorant to question what to me, appears obvious. I don't think you're stupid or ignorant for disagreeing. I just disagree with you, that's all. The team can have a ball all they want. They can giggle and laugh and tickle each other for all I care. They just aren't, in my opinion, good enough or lucky enough, to contend for a NC

There's always something debatable on a forum, including whether or not this team can "contend". Contend for what, sole ownership of a Big Ten title? Sure, I'll agree with you, we can contend for that. Contend for a Big Ten tournament championship? Less sure, seeing as we've never done it before, even with the advantage that we should have, playing it in our back yard. Contend for an NC? Not a snowball's chance in hell. We'd have to have too many things break our way, and we'd have to shoot lights out for six straight games. On a neutral court. Against considerably better competition than we've seen in the Big Ten. With Tom Crean as our coach. Pffffft.

I can admit that a Big Ten championship is nice, and a 23-6 record is nice, but that's all it is; "nice". The problem of course is that we didn't buy "nice" when we brought in Tom Crean. We brought in a coach that supposedly had/has what is takes to win an NCAA championship. To date, that hasn't happened. Nor, given the type of players and game philosophy he's beholden to, does it appear likely. Until he does, "nice" doesn't cut it with me. Until then, he's Gene Keady, Lou Henson, and That Matta rolled in to one. Until then, this thread should stay open.