ziggyiu

I've had the displeasure of slipping into Sleepers pods on and off for a couple of years. Sometimes I break a little bit when overexposed. I know not to take them seriously, but it does peeve me that they take themselves seriously . . . and some of their listeners do too. It just feels good to vent about them.

The lack of intelligence or unbiased projection in this episode is astounding. They say they'd pick UH because their best big will be gone and the other really good big may choose to leave, but it's not as if he's prevalent on draft boards. They put down IU for not having big. They don't mention that because IU doesn't have a quality big returning that Arafan has a better path to more immediate playing time. Another thing, and this is really interesting to me, is that they say he should go to UH because the way Arafan plays fits with the traditional way UH plays their bigs. What if Arafan wants to develop his game beyond the traditional big man role? IU offers greater development. IU can make his more versatile, which in a few years will make his more appealing to NBA teams. Also the, "Come on man, it's Houston." argument is flawless. Arafan may very likely go to UH, but this episode does nothing to expound on the rationale for either UH or IU. It's just a ignorant hottake, which is par for the course for them.

From my outside perspective, I could see paying more for Diane as he's at a greater position of need with rare similar talent--and he is more likely to stay at IU multiple years--compared to Anthony Thompson.

This came from two different sources in two separate interviews: a recent former assistant college coach and I think from Jeff Goodman. Maybe they're wrong, and maybe you're right. Just passing along what I heard.

@HoosierDevils and @Hardwood83 - This came up in a couple of college basketball podcasts in the last month or two. I don't know the ins and outs, but essentially Big Ten schools (and the like) will be giving 80-ish percent of revenue share to football and slightly less than 20 percent to basketball (in most cases). However, even though the Big East won't have the same total dollars as the Big Ten, because they can give 80-some percent of their total revenue share to basketball it will equate to more basketball dollars. Essentially, 80-some perent of the small pie is more money than the not quite 20 prrcent of the larger pie.

I'm not suggesting he picks Xavier, but just to pick up on your mention of dollars to give athletes, Big East schools have plenty of money. Even without outside help for NIL, Big East schools have a potentially larger share of revenue to give basketball players because they don't have to split it with football players.

I don't like these changes, but at least these are stated rules. Ed and boosters like him are still the seedy underbelly of college athletics because that was bald-faced cheating. Nothing about it is romantic, quant, or cute.

Putting this in traditional position terms, LA is more of a 4 (who could play the 5 in small ball). AT is a 3. I think they would complement each other well. From a money perspective, IU should be able to get both too. It's just a matter of if they want to spend it this way.

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but had Thompson set a date for his announcement?

I think you're right, and the last part of your post is a bummer. I think Thompson and Allmond can play well together. Allmond as an undersized 5 when we want to play 5 out or Allmond as a 4 to Thompson's 3.

It's a double-edge sword. We don't want the games on another streaming service we have to pay for, but the conference and the institutions (non-profit entities except for two BIG schools, not corporations) need the money to pay players, update facilities, etc. etc. We keep feeding a model that many (the conference, institutions, fans, players) don't particularly like and don't really think is sustainable. Yet the conferences and their schools, along with other governing bodies like the NCAA, refuse to consider other models.

I'm having a little fun with the fact that his IU IG post features a song with a line about making a decision last night and living with it. You're conflating issues. Me joking about the lyric aside, no one is confusing a young man posting about a visit and the importance NIL factoring into a recruitment.

I've been checking here and the socials for any indication for how things went. Can't find anything yet. Hoping the track on his IU IG post was a pleasant hint.

It feel like we experienced some of that with Crean. Hopefully the defense will keep us in games when the shots aren't falling--unlike the Crean years.

I wish him well. If what is rumored is true, he was done a disservice.

Nick Dorn from Elon?

Interesting to see if Scott did the right thing by passing on Buzz. Not envious. Just curious.

Austin has walkable neighborhoods. Great city. Fun place with lots to do. Travel through town is tough. Unstructured not in place for how quickly it has grown.

Burners now saying Dix down to Creighton and Illinois.

UCLA has infrastructure problems and for the first year or so of NIL lacked, but last year Mic was able to rally the donors. They no longer have NIL resource problems. They may not be UK, KU, etc. with resources, but it's not bad like it used to be.

You all focused on the incident with EJ. Frazier continued to trash IU after that--on social, above and beyond negative recruiting, etc. I'm not trying to change hearts and minds, but you've missed the point. Frazier never let go of what happened in 2006, and because of his inability to move on a decade and a half later, I'd prefer another coach. So many continue to comment on this without any knowledge of him and his vitriol for IU throughout the years. And if anyone of you were actually privy to the stuff he'd say, you all wouldn't want that person representing your program. It's like how all of you would take a offense--some slight, some major--to an obnoxious jerk spouting off about how terrible IU elsewhere in your life.

Frazier's behavior at that game and his subsequent negative tweets and other public comments about IU have me hoping we don't hire him. It wasn't just the incident with EJ. He doesn't deserve to represent Indiana.

Wow. He's not a good coach. Great timing to coach a school near where Queen grew up though.

I'm not excited or optimistic, but I also don't think this was a terrible hire. Partly I'm skeptical because IU has made horrible decisions for a quarter of a century, so nothing too much against DDV, but I have little reason to trust IU. Also, my expectations were kind of slanted. I had started to believe in the possibility of a "big name" so this hire pales in comparison. Again, I suppose that's really nothing too much against DDV. That's more about my inability to stay level-headed and accept the trend in college basketball. I hope he's amazing and is everything we've missed the last 25 years.

Uh-oh pack line can like a four letter word with some after watching Archie "install" it.