Old Friend

In bold....this is 100% incorrect. In red, only if you watch only for the score. That's absolutely your prerogative; but it's not boring if you're watching our players and our team develop rather than the score. In purple, disagree with this, too. I think we know a lot about this team. What don't you know? Without the crystal ball stuff like "what will happen if ____," what don't we know? What haven't you seen? Serious question.

I'm really not saying I like it and I agree with you and everyone else in principle. That said, I don't necessarily think it's hurting Indiana, either. They've seen adversity, they've been allowed to get all 11 players quality time on the floor, they've sorted out lineups and positions, and they've learned how to play team defense, or at least that they still need lots of work on that. All without a loss and all while also seeing how much they've improved. AND..how good they can be offensively if they attack and keep the ball moving. In the end, Indiana will have played a top 40 schedule. That's fine as far as I'm concerned. I may be all by myself in this opinion, but in November, I am FAR more interested in watching OUR players and the overall team develop(ment) than I am the opponent and final score. I have seen a lot of criticism of the schedule, and I suppose my point was "any given night." These kids from Portland State and Stephen F. Austin are on scholarship, too and they can all play. Going 7-0 against cupcakes (which we will) is fine as long as some are decent, and some have been decent. Indiana is currently #31 in Sagarin, and for reference's sake, there are 12 teams in the top 31 (including Indiana) who have not yet played a Sagarin top 50 team. Included on that list are Maryland, North Carolina, and Michigan. Indiana's not alone. 9 other schools in the top 31 have schedule strength in the 300's (Texas Tech, Louisville, and Kentucky among them). It'll all work out, and I'd rather see our still young team grow into a better unit while they win. I guess I believe it's all part of a longer term process because when we start winning, we'll start playing in better pre-conference events and by proxy against better teams. I just don't see the early schedule as detrimental as some do. ** For what it's worth, the Purdue's are #64 in Sagarin and they also have a SoS in the 300's. I sure wouldn't want to trade with them.

Stephen F. Austin was 193rd in Sagarin last week. Duke was #1. How many people here have jumped on the "Fire Archie" "we don't play anyone" "these wins mean nothing" bandwagons? Hell, I see a couple posting here now defending Indiana. Get old and stay old. Get experience. Get balanced. Improve year over year. Beat the teams you're supposed to beat. Indiana is in good shape and is just fine. Uncle Friend has been telling you for a couple of years, now. We don't need to fire Fred Glass. We don't need to fire Tom Allen. And we don't need to fire Archie Miller. It's all going in the right direction. Patience will pay off.

Al didn't take heat check shots. But yes..the whole team was sloppy last night. Green just doesn't get the benefit of the doubt because of his past. Every sportswriter in town wrote about "bad DeVonte" today. I'm not the dissenting opposition, here.

Then I stand corrected. Mea culpa

He started the 2nd half last night, didn't he? Didn't work out so well.

Doesn't matter to me one bit what should have happened. I saw his 4 turnovers and heat check shots. Can't have them.

Indiana 28 Purdue 23

From a coach's perspective Franklin plays great team defense, he sprints, he can play 3 positions and not hurt the team, and does a whole lot of little things (examples : he moves his feet well defensively, gets into positions that cause problems for his opponent, recovers to and from help as well as anyone we have..he caused at least 2 turnovers that way tonight) that don't show up on a stat sheet. But..he had more rebounds and the same number of assists as Green did. He just didn't score the same way; and that's really not his role, anyway. He is capable of FAR better from a production standpoint, and that absolutely needs to change at some point, but defending, taking charges and making it tough on ball handlers is his role right now. Personally, I'd like to see him stay away from the 3 point shot for now because he's better as a cutter/slasher. But he's getting minutes because of the things he does do well right now. I'm concerned about Green again. WAY too many hero plays tonight. At least 2 horrible shots, another that was poorly timed, and 4 turnovers. Can't have that from a senior. He needs to eliminate mistakes and take good shots - and eliminate the "heat check" garbage altogether. Indiana's not good enough yet to overcome their team captain giving away 6 possessions. Green cannot be a 1:2 A/TO guy in any game this year. He made some shots, but "bad DeVonte" came out, and it'll hurt against better teams. He now has 6 assists and 5 turnovers on the season. He's gotta' be better than that.

And a few "other" people have told "people" to let it play out and step away from the ledge. The impatience and intolerance of fans who want to win NOW regardless of circumstances is exhausting.

One of Leal's AAU team mates is a kid I've coached for 3 years. I had a chance to talk briefly with him (Leal) on Saturday, and I'll simply say this : I'd take 10 of him.

Indiana 93 SDSU 59

Michigan's line is among the nation's best; they're a top 10 team playing their best football, and they have a great quarterback and terrific (and big) skill guys. Indiana was out manned and with so many deficiencies; we'd have had to be perfect. And we weren't. Every weakness we have was exposed. We are not at that level...Michigan is playing as well as any but 3-4 teams in the country right now.

Because they play stupid against bad teams, too. They've made big and stupid mistakes since Allen's been here. The only person on the planet who doesn't seem to grasp that is Tom Brew, some blog dude who "covers" IU about as poorly as any person could.

As long as Indiana is in the Big Ten East, there is a hard ceiling. Wash, rinse, repeat. As long as Indiana continues to commit costly penalties, there is a hard ceiling. Wash, rinse, repeat. As long as Indiana continues to sustain multiple important injuries year after year after year, there is a hard ceiling. Wash, rinse, repeat As long as Indiana's quarterback can't consistently throw the ball accurately down the field, there is a hard ceiling. Wash, rinse, repeat. As long as Indiana's line is unable go block or get any push, there is a hard ceiling. This is a new development. As long as Indiana's secondary can't figure out how to cover receivers, there is a hard ceiling. Inconsistent. Indiana is a 7-8 win football team. But that's all they are.

A terrible look is different than "the conference is unhealthy." I'll stick with my original statement that regardless of the outcomes, the Big Ten has had more teams in the final four than any other league in the last 15 years. They have given themselves that opportunity. They have also done just fine in the Big Ten/ACC Challenge and the Gavit Games or whatever that Big Ten/Big East event is called. I think there's a hell of a lot more to the results than the overall health of the Big Ten.

So you're going to base the overall success of a conference based on the outcome of a single game?? That proves nothing. It just proves no Big Ten team has won a 3 week, 68 team tournament. You're telling me that means the Big Ten isn't doing something right when they've given themselves the opportunity more than any other conference? Okay.... Your measure is your measure; but if national titles is your only measure for success, then the poor PAC 10/12 is in a world of hurt too, and the American conference is in better shape than the Big Ten. But....your measure is your measure. Edit : FWIW since 2010, the Big Ten has had 59 players drafted into the NBA and has by FAR the most balanced distribution among teams. Kentucky, Duke, and North Carolina obviously skew the results to the ACC and SEC. I don't think the sky is falling because Indiana didn't land Dawson Garcia.

Just picked ~ 15 years...so "modern." Big Ten has been in the final game 6 times. You're really basing the comment that it's not worked out well for the Big Ten" over the results of one game? That's an awfully narrow window and in reality based on factors well beyond how a conference is doing....but your measure is your measure. You have to get there, and the Big Ten has been there more than any other conference.

Dating back to 2005, the Big Ten has had 12 Final Four teams. The ACC has had 9. The Big East has had 10. THE SEC has had 10. What's not working out so well?

Again, I was making a point about a specific comment used as why we needed Garcia. I understand completely the points pro and con about Luke Brown. Brown would be a kid who wouldn't do ,much in the Big Ten until he was a junior, and his body would have to change before he would be able to be anything but a stand still jump shooter. I get it.

I have seen him play plenty. He's a Euro 4/5. If what Rabjohns said is true (and it wouldn't surprise me), the physical nature of the Big Ten scared him off. And we don't need a kid scared of being physical, regardless of what his skills are. He's skilled, sure, but is he the difference between Indiana's program going in a good direction or not?? No. Not close. I'm not at all minimizing him. I'm just not giving him the status some are. My reference to Brown was pointed at the "he averages ______/game, therefore we want him" comments. Points don't mean a hell of a lot. It wasn't at all a comparison and it wasn't me making a case for Brown. Garcia would have helped us. He also would have helped Duke, Kansas, Memphis, Minnesota, and Baylor. This, to me, is another in a long line of recruits who are given WAY too much weight one way or the other. All's great and we're winning titles if we get him; the sky is falling if we don't. Mike White was "Kong" and was going to come in here and dominate the Big Ten. Ben Allen was a 6'10" Euro who could play 4 positions and would be one of the best shooters in the Big Ten. DeAndre Thomas was supposed to be a dominant player. Every time we miss on a kid who's serious about Indiana (and...other schools too, by the way), some use it as some ridiculous indictment of whoever the coach is. Indiana and Marquette are not at all similar programs; so I'm not even sure I believe IU "missed."

I love it. This is a 4* kid. He plays in Minnesota and generally against kids smaller than he is and not as talented. The point has been made that he averages 27 PPG, using that as a positive point of why we need him. Yet we have a local kid in Luke Brown averaging 35 PPG (and who will leave high school as the all time leading high school scorer in Indiana) who nobody wants because he "doesn't play against anybody." We "have to start landing kids like Garcia." Okay...you mean like Romeo Langford or Trayce Jackson-Davis; both of whom were ranked higher? One of whom is as big and a better player? We HAVE "started landing" kids like this. Did you forget? No school gets all of them. Especially out of state kids who want to stay closer to home. Nobody knows what the future holds, nor what our current kids or recruits will become. To pin the state of our program and future hopes on Dawson Garcia is a fool's errand regardless of who he chooses. Indiana will be just fine. Sometimes, this board really makes me laugh.

Indiana 79 LaTech 69

Okay then...who do YOU root for? If you don't understand IU fans, you don't understand IU. Talk to Geronimo. Ask him why HE chose Indiana. Or Trayce Jackson-Davis. A McDonald's All American who could have gone anywhere he wanted. Or the kids who walk on at IU every year. Or Victor Oladipo. Or any number of others. You can speak for yourself and you're a genius. When you speak for other people with a blanket, you look like an idiot. Nobody I know is living in the past except to use it as a barometer for what Indiana can be.

UM 34 IU 17