Old Friend

I would agree 100% if I saw effort. If I saw ball movement. If I saw consequences for lack of effort and hustle. If I saw Archie recruiting and landing shooters. If I saw an offense that got good shots consistently. Those things don't require specific players. I do agree with you in principle, though.

Given this is the first season any of "Archie's recruits" are playing, I'm willing to wait and see, but his offense is awful. We are so easy to guard it's comical, and having next to no perimeter weapons, I'm not sure I see it getting any better. McRoberts starts the other day, and had one shot that almost broke the backboard and rim at the same time. The ball doesn't move, it's deliberate, slow, and predictable. I don't even see Indiana do much in transition. It has been a frustrating couple of weeks for sure, mostly because I see no "help on the way."

Indiana 65 Northwestern 60

That's not the point, though. That Indiana has maintained the level of interest among it's fan base it has,despite even a modicum of success IS the point.

It has nothing to do with stories or watching old games. You're missing the context. The culture and tradition of this program goes back 100 years. For myriad reasons, that tradition has taken a beating since 1993....absolutely true. But, as this list shows, interest in the program itself is still elite regardless of the team on the floor. The program and the team are very different things. The list by itself doesn't say that, but the implication sure does. That's why it matters if we're lazy. Why it matters that we strayed from the "family." Why it matters that we recruit players who understand where they are. It has nothing at all to do with stories about 1976.

I don't even know how to respond to this, but I'll try. Go back 100 years. That's "blue blood." The guts of college basketball history. It's exactly why the interest is still there. Historically, we are absolutely in the same class as they are. Why do you think Indiana was on national TV 5 times Crean's first season? Good grief.

In response to the above : 1) Mismanagement of the program for a long time. Mike Davis should never have been the coach here. Kelvin Sampson should never have been the coach here, and he was hired for reasons having nothing to do with basketball by a man who cared nothing about tradition or winning. Crean was given an extension before he won more than 4 games in the Big Ten, and yeah, he won 2 titles, but finished 10th and 8th the years following. Consistency was never prioritized and he stopped recruiting Indiana or kids who knew what Indiana is all about. Or was all about. The fans older than 35 get it. Seems the people inside the program do not. Michael Lewis was interviewed on Dakich's show yesterday and told a story of one of Nebraska's players saying "wow, you can just feel the tradition in here." I don't believe the people inside the program get that now or have since Knight left. Currently, we have a board of trustees who are complete yes people, and a president who couldn't care less about sports. And an AD who's kumbaya and all about the budget. Winning is not prioritized. 2) Students are apathetic now. They get tickets to every game and they aren't close to as passionate about the team as they once were. The home court advantage is now only present when the team plays well. Sorry....that's the truth. I'm not talking only about the ones who dress up as Power Rangers...I think the entire student body that attends games is nowhere near the asset they could be. 3) Many fans (and I have been on the other side of their ire and castigation for suggesting this) have said they don't care where kids come from and that it doesn't matter. Bull$hit, it doesn't matter. Kids have to understand Indiana like they understand Duke or Kansas or North Carolina. And...they don't. It showed in the effort the other night. It shows when they jog back on defense. It shows when Archie doesn't have a reliable shooter on his roster. Right now? Indiana is 140th in 3pt FG% with just 103 made. That ranks 295th in makes. Imagine that. Indiana University....ranks 295th in the country in made 3 pointers. Let THAT sink in. I am laughing again at the couple of people who argued vehemently with me a week ago that IU has shooters. No....We don't. Archie is trying to do it with long athletes; Crean tried to do it with kids from the east coast, (in part, IU's current university blueprint, and THAT has been a detriment, also. Indiana University is no longer sacred to Indiana. McRobbie has been after east coast money for a long time) Davis tried to do it with kids from the south. One man's take....but I rest my case.

I was interested to see where Louisville, Minnesota, Butler, and Vanderbilt were on this list.

Exactly my point. It doesn't matter.

Purdue 76 IU 64

Ball handling. Maybe. McBob is supposed to be a great defender and effort guy. I said last spring that if he were required to be a major contributor this season like he was last, we're in big trouble. He's not even a threat to score. At least Fitzner has the capability and teams have film of it. McRoberts seems to have drastically regressed.

Yes. And that was my exact reasoning earlier. He's going to have his number called eventually; and he can't get lost on defense. He is ready now for "spark" role, but he can't give up points on the defensive end. Many saw the 5 he scored but not the 3-5 he gave up. Not saying I think Fitzner is the answer, but he may be more equipped on defensive positioning and awareness, which is enough of a reason right now.

I do hope some changes are coming. Or that Fitzner becomes the player he was early. I still don't understand why anyone had expectations of him. 5 PPG @ St. Mary's his junior year with declining numbers each season don't exactly spell "answer."

Look at their bodies. Fitzner is far stronger physically than Moore is. Come on... Your other points can stand on their own, but none have to do with physical stature. I'm not telling you I think Fitzner is any good. He clearly hasn't shown he is. But...unless you think Archie is a moron, there's a reason Moore's not playing yet.

Difference is Fitzner is worlds stronger and Archie thinks those minutes should be his. Fitzner may not be very good, but he is in the right places and can at least provide post resistance. Same can't be said for Moore right now, and a kid in the wrong place hurts the overall team. He's (Fitzner) also a decent passer and still a threat from outside, even as his slump has gone on embarassingly long. I don't agree with your last. Playing kids who aren't ready generally doesn't help them. That said, if Archie thinks a change needs to be made, a change will be made. I'm not against playing Moore a few more minutes, but I would like to see his defensive awareness improve.

Here's where we differ. You said "if Archie actually played him" as if there is a compelling reason Archie should. Players earn their playing time in practice. If a kid's not playing, especially in a position of obvious need, there's a reason. Moore's energy notwithstanding, if he's not showing himself ready when none of us are watching, he's not going to get those minutes yet. If he needs to play extended minutes "because we have nobody else," I think we'd see why he hasn't played much. Moore's role right now is "spark off the bench." Extended minutes for a kid who's not ready for them is always detrimental; and Moore was absolutely lost defensively last night. Very few will focus on that because they saw the two buckets (both of which were in "open" situations, where he can thrive like anyone else); but I don't think this falls on blaming Archie for not playing him. We're all frustrated. I don't think Moore is the answer yet. I do think Archie needs to spend some time this week figuring out what kind of coach he is. The slow starts and obvious lack of offensive production fall absolutely on him.

Help me. Moore still has a long way to go defensively. Yeah, he had a bucket in transition and another at the end of a loose ball; but what did he do tonight that was so worthy of "credit?" He, like almost everyone, has a long way to go.

Adam Herbert chose Sampson. For one reason and one reason only. Indiana has STILL not recovered from giving Mike Davis the job when Knight was fired.

I was negative w Davis immediately and w Crean about 10 games in when I saw kids just standing on offense. I'm an expert at being negative early. Good Lord, a college coach needs to have an offense that can at least GET good looks consistently. It's almost like he doesn't want them in transition, but that's the only time they get decent looks on a regular basis. How he can have an offense oriented on low post play and penetration, and completely lack perimeter shooting is beyond my realm of understanding. Go get as many lengthy athletes as you want, but if none of them can shoot, you're not going to score with any consistency at this level. Big Ten teams can very easily collapse on post players, and many, like Nebraska, have kids who can make up ground and block or affect shots at the rim.

You gotta' get kids into places where they'll be successful. Unless we throw it into the post to Morgan or let Romeo do something in isolation, we generally don't score. That's absolutely partly Archie's fault.

How....HOW can you only shoot 36.5% in your own building?? Green 1-6, Fitzner 0-3, Smith 2-7, Langford 5-14... WTH???

I just learned that Tom Crean married a Harbaugh and coached Dwayne Wade at one time.

Hhhmm.. I point out a fact and that's un-necessary criticism which leads you to believe I've "picked Moore out?" Interesting. Your hero finished in the bottom 1/3rd in the country in yards per attempt and led his team to a 5-7 record for the second straight season. Has he built that window in his stomach yet so you can see out? I wonder why it is you think I've "picked out" Moore? Have I said even one truly negative thing about him? That play at the end of the half was on him. It just was. Is it some problem that I pointed it out? Others did as well... Where were you then? McRoberts is awful, too. So is Fitzner for the last month. Hell, I don't get what Archie is trying to do on offense much of the time. There are many whipping boys. For what it's worth, until last week, Green was my man. Do your homework.

If you're not convinced by now, I have no idea how you'll ever be. After all that BS last weekend, you still can't see it? We do not have shooters. We may have a couple of kids who can make a driveway jumper....we do not have shooters.

Clifton is lost on defense. That last 3 was 100% on him.