Old Friend

There will be lots of "this is what I was afraid of" posts, and I'll simply add mine.     This is the consistent problem with Crean's teams.  Someone (and it's been Wisconsin almost every time we've played them) is able to slow us down, take away transition, and our offense stagnates.  We struggle to defend one on one, both on the perimeter and at the rim (Thomas Bryant is not close to NBA ready, and I hope someone tells him).  And we lose.     This is a pattern.  We had 6 assists tonight.   28 made FG's.  6 assists.  Everything off the dribble because our half court offense is awful.  It's BEEN awful.  It will always BE awful with Crean because we don't move well, we don't screen well, and we don't cut well.  We happen to have a couple of players who are spectacular off the dribble, and tonight we made shots that way, but that won't always be the case.   More often than not, against even decent teams, when we're forced to play off the dribble, we'll get beat.   Our perimeter defense is weak, our interior players are either too young and not yet developed, or too slow, and don't move their feet well.  Only Zeller has been the exception under Crean. Those are the reasons we lost.  Inefficiency on offense, and awful defense which led to easy baskets and FT's for Wisconsin.  We made more FG's, more 3 pointers, and out-rebounded them.  That's a game we should win, especially with an experienced team; but alas....   Tonight was more of the same issues Indiana has always had under Crean when we play good teams; and if those teams take away our transition game and make us play defense, we're extremely vulnerable...even if that team is just 12-9.      This loss was no surprise.  It was completely predictable, as were the reasons.

Oladipo did a ton of work on his own.  He played on a summer team with Sheehey between his freshman and sophomore year; met some coach during that time, and used that guy individually.  He watched more film on opponents and on himself, did new weight training, lots of shooting, ball handling, speed and agility; and voila'....his sophomore year, he was a new player.  

The recent play is either fool's gold, or....it isn't.  If it isn't, and Indiana makes a run this season both in conference and in the Big Ten, all of this "fire Crean" talk will die down.  That said, one year here and there isn't what fans or the University are looking for, and no matter what happens this season - even if we go undefeated and win it all - won't solve the consistency question.    Winning cures almost everything, especially when a team looks as good as Indiana does right now.  I don't think we'll ever be done with "fire Crean" until he either proves he can win consistently or......not.   Right now, he looks great.  The team looks great.  That can all change in a couple of games.   

They really haven't been challenged by a good team yet, and I'll be interested to see how they handle it the first time they are.  I can see 1-2 losses....I can see 6.  All depends on how we respond.

They're good and the tournament's wide open.  They've played a schedule a hell of a lot harder than we have, and they've cruised since December 10th.  They've got 5 wins vs. Top 25 teams, and their SOS is 14.  (Ours is 142 right now for reference's sake)   They're certainly not invincible; but they're experienced and play well together. They guard, they're pretty efficient offensively, and they don't make a ton of mistakes.     Fran McCaffery is a good coach, but not better than Izzo.  That's the best coach in the Big Ten, despite their slow start this year.  After him, since Bo Ryan left, there are a bunch of guys in that next tier.  McCaffery's in that group with Belein, Crean, Matta, and Painter.  Our games with them will be interesting.

Disagree with this on a macro level.  The argument is bigger and more detailed than simple geography, and we don't need to have it again.  

For the record, statements like this have been erroneously made for a long time.   (And I know I'm someone who's said to focus on the midwest many times).   As far as I know, the comment has never been made relative to "kids from Indiana" exclusively.  And certainly not with him.  Personally, my beef is with the "focus" on the east coast."  I don't happen to agree with that en lieu of a more local one, but that horse is dead.     in fact, I know for sure I defended OG when we signed him because people were making pretty lofty comparisons, and I said to be careful and just let OG be OG because nobody needs to be "the next _________."    This is a midwestern kid who plays like a midwestern kid, understands the game, and doesn't need the ball to be successful.  If we get THIS kind of kid, we'll win the way we all want to win.     I don't think it's a coincidence - given our recent success, despite the couple of weeks when we were awful  - that we don't seem to have any kids right now with low basketball IQ.   That we're playing defense, that we're sharing the ball, that we're taking good shots, that we're making other players better, that we're getting on the floor after loose balls consistently, that we're no longer standing around on offense, etc.  We have kids who understand the game and we have experience.  Those things are pretty important, and it's obvious OG has been taught all of those things prior to arriving at Indiana.   I think this comment is straw man.

I'm happiest for him.  His skill set is such that many were saying he is tne "next Oladipo" and things like that.  I talked to some AAU coaches who knew him, and all said "he's ready in the lower body, not yet in the upper body."    He's obviously done some work, and he's ready now.  A great athlete who has terrific spacial awareness, understands his role, and just plays with little fanfare.   I hope he's not disappointed anyone because he wasn't an immediate factor.   And he'll only get better.   Happy for him, and have to compliment Crean on this one because he's the kind of kid Indiana can succeed with long term.  I'd take 8 of him.

Take a look at John Perrotto's piece about it.  He says they don't look at the "last 12 games" as much as they used to, but finishing is still a consideration; especially when comparing two teams.  We're splitting hairs and both "right."

They DO care how a team finishes, but it's not the end-all, be-all.   They also care about strength of schedule, performance in conference tournaments, and injuries.  None are sole reasons for anything, but they take all of that into consideration; especially when comparing two teans.  If two teams have an identical resume, the one who finished best will get the nod 10 times out of 10.

Sure has been lately.   He's always been active, fast, and great in transition; but you could have questioned his decision making, ball security, and shot selection from time to time.  He's cleaned all of that up over the last month or so.

I don't know what happened, and I sure don't want to make the statement that Indiana is a better team without Blackmon, but if something else other than his getting hurt happened which led to the team playing this efficiently and this well on the defensive end, I'd love to hear other opinions.     They're playing now as well as any Crean team has at Indiana, and it's a lot of fun to see.  The schedule gets a little tougher, but this is a team taking better care of the ball, taking higher quality shots, sharing the ball from all spots, rebounding well, and guarding really well on the defensive end.       Pretty hard to find anything other than "keep it up."

He needs to take a hard look in the mirror, too.  He was the guy who recruited Eggers and Mandeville (among others); recommending IU give scholarships to both without Knight seeing either of them.  Dakich is great on the radio, but was not a very good recruiter; which is why his record is what it is.   Indiana played one season when Luke Jiminez played major minutes and STILL made the NCAA tournament.  Knight was great, but as Lou Holtz says, you can lose with talent, but you can't win without it.   Guyton is simply not the right guy to blame.  Dakich, Knight, Myles Brand, and Adam Herbert are the 4 guys who should shoulder most of that.

That this "rift" or whatever it is was made public is the problem to begin with.   Dakich does a radio show. It's his job to get people to listen.  Not to get people to like him or earn fans.  He has a FANTASTIC show, whether people agree with him or not.  Guyton was a really good player, and seems to be a good guy.   His problem was his era.  He played at a time when Indiana was "down," and yes, Knight was both directly and indirectly responsible.   He's not revered the way he would be had he played 7 years earlier than he did.     Love Dakich's radio show; love Guyton; who had a gorgeous jumper.  This does not need to be a public feud.

He sold me in the first 1:10.   "There's just something different about basketball players in Indiana."      I became a bigger fan tonight.  Thanks for sharing.   Edit : the shot of Assembly Hall at 3:55 is breathtaking.

Agree with this.   Not just an IU problem.  At all.

Sigh.  Season on the Brink was written before I was in school, so that is not the era of which I'm speaking, but nice try.     I love how you guys just fly around looking for things to disagree with so you can argue.  You don't know facts, you don't ask questions so you DO know facts, and you just fly off the handle ready to pounce for whatever reason.  I was there.  I was in the building.  There were not many empty seats for Big Ten games in the late 80's and early 90's.  There just weren't.  I sat in the top row of a full balcony several times; and there were no better seats to be found.     I don't need you or anyone else to tell me I'm romanticizing.   It's nothing but an uneducated cheap shot because you feel like you have to argue.   You're wrong.  Plain and simple.  

Was speaking of Big Ten games, and it's not patently false.  The chart you showed included the Indiana Classic and all of the other games when students weren't on campus, etc.  The student ticket package then was Big Ten games only.   I wasn't speaking of the overall attendance which included some of the same BS games we get today.  I was around when students could sell their tickets to scalpers, and the scalpers used to make up fake student ID's so people could use them...and sold student tickets for double the face value.

We used to get 4 games and 4 games only.  Place never had an empty seat.  When you're mediocre, you have problems like this.  Sad to me, because it used to be a rarity to get a main level seat for an IU Basketball game.  You got one main level, one endzone, and two balcony seats, and that was it.  In the late 1980's and early 1990's.   "It was cold" is not an excuse.

Playing much better of late, but it's a fair point to say Indiana has not seen a good team in quite a while; and we keep getting lucky seeing teams with injury problems or teams that are completely disjointed.  Minnesota is bad, and they played us close.  Illinois is up and down, had injury and foul problems; and we just blitzed them.  Ohio State had everything go wrong....etc.   That said, Indiana is playing well.  There's no hiding that.  They've made some adjustments, they're being more patient...  The problems are not "gone," but they're not as destructive.  Tonight, Indiana had 27 assists and 11 turnovers.  Granted, Illinois' defense was awful; but if we could do that against good teams...even half the time, we'd win the national championship.   The issue with Indiana has been consistency.  Can we do it against good teams.  Can we do it every night.  It's easy to look good against mediocre teams when you shoot well.  If Indiana can bring that effort and that execution against the conference's top teams?  We'll win the Big Ten, and make it look easy.   10 in a row is terrific.  We're at Wisconsin next week and at Michigan the following.  I'm holding out a complete buy in until those games have taken place, but the kids played really well tonight.

Haven't read the whole thread, and I'm sure someone else either thought of this or brought it up, but this game reminded me very much of the Illinois game several years ago when we just wiped them out at home, shooting the lights out.  2002, maybe?   They played really well tonight.  I liked the movement and liked 27 assists.   How good's THAT?  IU didn't just shoot well, we played well.  I like it.  Happy for Yogi on a night he broke a record, because he was patient and played very well.  I've been hard on him, but tonight was a night for him to celebrate a great accomplishment and a game very well played.  Illinois has some serious work to do; and I think Indiana is much better than they were in November.  

And he did it on a night when he played a terrific overall game.  Good for him.

What midwestern team has had consistent success recruiting east coast players.   Or even overall?  Duke and Kentucky are different animals.  We are not Duke and Kentucky, and those schools are not recruiting 3* and 4* kids like we are.  There is no precedent for what Crean's doing, and I know what I've watched from the kids he's had here.  If you don't agree with me, you're never going to and I don't need to explain or sell it any more than I have; but I think you're hoping. I don't think you put any weight to culture, DNA, or expectations at Indiana.  Your prerogative and I'm not arguing with you.  I just don't believe your position is supported with anything concrete and I think mine is.   I don't want to be a program like Kentucky.  I don't want to root for laundry and sell our soul for the sake of winning games.  Iowa was hot garbage last season and beat Indiana by 14 and finished 3 spots ahead of Indiana in the Big Ten.  Hot garbage with 22 wins and a win in the NCAA tournament?  Think you need to eliminate last season from that comment.     Regardless of what they were a year ago, what they've done is build a team that can win at a very high level.  It's yet to be seen if they can maintain it or not, but the formula is similar to what Knight did here.  He built teams that had seniors and were capable of winning on a national level.  He always (until the late 1990's) had recruiting classes that included 3-4 year players who ultimately won national awards.  He added to rosters with kids who fit, not just kids who said yes.  And he asked those kids to play roles which would help his teams win.  Same as what Iowa has done.  If Iowa goes backward...that's on them.  But this season, they're rolling and beating teams a lot better than Indiana is.  Their Sagarin rating is 6.  So last season, they took a step.  I think it's clear they're taking another one this season.   And they're doing it with experienced players who know the program because they're close to it.  Same as Indiana did for 3 decades.     I agree with you that it's up to the coach to make sure kids fit within the culture.  My problem there is two-fold.  Because Crean has recruited with a shotgun approach, there IS no culture anymore.  And, as I've said many times, he hasn't done that.  He throws mud at a wall and hopes some of it sticks.  Why else do we go get a 3* combo guard from New York?     For the sake of discussion, who are these "winners" the east coast produces...period?  Can you point to consistency?  I'll point to Wisconsin and Michigan State and show you their rosters over the last 15 years.   Who among us wouldn't trade our last 15 years (recruiting the south and the east) for theirs?   Again, take Duke and UK out of it.  They're unique in their own way like I think IU is unique in our own way.  What program not IN the northeast has recruited the northeast to consistent success?

Just saying we're projected right now as an 8 seed. I think we'll make the tournament.  I don't think there's much doubt about that.   But....looking a little deeper.  This is Indiana.  This is Tom Crean's 8th season.  We're talking about "top 100 wins?"  We're talking about "making the NCAA Tournament?"   I didn't make the comment about the Big Ten.  That comes from "experts."  Joe Lunardi in particular.  He said the other day that the Big Ten is as weak as it's been in 20 years because there just aren't many "really good"  teams.  Maryland may be.  Don't know.  Iowa is, I think...kind of been under the radar until recently.  Purdue's had some stumbles.  As has Michigan State.  Indiana hasn't beaten anyone of real substance and got blasted at Duke.      This isn't my opinion. I'm just relaying what I hear and what I see, applying it to this thread, which is all about Crean and his long term viability at Indiana.     You're absolutely right that their future opportunities will make or break our season, but if they stumble in any of the games other than "opportunity games," Indiana puts itself at risk.

Iowa's really good.  OG would be way overmatched against them right now.  They're loaded with experience and length....and take a look at where they're all from, save 1.  In the Big Ten, you win with smart, experienced players.  Been that way for decades, and it's not changing.  Iowa now, Wisconsin and Michigan State for the past decade or so....  I know I've beaten this horse for a while, but recruiting the east coast just isn't necessary.  http://www.hawkeyesports.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/iowa-m-baskbl-mtt.html