Old Friend

I understand from a wins and losses point of view. Indiana has been far better the last 2 games than the were prior. I'm not sure if I have confidence or a feeling; but I didn't mind the effort last night. I hate that we don't have shooters and I hate that we have only 2 reliable guards. I didn't think we played great at MSU at all. Sure it helped that they missed FT's. We've lost games because of that, also. (Arkansas as an example) Wins are wins and there are many reasons teams win and lose. I see enough progress and effort to believe something got through to at least a few of the kids to also believe Indiana can win a few down the stretch.

Neither are ready to play in the Big Ten yet. Spot minutes at best. Forrester is incredibly weak defensively and I'm not sure Moore's any better. Nothing to do with the dog house. Forrester only played the minutes he did because Morgan was in foul trouble, Smith needed a blow a couple of times, and Davis isn't capable right now of playing 35 minutes. Gotta' put somebody out there. Personally? It looks to me like Forrester cares more about his hair than he does working hard on a basketball floor.

I told a couple friends last night would be a loss...but the real test (and I think one Indiana will pass) begins Sunday. I think they'll win more than we lose from this point forward and I don't think MSU was a one-off. I thought last night was going to be difficult with Morgan coming off the injury and the mental side of having to prepare for a much bigger, longer team than we are having just had that win. Green is awful. This is a recording.

The comments you have made here have all been finding the negative in every comment made about Brown and anti "white guy from Indiana." That's fine....but haven't you seen enough of these AAU all stars to understand that doesn't always translate to success in the Big Ten? Teams that have kids that understand how to play the game, not just the sport, succeed in college. Surely you noticed that.....last night? So you're not sold on Brown because he plays a bad schedule (so did Boyd, but you think that's irrelevant); he played well against a highly regarded player (but you heard the kid is a poor defender); and you subscribe to smaller schools with better basketball players (I didn't say athletes) is simply a narrative and everyone who sees it that way can't see the forest through the trees. Is that right? I'm just quoting you. So help me. Indiana has lost 8 of 9 games. Indiana has finished 7th or worse in the Big Ten 4 of the last 6 seasons and this will be the 5th time in 7 years; even leaving out Crean's first 3 years......with a whole bunch of AAU stars and kids who weren't gym rat basketball players from wherever....not the point, really. You think Luke Brown won't succeed.....why, exactly?

So did James. So is Brown. Numbers weren't the point of my comment.

I am personally not sold on the Blackmon's. I know they're talented, but I also think they're limited within a structured offense while not showing much interest in defense. I also believe with my entire being that AAU and high school ball are 180* different. Some kids succeed with more structure while other succeed in an AAU environment. If Brown is the former, he'll do fine in college. I'm convinced the Blackmon's are more successful in wide open games where they can create and have some more freedom.

One doesn't equal the other both ways. Because he's played a bad schedule has nothing to do with what he can do in college. Boyd was merely one example. In Myles Turner's last game at Texas against Purdue he didn't score and had 2 rebounds. Players have bad games. The kid leads the state in scoring and he can shoot. Lots of kids his size have had successful careers and he understands the little things many (Green, for example) don't.

There are a lot of kids who don't have "measurables" and are just ballplayers. Ballplayers figure it out. Kid can shoot and has a high basketball IQ. Been taught by an old school coach who understands fundamentals along with angles and spacing. Couldn't care less where he's ranked or what other schools think. Indiana needs to at the very least "show interest," and see how he might fit. If in the end he doesn't or shows he's not capable, fine....but I don't want to see him at Purdue having success because Indiana (again...and it happened time and again w Davis and Crean) felt it could get what it needed elsewhere. (See : Stanford Robinson en lieu of a couple of local kids)

Mark went to Brownsburg

Brody Boyd played at Union Dugger. Just sayin'.

It'll feel smaller than that. It's above a pool and there's a track around the top. There might be 6 rows of seats on both sides. Cool place, but it's tiny. I have no idea....has Archie offered this kid yet? He's a ballplayer. Straight up. Reminds me a little of Brody Boyd.

Iowa 73 Indiana 65

There is a big difference between playing well and making a couple of plays. Green got beat time and time again yesterday and he quit defensively on a couple of other occasions. The win had at least as much to do with MSU's failures as it did our successes. Believe me, I'll take it; but I don't feel like going overboard giving credit to Green or anyone else defensively. Romeo was horrible again at times as well. Watch the game again....objectively. Green did not play well.

Man, I whiffed that. Not to speculate, but Rob was a complete non factor yesterday. Had a good game against NW, but pretty pedestrian since his concussion. It truly didn't look like a serious hit, but it was to the temple... We need all hands on deck.... hope he snaps out of it.

No! I didn't see that. When did it happen??

=) I've been accused of far worse. Lord knows what avvy's have been applied to me over time. I happen to see the state of IU exactly as he does and for the same reasons. I know why Sampson was hired. I know we passed on Urban Meyer in favor of Gerry DiNardo. It was idiotic. He has said it was idiotic. Same with hiring Mike Davis without doing a search. Same with avoiding IU guys altogether. Same with the "kumbaya" state of things and the complete indifference of Michael McRobbie and his band of yes men. All of that stuff, as far as I know is absolutely accurate and I hate it as much as he does.

=) You started it

Most of them copy/pasted.....to be fair. Response to "LITERALLY."

Mmmayyybe

Since I've been hard on the kid, I'll respond to this. Green made some timely and much needed shots yesterday. No doubt about it. Brass nuggets and those plays were needed. He also made a couple of nice passes and had 5 assists. (Albeit on 2-3 we finally made jumpers or he and the rest of the team would ALL have more than they do) He also quit on defense several times, had 4 turnovers - including the one late in regulation that could easily have cost the opportunity to win, and took a couple of bad shots. While it's true we don't win without him, it's also true we don't win if MSU doesn't miss 14 FT's. It's also true we don't win for several other reasons. Since he is one of our limited options, yes....we "need" him; but I don't want to confuse that with "he played well." He didn't. In fact, when the team watches film, his defense will be embarrassing. There's something off w Phinisee. He's a different player than he was in December. He was ready for Marquette, Louisville, and Butler and played great against Penn State. I think it's something different than he's not ready for the Big Ten. Something's just off.

Curious as to my "recruiting stance." What about "I think - because I also think there's a reason Indiana is a targeted state around the country due to youth basketball, how the game is taught, and the passion we have for it here - Indiana should recruit from the inside out" is outrageous? Serious question. (Or are you referring to something different?) That is absolutely my stance; and I don't think it's outrageous at all. I believe in it strongly and I'll continue to do so. But outrageous? I would disagree. Yes. This is a damned message board, which in itself is very unimportant; so I would disagree that I think I'm important (at least here. Nobody is). The stalker label comes when guys make things about me. Started on the football board when one guy posted something like 12 straight posts in response to mine over a 3-4 day window. All of them strongly disagreeing and several personal. Like he was following me around just to attack me when I posted. Just a moniker. No big deal. There may be two Josh's. One guy for years followed me around and slammed me every chance he got. If the current Josh is a different "Josh" - possible, and I have acknowledged and apologized, then mea culpa. I'll extend an olive branch to you as well. You acknowledge all I'm here to do is talk IU and I'm going to do so with positions that aren't always popular or mainstream - that is intentional because I don't see things the way others do; and I'll leave you be just the same. Worry about how treat you. Not everyone else. You do you. And we'll get along just fine. You've been around here way too long. And....we all, including Dakich want the same thing.

I agreed it was perhaps overdone. I just don't think the initial "little Archie" was made with malice. I think it was in response to something else. My real point is his style is with intent and the intent works. I also think he's exactly right as it relates to the state of Indiana University and it's board of trustees. That's truly all I'm trying to say here. The explosion has been interesting. As have the claims. Amazing what riles people up.

And yet..you keep responding. Why do you suppose that is? Keep pointing fingers.... I have followed no one. No one worth following. (I think you're claiming other boards have closed because of me, which is false....completely false. One went down in part because a guy gave out my personal information, which is against the law; but I digress. That's a long story that ironically involves someone who actually went on a radio show and claimed how important HE was.) For the most part, I just talk IU sports, same as you. I see things differently than you do and it's not always popular. So what? The "stalkers" are the ones who make it about me rather than just talking about the games, the team, the situation, whatever. My perspective on those things is sometimes very different than the mainstream, and it's THEN things get personal. Like now. It's THEN that other people make it about me. At that point, they're stalkers. I love disagreement. Debate. When it's done civilly, it's a terrific exercise. But when things are said which are erroneous and nothing but personal, things change. For example, what outrageous claim have I made? Give me one example. A single "outrageous" claim. (If I continuously do it, this should be easy) You're now making claims about me. YOU are making it about me. All I'm doing is giving a different perspective about a radio personality who happens to be an IU alum. It's not a popular position. It's not what many people think or are willing to say. At the end of the day, I'm not someone to get in line and agree with things I either know to be untrue or incomplete. That style rubs some the wrong way. Obviously you. And I'm fine with that.

Different perspective.

Nobody's reading this anymore and it's now to the point of ridiculous. We can all stop now.