Old Friend

I'd rather be lucky than good. Horrible possession, but I'm glad Green was in the game; otherwise Phinisee has the ball when Green does and never gets that shot. What a gutty 2nd half.

Archie needs an offense. Archie needs a junior point guard who doesn't turn the ball over about once every 3 minutes. Archie needs a team that can score with more than 2 players. Archie needs to understand what Evan Fitzner is and what he is not. Archie needs to get his own house in order. This offense is flat assed awful. And yes, DeVonte Green is a bad basketball player much of the time. Very low basketball IQ and a lazy defender. We need a guard in next season's recruiting class.

The one I find intriguing is Reggie Todd. A kid who originally went to Mississippi State, was arrested for getting into a fight (with another male), and ended up at Hinds C.C. Caught 14 balls as a freshman at MSU including a TD. 6'5" kid. Lots of potential. We get both he and Bell? Our offense is significantly upgraded immediately.

IU 91 UCA 64

You know, funny you should say that. I was just talking yesterday with a friend (coach) of mine and said the same thing...that he'll be a 4 year college kid. There's just something.....missing (?) from his game that may not afford him an NBA opportunity for a few years; and I can't put my finger on it. Yogi, for example, didn't have hyper-athletic ability, either. As a freshman, was a similar shooter. Phinisee is very athletic and explosive when he needs to be. I think that part of his game is under-rated. But hyper athletic he is not. Is that what's missing? Could be that... I also think he's a little too unselfish to be an early entry NBA guy. Not assertive enough, maybe? But he can handle the ball well enough. He is a developing shooter. He can guard. He can rebound. Hard to put a finger on it...but I agree absolutely he'll be around a while; and I love it. I said when he committed I wanted him as much or more than Romeo; and I am very proud to stand by that comment.

I would argue (and yeah, I know I'm biased because I flat love the kid) that Phinisee is damned close to a 5* guard. I also don't know that I want a 5* kid at that position who's a score first player. I don't think that's a winning recipe.

His improvement has been obvious and he's helped the team generally speaking. It does make me wonder about DaVonte Green, though.

I don't even begrudge Calipari. I don't dislike him. I have had 2 friends in coaching (one very recently) work with him and have nothing but great things to say about the man. I just don't want to put my energy behind a team and program that runs itself the way he runs his program. Not my cup of tea and I agree in large part with you on the "why."

I am. Calipari does things his way and I have no interest in doing things that way. Records be damned. I like the culture Indiana has developed over time; and Kentucky has become nothing but laundry. No thank you. I like where we are now vs. where we would have been had we hired Calipari. His way is his way and has been successful to a point. I get all of that, but it's not the way I want to see this program run.

Good grief...he was, wasn't he? I had forgotten that. Can you imagine??

Is this a serious comment? At that time, Rck Pitinio wanted the job. We could have had Brad Stevens if we'd have called him (and yeah, I have the benefit of hindsight making that comment). Rick Barnes was interested. We could have had any number of highly qualified and high profile coaches then. Indiana is still and was then...Indiana.

Crean : You cannot - at Indiana - win 2 Big Ten titles and have each of them followed by 7-11 records in the conference. Guy had no idea how to build a program. Only the occasional team because he could out-talent many teams. Did we ever have a game against a good team when we thought he out-coached the opposition? Has any coach in any sport ever spoken in platitudes or cliche's as much as Crean did? His recruiting was a mess. Stanford Robinson? Peter Jurkin? Bawa Muniru? Guy-Marc Michele? Jeremy Hollowell (seriously....do your homework. This kid was a PIA when he was 15)? Max Hoetzel? Tim Priller? Jeremiah April? Good Lord. WHY?? On and on and on and on. Archie : I see building of a program. I see recruiting from the inside out and building relationships with good local coaches. I see defense first. He talks the talk. And I think he walks the walk. I also see a sometimes stagnant offense, missed FT's, and some careless offense once in a while. Overall, give me Archie in a landslide.

Most Butler fans woke up on 3rd base and swear they hit a triple. Most never went to a game prior to 2010; and they can't name any players who played prior to that. Laughable indeed.

Help me understand. He "kills us" with stupid, unforced turnovers?" He has 19 on the season. Not even 2 per game; and he plays 28 minutes every game. Indiana would have lost to Duke if he had zero TO's that night. In the other game IU lost, he had zero turnovers. (By the way, he had zero in each Big Ten game, also) So how does he "kill us?" Every college player turns the ball over. Green has 2 fewer turnovers in 86 fewer minutes. Juwon Morgan has 2 MORE turnovers and handles the ball far less. Langford also has more turnovers. I don't know what you're really trying to say, but Phinisee's TO's are pretty normal and average in the overall scheme of things. Given what we've seen in recent years, I'll take a freshman point guard with a 1.9:1 A/TO ratio. Especially when he also averages almost 3 RPG and shoots 41% from the 3-point arc. He has not "killed us" at all and his mistakes have not "cost us" yet. Every team and every player turns the ball over. His numbers aren't outstanding in any way as it relates to TO's. Why single him out?

IU 65 Butler 57

Whatever predictions were here doesn't matter to me. I think many had un-necessarily tempered expectations based on last season; but this is a completely different team. We have the best back to the basket player in the conference (except maybe Ethan Happ) in Morgan who's also versatile enough to space the floor. We have a returning 6'10" kid who's shown himself to be effective. We have one of the best athletes in the conference in Smith, who played a year ago like he should be better this season, or at least more consistent. We have a top 5 freshmen who's a McDonald's All American; a freshman point guard who I know many here under-rated. And we have depth. Fitzner, McRoberts, Durham, and Green have all shown they can play and contribute at this level. The ceiling should be higher than a 4 seed. I know we're not a contender, but we handled Marquette who just beat Wisconsin, and we beat Louisville who beat Michigan State; both of whom are ranked in the top 12; so we're not THAT far off of a top 10-15 team. Seriously....Furman, Buffalo, Nebraska, Kansas State, Virginia Tech, Iowa, Texas Tech, Maryland, Florida State, Arizona State, and Nevada are all ranked ahead of Indiana right now, and who among those teams has our talent or depth? (Hell, we beat Iowa twice LAST year...and we're worlds better this season from a talent perspective. We also beat Maryland a year ago. Why expect Indiana to finish below them this season? Like I said, I think 4-seed expectations are too low) We only have one player with true iso talent, so why we're an iso offense, I have no idea. I don't need to see the Bob Knight motion, but we're not very good in transition right now and we do a lot of standing in the half court. We just fired a guy whose offense looked like this; but he was far better in transition. If we're going to rely on winning 1-2 point games because of an iso offense; we'll struggle. Yeah, we won 3 close ones and it feels good to do that. Experience and some luck involved, but I'll take it. I also know those things tend to even out unless things change.

Agreed and I think many people (myself included) believe, and reasonably so, that this team's ceiling should be higher than that. There's no reason with the depth, length, and experience we have to have an offense that looks like this. I think that's the gist of the frustration.

What I'm saying is people are not reacting to results, necessarily. We still look very incomplete at times and we struggled with a couple of teams (UTA and UCD) we really shouldn't. FT's are definitely a concern. Having (until yesterday) just 2 threats to score was a concern. Same with the lack of movement, decision making by players like Green and Smith, the complete inefficacy of McRoberts, injuries, etc. Eyeball test. We don't look like a good team despite winning ugly. Yeah...it's better. But I think what some are saying is it needs to look better than it does if we can sustain it.

I think the problem people have - and perhaps not articulating -is the style we're playing is not sustainable and won't win consistently. Eventually, you don't win all of your 1 or 2 point games. Yeah, we're 3-0 in the last 3; but easily could be 0-3 in large part because our offense has looked pretty anemic at times and at best is shaky.

WHOLE lot better from Smith today. Also, with Phinisee scoring some, Indiana finally finding some additional weapons.

9 assists on 24 FG's isn't going to cut it most of the time; and if our offense is that focused on ball-plays, we need shooters for kick outs. Not an option to NOT have shooters.

See above. I think we said the same thing within 10 seconds of one another

Our offense is awful. Absolutely purpose-less and stagnant. Durham and Green are unwatchable today; and why Archie won't recruit shooters is beyond me. If we're going to drive it or hit the post all the time, we need weapons on a kick out. Maddening.

Like I said, your eyes work or they don't. My question back to you based on yours to me is "are you dating his sister or something? Best friends since childhood?" He is extremely inconsistent beyond 10 yards and has a weak arm. He is average only because he was able to hit check down after check down and his receivers were able to get some YAC which also gets credited to his stats. You're as biased as you think I am, just the other way. You and others complained about DeBord's play calling all year; but didn't seem to notice or add 2+2 when it changed for Penix. There was a reason. As far as McSorely....come on, man. What 4 stats are you referring to? Don't BS people when you can easily look this stuff up. McSorely averages 2 yards per attempt more than Ramsey does. McSorely's career rating is 144. Ramsey's is 128. McSorely basically averaged 25 TD's a season. Ramsey 14.5, or a little higher if you give him a few for the time he was hurt a year ago. McSorely throws fewer INT's. He rushed for twice the yardage Ramsey did. The ONLY reason Ramsey's completion % is a little higher is the throws he makes and you have to know that, or you're completely blind and not objective. Ramsey is not average. Only one Big Ten QB (well, except the Rutgers dumpster fire) averaged fewer yards per attempt than he did; and that was Lewerke from MSU who is flat awful. Ramsey was 3rd from the bottom in INT's...which is incredible for a guy who checked down as much as he did. His down field throws from a broad brush perspective ended poorly. Because...he can't make those throws consistently. Yeah, he made a few. Absolutely. But again, you either noticed the difference between he and Penix or you didn't. For being such a mobile guy, Ramsey was 2nd from the bottom in sacks allowed. Guy had the 3rd most attempts in the Big Ten and was 3rd from the bottom in yards per attempt. What does that tell you? Seriously? You and others complain about wanting IU to be better in football and you blame coaches, administration, etc. Yet you defend the player who has proven time and again he's not very good and limits Indiana's opportunity to win. Yeah, my posts were aimed at you and the other 2 guys who always reply and defend Ramsey while blaming everything else. We don't have a good QB and that matters. A lot. You can blame Allen for that, and I do. But we also have a much better arm recovering from an ACL injury. We shall see. But seriously....be objective and look up stats before you reference them.

IU 76 UL 69