RaceToTheTop

Colorado last year had a 47 point loss on their resume.

I know that the committee doesn't look at the conference tournaments all that much -- particularly the Saturday/Sunday games. Do you think if IU was on the bubble it might be better to be seeded somewhere 10 or lower in the conference tournament in order to get an extra game in on Wednesday -- that is, if they are a bubble team, is it better to have potentially more opportunities to play their way in? It seems likely that Wednesday games will most likely be against Q2 teams and Thursday would most likely be Q1. Currently, for games on neutral courts: Quad 1: Purdue (9), Illinois (13), Wisconsin (16), Michigan (17), Maryland (18), Michigan State (23), UCLA (25), Ohio State (28), Oregon (34), Nebraska (47) Quad 2: Indiana (56), Northwestern (59), USC (62), Iowa (67), Rutgers (69), Penn State (73), Washington (92), Minnesota (99)

I would agree that's the best case scenario, just wondering about other paths. A win at Oregon should also be a win against a team in the field.

The only way they are the same person is the way that Jekyll and Hyde were the same man.

In lieu of winning all four home games, if IU were to drop one but then win at Washington they would still have a 10-10 conference record. I believe as of right now (could change) that we have 4 quad 1 and 2 quad 2 games left. Has any team ever missed the tournament when all of their losses were Q1?

Trying to watch the replay of the game (only saw like the last three minutes)....hate hate hate how long it takes for Peacock to put the video of the replay back up. Been over an hour since the end of the game.

Dave Bliss? My God, no.

The fact that Woodson is refusing pregame interviews, not doing his Monday show and not doing post game with Fischer only goes to reinforce in administration's eyes that they did the right thing. We don't need a 66 year old child as the face of the program.

You can rest easy, my fine friend. I understand your jitters but you've earned the right to celebrate the end of the Woodson era and beginning of someone else's.

The thing is that if IU somehow ran off a few more wins and snuck into the tournament, Woodson will have thought he did his job. Teams picked to finish second in the Big Ten should have to run off wins at the end of the year just to become first round NCAA bottom feeders.

Cue the post game where Izzo says we had some guy (won't say his name but his number) he just 'made some shots he doesn't usually make'.

Sure, MSU fans, a two hand shove isn't a foul

Guard the inbounds, foul at midcourt

dumb foul

Bogus foul call

ARE YOU ******* KIDDING ME RICE????

All is Goode!

GOD DAMN IT

Are we ******* kidding on the length of this review??

Going into a shell on offense is the perfect way to lose a game.

******* Galloway leaves so many important points at the line.

After @Uspshoosier post, I went back and looked at Cronin's coaching history. While I would not put him at the top of my list, I certainly came back more impressed than I initially was. He was one I did actually put a yes on, even though he was a tepid one.

Personally, I would rate them on a scale from one to ten. I don't know how other people would rate them.

I believe if Cronin wanted to move on, the buyout wouldn't be an issue. I think it would be more of a mutual parting -- UCLA doesn't tend to have coaches with long tenures since Wooden retired. Bartow 3 years, Cunningham 3 years, Brown 2 years, Farmer 4 years, Hazzard 4 years, Harrick 8 years, Lavin 7 years, Howland 10 years, Alford 5. Cronin is in his sixth which is pretty par for the course at UCLA as to when they move on.

Couldn't find the old picture, but just changed it back for your browsing pleasure.