Aaron

Totally different. In 2013, IU had to win the Big Ten Tournament to make the NCAA Tournament and was the only time finishing below .500 overall since going varsity in 1973. They then lost in the first round on the road and one of only three times they were not seeded in the last couple of decades and only time since 2001 without at least one home game in the postseason. This time, they will absolutely be seeded with a top-10 RPI and undefeated in non-conference. The only question is if they can get a top-8 seed and get that second home game for the Sweet 16. The round of 32 is a locked-in home game. The year you should compare not to 2013 but one year later, in 2014. In 2014, they ran the table in the non-conference and were mid-pack in the Big Ten, but got a very high NCAA seed off the non-conference games, which will happen again. However, don't want to repeat the NCAA results as the Hoosiers were upset by Xavier in the round of 32, and this is the last time they didn't win a postseason game and make at least the Sweet 16. Could literally see the squad use their scoring to get to the college cup, or the struggling backline and goalie knock them out in the first game. Both outcomes are equally likely for this iteration of the team. You may have also meant 2012 when the team struggled down the stretch, but won their last national title by getting hot in the postseason. That team was the final one earning a seed at no. 16. I expect them to be inside the top-10 this time, if not top-8, for that second home game to be guaranteed.

See everyone for the NCAA Tournament. IU will still host at least one game and maybe two, as they are right on the fringe of the top eight. The Big Ten Tourney has zero to do with NCAA seeding. In general, though, college soccer is not fun to watch right now. The talent drain and basically no defense across the board feels like watching the FIFA Video game instead of real soccer, with the amount of scoring and easy shots. While I love cheering for IU, watching the sport at the college level is painful. Either the sport needs to listen to the USA Soccer Federation and work with them to take their recommendations to get the top talent again, or fold up shop. Right now product is unbearable, and this is no fault of Indiana. They get the top talent of those making it to college, but that starts pretty far down the rankings.

Michigan is most relevant and equivalent example in Big Ten right now.

That could be a reason and legitimate. However, would you have dropped if team was ranked and won nearly 30 games. If you were going to drop anyways you may have hit on a factor. If being less then excellent caused you not to renew and would have otherwise, that is something you are certainly entitled to do but that behavior (better or worse) sheds some light on how fan base thinks. Don't blame you for your specific case. We would need to hear from others and cross reference with other schools to find the smoking gun for this pattern but your particular case def sheds a tiny bit of light.

Michigan has all the buffet of sports options as Indiana and lost no season ticket holders for its women's basketball program after one good season that was slightly less than others. Its a conundrum that the athletic department has to figure out. Nowhere else loses 30-40% of ticket holders over a women's season like last.

This survey is important since no other school wins 20 games and loses mass numbers of season ticket holders. There is clearly something unique about our fan base being more front running than others. Our athletic department needs to get to bottom of it if it does not want to lose a large percentage of season ticket holders after good but not great seasons when nowhere else does.

Exactly when we were ranked and times were the most sunny attendance grew and grew. Now one 20-13 season loses 40% of season ticket holders. Iowa with similar success recently has sold out last two seasons even without Caitlin Clark. Michigan whose path has mirrored IU each season recently including last, lost no season ticket holders last year and Michigan's sports options are no different than Indiana's. This proves my point that our fan base even in equivalent spots in equivalent sports has always had more frontrunners.

Totally agree with all of that. However, no program like women's basketball should have to endure losing nearly 40% of its season ticket holders over a 20-13 team with an NCAA appearance. That doesn't happen at most if any other places after five straight years of being ranked each week and then one solid top-30 season not ranked. This is where the problem comes in and is not an issue at most schools. Michigan women had a worse season than usual last year and equivalent rise of IU before that and lost almost no season ticket holders. Meanwhile, Iowa has sold out its next two non-Caitlin Clark seasons recently that saw similar results to IU last year. I get IU is competing with more sports here, but it shows our fans priority for our fan base in general.

A five year run of being ranked each and every week is pretty 'elite' and matched only 1-2 others. Iowa has sold out season tickets post Caitlin Clark each of the last two seasons and their recent run is similar to IU. A 20-13 season does not warrant losing 40% of season ticket holders and would not anywhere else. Attendance absolutely is tied to winning but definition of 'winning' needs to be upped by our lot of fans if we want constant success in any program. Losing nearly 40% of season ticket holders in IU women tells me our fans view of what constitutes 'winning' is not consistent with elsewhere.

Again I agree with most of what you are saying and hope you are right and I am wrong. Proof will be in pudding though and history says otherwise. Really hope football's likely eight win season next yr is a new leaf for our fan base but past precedent says otherwise. Really hope you turn out right. No one more than me is rooting for that.

And you are entitled to that opinion, but it answers why last night was sparse and 3k season ticket holders were lost in offseason. There is a big different between hoping for 23-24 wins and less than 10 losses (which is perfectly acceptable) and considering not getting there with only 20 wins a failure and losing nearly 40% of ticketholders. This is where problem is. Not "hoping for more' which every rational fan absolutely should and zero reason to lower expectations.

Don't disagree with a lot of you are saying. However, it does mean a lot more work to get butts in seats at IU compared to most, hence the empty ones seen last night. There is nothing in the women's b-ball product last year that should have caused team to lose roughly 3k of its 8k season ticket holders. No where else loses nearly 40% of its season ticket holders from last years products and generally maintains steady or gains. Yes its still light years ahead of past, but if you bleed at this number or even half of it over 2-3 more 20 win seasons, it is no higher than Pre-Moren. Hopefully the most front running fans were weeded out, but if a similar season to last loses another 1-2k which is possible my point is well proven. Almost any other school with two 20-win seasons with NCAA appearance with an 8k ticket base would hold steady or gain not shrink by nearly half. Here it is considered a failure and bleeds support. We need a lot more people in this fan base to stop considering these 20-win seasons (or in football's case 8 wins) not enough. You want long sustained success for a program outside soccer? A big part of it is not losing 40% of a fan base over a top-30 NCAA appearance. You will see my point when next years eight-win 'rebuilding' football season wins 8 games and loses 20-40% of season ticket holders which will absolutely happen here and not anywhere else. Prove me wrong. I hope I am wrong, but every historical perspective here including with Mallory, and now with women's basketball and more recently baseball, makes me very skeptical you won't lose thousands of ticket holders over a solid season which does not happen elsewhere.

And this attitude proves my point. In any other fan bases world, constant 20 win seasons is celebrated, not asking for more. You are entitled to feel that way but this attitude answers my question in my mind even if some might disagree.

I warned about this in another thread and its not the ticket distribution. You can easily buy them for a few $$$ on Seatgeek and plenty available higher up. This is because a much larger percentage of our fan base then most others is especially front running compared to other college fan bases and this is a massive issue across the board issue when it comes to IU. This is not a problem with people on the board or devout fan, but the number of people in our fan base who refuse to support anything less than a top 5-10 team in that sport is why you see this. I deal with this everyday with fellow Hoosier fans. Ask other fan bases about their decent postseason squads and if they go and the answer is 'yes'. Ask an IU fan about women's basketball or baseball now and they will tell you they followed them a couple of years ago when they were elite and in Schwarber days respectively. This is not normal behavior from a fan base and generally once a team has great seasons and become elite, a slight fall off to constant postseason squads is enough to maintain a fan base but not at IU. Until our casual fans change their behavior to mirror what other schools do, you won't see a football stadium expansion or top NIL money available. I am very skeptical yearly eight win Cignetti teams can draw more than 35k as the Mallory years showed and was partially (although not completely) responsible for fall off. We have a good number of loyal fans (and the people on this board are amongst that), but the amount of casual fans who will maintain their interest for a winning but non-elite squad is much higher than a normal college fan base. My estimates at most schools is its about 60% front running 40% loyal. At IU its 90% front running and 10% loyal. Until 30% more casuals like many I know become loyal, this problem isn't going away. We better hope Moren's new elite recruits make them top-10 teams yearly and Cignetti's "next emerging super power" is true. Anything less, like a 20-13 postseason squad or eight win bowl team will not be supported much better than a losing 13-20 or four win football team seen through most of the programs history. IU has a serious front-running fan problem that is far greater than most schools and I don't have a good answer as to why, other than it being a very real thing. This 20-win postseason women's team bleeding attendance is unfortunately entirely predictable and would not happen with most other schools. As an example, Purdue women's elite performance for a half-dozen years giving way to second round tourney exits saw very little fan drop off and even decent support for their awful product now. For IU, one year of 20 wins vs. being elite and you bleed thousands of season ticket holders. This front-running attitude amongst vast majority of the IU fan base is a very real problem that most IU fans need to look in the mirror and confront. Until then, the necessary revenue to sustain winning across board will go through these 2-5 year elite cycles followed by coaching changes and slow decline. I don't take pride in any of this and it sucks, but its a hard truth for diehards like ourselves on this board.

Hopefully, tonight will be a preview of football tomorrow as expected. IU clubbed a bad Maryland side over the head with an easy three-set sweep to stay on track to host in the NCAA Tournament.

As I've said, this is how recruiting is supposed to look with the level IU has won at. Makalusky and Caffey are clearly the highest-ranked recruits in many years for a reason (and in Makalusky's case highest ever until next year), and Battle and Nyemcheck are even higher and could well be 5* by next fall, being in the top-30. Moren said she wanted better athletes who are higher ranked, and the new recruiting coach has delivered big in the last two classes with this.

Not really. They beat a top-flight Kentucky and Notre Dame squad on the road, also. For whatever reason, conference road games have been a bugaboo much more than road games overall. If you can hold on to a top-8 NCAA seed (RPI is exactly 8), the team will play at least two NCAA Tournament games at home against non-Big Ten squads, which has been the sweet spot this fall, and the team has no. 1 non-conference RPI in the nation. Can't wait to get out of conference play and try their luck against other opponents at home, where the team has been best. As I said, offense could take the team to a College Cup or the defense could end their season in the first round, and both are equally likely given positioning. Team is 4-3-1 in Quad one, 1-1 in Quad two, 4-1 in Quad three, and 1-0 in Quad four. The resume is actually quite strong, and the committee doesn't look at conference record: https://rpiupdatemenssoccer.blogspot.com/2025/07/indiana.html

This team has two versions of itself. One that plays at home and outside of conference play that looks like a national contender, and one that plays on the road in the Big Ten that looks totally inept. With all the top wins in the preconference, RPI only fell to 8. The team is going to the NCAA Tournament as a seeded team, and if they can hold on to the top 8, that would be key for the second guaranteed home game. 2014 has struck again in every way; league play is a mess, but non-conference is elite for a good NCAA seed. Tonight may have been the Hoosiers' worst effort this season across the board. You still have no goalie who is halfway decent or a competent defense. The normally elite offense had a Michigan State night. Team needs a win and UCLA loss or tie just to make the Big Ten Tourney, but given the Bruins are playing at Washington, who will be going for a conference title, and the Hoosiers are back at home against mediocre Rutgers, where they thrive, this is well within reach. Ironically, a top-four NCAA seed is not completely out of the question if you can qualify for the Big Ten Tourney and beat Maryland or Washington in a rematch in the first conference tourney game. Quite frankly, despite the atmosphere, I'd rather rematch Maryland and their much better RPI without the cross-country trip. Terps clinch Big Ten with a win or tie, or Huskie loss or tie. The goal right now, though, is to make the Big Ten Tourney and hold on to the top-eight spot for the NCAA's.

IU stayed in the rankings at 24 in the human poll which I was not sure if they would, although they did easily beat Northwestern after losing to Golden Gophers. IU is still at no. 15 in the RPI and at Maryland this week is absolute must win (no. 141) if you are serious about being close to hosting and clear NCAA squad. Always dangerous since they get up for this one, given IU stole Coach Aird from them. However, Hoosiers are vastly better similar to football next day and loss in either sport would be an utter embarrassment. Penn State (no. 21) on Sunday afterwards is a clear bonus match where a win would be a massive surprise elevating ceiling to a new stratosphere much like football's win over Oregon. In future weeks beating Iowa at home (no. 107), Maryland again (this time at home), and Rutgers (no. 147) are absolute musts also to not put NCAA bid in question and get to at least 11-9 in league. To seriously be in contention for hosting beating Oregon (no. 51) in Bloomington and winning at Illinois (no. 26) are probably the easiest gets amongst the rest. Any other wins whether it be at Penn State, at Wisconsin (no. 14), Nebraska (no. 2), or at Purdue (no. 9) are long shots. Projecting the four likely wins and four likely losses, team would be at 11-7 and 20-8 making them a safe NCAA squad given the wins so far at no. 20 Miami, no. 65 Northwestern x2, no. 38 Washington, at no. 23 USC, at no. 32 UCLA, and at no. 30 Michigan. Also, no bad losses with worst one being at no. 34 Michigan State and at No. 35 Western Kentucky. Minnesota and Purdue have higher RPI's than IU meaning no shame losing those, while rest of wins were against sub-100 teams in preconference (and no. 186 Ohio State) with best being no. 107 Stephen F Austin on a neutral site. How they do against Oregon and Illinois will determine ceiling. If they get both and are 22-8 and 13-7 they are a probable host as top four seed. If they go 1-1 in these two matches and are 21-9 and 12-8 then they are probably right on fringe that could go either way. If lose both and are 20-10 and 11-9 almost certainly travelling. Bottom line is, as long as they take care of the four gimmies to get to 20 wins and winning conference record, they are dancing into postseason for the first time in 15 years. Whether they host, will almost certainly come down to the toss-up matches with Illinois and Oregon assuming the other eight matches are won by the clear favorite as described above. There is no Big Ten Tourney in volleyball. Its straight to NCAA's after conference play ends which is why at-large resume is necessary. Expect league to potentially get 10-12 bids with 4-5 hosts as 12 squads in top 50 of PRI with five including IU in top 15.

The evidence of Faith holding her own against Oregon last year in Big Ten Tourney is far more compelling case for her then anything Noyan did last night. That is what I am going on more than what I watched last night, even though you are completely right based on yesterday alone.

Watching one game against P5 basketball in person for IU, a few clear things can be taken away. Lamar Wilkerson and Tucker DeVries are clear top level players. It’s why it took an all out war to win them in portal (or in DeVries' case being coaches' son that would have otherwise had every top level school interested). Sisley will get there but raw as top freshman and Alexis from Florida has p5 traits with rebounding and athleticism but not a huge scorer. Also Conerway, can clearly hold his own at this level with p5 tools and driving ability. Rest of guys look like mid-major players in size and ability (especially Bailey at the five really concerns me) and it’s why Indiana easily won their services in portal. Team lacks size and athleticism and ability to win or lose will be entirely on heart, hustle, and 3’s falling. The lack of size is main reason for the foul trouble we saw in this one and could well be ongoing problem. This isn’t Crean’s first team given you have five p5 level players while that had none. Whether this year is more like Crean's competitive third year team that plays hard and loses and goes 12-20 or is a bubble team at 20-12 will depend entirely on how many times 3’s fall in conference play. Shooting and heart will determine with squad's ceiling and right now I'd believe anywhere from back end tourney team to 13-15 wins depending on these two factors and how well things go with them. A lot will come down to if Darian DeVries can can maximize his roster in ways Crean could not.

Based on last night looks like Fenn (injured), and Ondineme won't contribute at all. Kiaku will struggle to adjust to this level and Spreen and Noyan will play only bit minutes. Rotation looks like Shay and Lenee as clear leaders as we expected, Caffey starting and having a Yarden like impact immediately, Big Z at the 5, and Valentyna (clearly much improved) or Phoenix taking last spot starting with other playing extensively off bench with Faith and Makalusky seeing extended back up minutes as main 8 person rotation. Freshman in Caffey and Makalusky are real deal and even more excited for the three even higher ranked recruits next yr. This is what recruiting is supposed to look like when you are winning. Clearly new recruiting coach over coach Sayavongchanh was exactly what was needed and recruiting fell off as soon as Glenn Box left several years ago. Despite winning, coach Sy was missing on nearly everyone good and glad Moren saw it and replaced her with the new guy getting recruiting results that match the results on court. Speaking of missing, it’s early but I have serious questions if any transfers outside Phoenix and Big Z contribute much. There is a reason they were immediate gets and had to beat everyone and their brother out for them while others were added late with little opposition later. Exactly like men, where Tucker DeVries and Lamar Wilkerson are legit players added quickly from portal against serious competition while others were later gets who look like minimal contributors at this level potentially. Expect a similar record to last year as comfortable back end NCAA Tourney team who finishes mid-pack in league. When Caffey and Makalusky are combined with the even better recruits (+portal) and Lenee next year, look out. Outside of Valentyna's improvement, pretty much what I expected player wise and always thought Caffey was an instant stud with athleticism team has lacked as I posted many times last year.

Last night proved what I already knew. Offense could win the team a national title, while the defense and goalie could knock them out in the first round. The good news is the team is still cruising towards a top-eight seed if they take care of business in the last couple of matches. This means two easier home games guaranteed and only one tough road game (if bracket holds to form) or home game in Elite Eight (if upsets occur) for the NCAA's in their path to another College Cup. This is kind of the inverse of 2023, when IU won the Big Ten and got to host the entire conference tournament after non-conference struggles. However, they had to travel for the entire NCAA Tourney, given a poor RPI. This time, the RPI is fantastic (No. 5, which is where the committee has them seeded in the latest reveal) due to a strong non-conference schedule, but league play has been a struggle. This means travelling for the entire conference tournament but hosting through most of the NCAA Tournament. This is nearly identical to 2014 when the same scenario played out. Have to hope for a better result this time when a rainy day and a missed PK led to being upset as a no. 7 seed in the first round. Hopefully, with a similar scenario this time, they can get to at least the Elite 8 as their placement would expect. Just have to hope the offense scores enough. The advantage this time is that Palmer Ault is IU's most dangerous scorer since Eriq Zavaletta when the Hoosiers last won a national title. However, the D and the goalie are much weaker. Given stout defense and fewer offensive threats have led to no titles in the last decade+, maybe being the second best goal scoring squad in the country is preferable to recent times. We will see soon.

This team has shown that there is still a gap between them and the top of college volleyball the last couple of weeks. However, if they just beat the teams they are better than (starting with Northwestern Sunday), they will cruise into their first NCAA Tourney in 16 years. However, hosting is starting to look like a bit of a long shot despite being on the bubble of doing so in the NCAA's recent reveal. While this would be a nice bonus, just defeat the squads that they can and no one will complain.

Recruiting has seemingly been fixed with the switch of recruiting coaches. Three top 60 recruits including the two highest ranked players in program history directly out of high school for 2026 both in top 30. Also 2025 has two top-40 recruits. These classes (especially 2026 which is likely to be top-five in country) are in line with other top programs of last few years and is what should have been happening the last few seasons when winning. It was all about switching lead recruiting coaches. The job under the previous recruiter was not commensurate to the results on court. This new one in last year very much is. Glad Moren recognized it and made the change. It shows she expects winning and strong recruiting as much as fans and recognized job was not getting done under previous person.