iu eyedoc

Yeah, I agree. The premise brought up about Brunk was that he had been treated in a way that I and others don't want any of the current players to be treated in order to make space for an "upgrade" player. It's an idea that ignores that Brunk didn't count against scholarships and, even at that, he entered the portal at a time when IU had 2 scholarship spots open. I don't think anyone saw Brunk getting anywhere near 20 min/G if he had stayed, I would guess less than the 13 M/G he averaged over the last 9 games of 2019-20. My reply to you was a bit in jest, as Brunk would have been a useful keep, but also I don't think CMW would be recruiting guys that would look at Brunk as a competitor for minutes. As for Duncomb, as a good but not OAD type incoming freshman, I don't think he expects a ton of PT and Brunk wouldn't factor into his thinking. My thoughts are that Brunk was told, this is what we are going to run and it isn't an offense in which you are likely to see much playing time. And that is the exact type of the conversation that hopefully was done with every player, and really unrelated to a Creaning type conversation that some are advocating if a certain player became available.

If CMW is looking for guys that are worried about losing PT to Joey Brunk types... oy vey.

What did IU gain by having a non scholarship counting, mature team leader leave? It makes zero sense to think they didn't want him around.

How so? 1)Brunk could have stayed. In fact, why would any coach encourage a freebie scholarship guy to leave? 2)No one new was added at Brunks position. So he just didn't want to stay for whatever reason. 3)And by him leaving to take a similar PT position at OSU, I would far from consider him a die hard Hoosier.

Answered above.

It's would not be the welcoming of Brooks, it would be the Creaning of a guy you just asked weeks ago to stay and buy into the Hoosier Nation family that is at issue.

Problem is when CMW says: "My first job is to sit down with each one of them and talk about staying in Hoosier Nation. You know, that's what's important. And if I got to plead and beg a little bit to keep them here, I'm going to do that." Then you have 13 guys sign up to go to war with you. Essential leaving a man behind is not a good look or where I want the program to be. You could make a bit of a justification for a program changing talent, but Brooks is not that. I take these 13 and expect improvement, next year through normal attrition (early NBA/ PT transfers) there will be more space made available and the following yr there is 4 open spots

Well it would be an either or situation as for Brooks if he enters the portal. Either a current Hoosier "chooses" to continue his playing career elsewhere or Brooks wont be a Hoosier.

So is May 1st correct moving forward?

I definitely see it as likely, but what would really bite is if they "make room" for Brooks with one of the fringe players and then someone bolts because of reduced PT. Just my own thoughts but RP, JH, JG seem like the guys that may get slapped in the face with the reality of PT loss and/or currently unrecognized need for a big increase in intensity and focus.

Yep, beyond the top 8 to10 rotation, turnover is going to be immense. That is why finding 3 star guys like Leal and Galloway that bleed Hoosier Cream and Crimson will become more valuable. If not it will just become musical chairs on the bottom half of college rosters. I would really like basketball to take on the college baseball model: Players are eligible for the Major League Baseball draft out of high school. However, if a player attends a four-year university, they are not eligible for the draft again until after their junior year of college. If players know they have to stay for 3 years they will be more accepting of "earning" PT. At least, I think it will help.

My point is there is typically a very sharp line at about 8-10 with players getting more than 5 min/G. I see Galloway and Leal being more accepting of the limited minutes roll than, say Geronimo or Hunter. I see a potential problem more with the 8-10 slot guys staying happy with lesser minutes. Galloway's minutes from last year have realistically already been given to other players, Brooks would be knocking someone else out of PT that may not be accepting of such a thing. I think that is where things need to be worked out.

I am indifferent to the Brooks to IU talk, but a thought about why if he wants to transfer to IU he hasn't announced it yet. He is a student in Lexington KY, that has already ruffled the feathers of UK fans with his Rupp comments, to announce you are going to transfer to a hated rival with months left in the semester would turned him into a pariah at best and a target of hate by many. Imagine TJD tweeting, " Bob Knight was a whip carrying racist...oh, and I am entering the portal to transfer to Purdue. Boiler Down!!"

Not sure your point, every teams 12th and 13th man just rides the pines. Almost every team only goes 8 or 9 deep for over 5 min/G PT. Leal and Galloway could easily be a12 and 13 on a B1G and NCAA championship team. If one leaves for Brooks, someone else will move down a notch and lose PT to Brooks or Brooks won't get the PT he wants and that is the guy that will most likely be an unhappy teammate. I see a bigger potential problem with Hunter going from 20 min/G to 12-17 or Rob Phin 27 to 15ish. Galloway has to see the reduced minutes coming, but it will be a much harsher reality for an upperclassman to except graciously.

Awful news Terrance Clark killed in LA car accident. https://www.dukebasketballreport.com/2021/4/23/22398856/kentuckys-terrence-clarke-dies-in-la-accident-kentucky-basketball

My personal feeling is that the guys that are here I want to stay. If a spot opens up because a guy wants to move on, fine, bring on Brooks, but suddenly having a playing time conversation with a player to nudge him out the door for Brooks, esp with an old school 80's middle part Hoosier for life type would be sort of a buzz kill for the party that has been IU basketball the last month. These through thick and thin guys are what make a program great. Creaning either would be a disappointment.

Even though the scholarships are full you need to find space for talent. I would love for CMW to welcome him... as a preferred walk on.

So do all players academically finish the semester? Is it case by case? If they don't finish the semester, do they then count against the team APR? It could get uncomfortable for players, esp if they are transferring intraconference. Brunk not so much because he is a nonessential grandpa type, but had Armaan gone to UI, or if a star player would transfer to UK or PU, things could be pretty prickly around campus for 2-3 months.

IU football is the type of school that I think could get hit hard in football by the transfer portal rules. Below average to middle of the road P5 program, where a late bloomer may want to move on to a high major program to highlight his skills if he thinks it may increase pro prospects, but also a good enough program that low PT guys could move to lesser programs to increase PT. Bama, UF, LSU OSU, CLEM only have guys leaving to move down or to get more PT elsewhere, while Akron, Coastal Carolina, La Tech and the like are likely to loose just players that can upgrade exposure. Should become very interesting.

So more of a football issue than BB.

School earn a point for good academic standing and 1 for them staying at the institution, so a transfer in good standing costs the school 1of 2 points

Not sure if already mentioned but with the new transfer rule, the college APR is going to need to be seriosly tweaked. The APR is calculated as follows: Each student-athlete receiving athletically related financial aid earns one point for staying in school and one point for being academically eligible. A team’s total points are divided by points possible and then multiplied by 1,000 to equal the team’s Academic Progress Rate. In addition to a team’s current-year APR, its rolling four-year APR is also used to determine accountability. Teams must earn a four-year average APR of 930 to compete in championships. So a team of 13 scholarship players with everyone staying academically eligible and 2 players transferring scores a 923. If teams are recruiting well, I can easily see an average of 2 players per season leaving to get more PT. IU has had 1 at the moment, but there are at least 4 players I could see considering it within the next calendar year and that doesn't even account for TJD leaving for the NBA. They should just count transfers in good academic standing as 1 of 1 instead of 1of 2 points. Transferring in good standing to another academic institution is not a failure, it's a player choice.

Not really talking just you, as it has been oft repeated, but the talk of Rob Phin getting his stroke back assumes he ever had it, heck, even Fife talked about it. I like him as a player but he has never been even an adequate shooter as a guard from 2, 3, or FT's. I think he has value, but right now his three yr history, doesn't bode well for ever becoming an outside threat.