HoosierHoopster

I said he was stubborn earlier, it didn’t go well, but the thing is, he is. I believe he’s capable of growing the program back, but the continuing stubbornness is a problem

And it’s head scratching, why not have G start, or Bates, with Galloway out? Not getting the repeat starters no matter what

Ha! I’m in the 20’s - while picking with my heart and against the odds all year! Real gamblers say screw the odds lol

Well that's what happens when you go on a 4-game losing streak and including a game we should've won, but for multiple suspensions, at NWU. It's going to look dicey until we start winning again. Hope that happens tonight, but regardless need to win another 3 -- I think we will, and then we'll be in better (but not certain) shape, with the B1G tourney starting.

I said I don't care where I end up in this 'league' -- yep, I don't. O$U is a 6-point favorite, it's at O$U. So, I'll go with the unlikely, but what I hope for IU 69 OSU 67

You think it was major? Ok

Doesn’t answer my question. Ok calling it a night — goodnight —

Fair, but i guess they had a point guard and 5 is more than 3. I mean do you really think our missing all 5 including our point guard didn’t make it much less likely we’d win? Whether benching all 5 was right to me is just a matter of opinion, but i dont know how anyone can actually believe missing all 5 wasn’t a major crutch

Your opinion. We disagree. Coaches often run players etc for rules violations, they don’t often sit 5 players for what was a relatively minor team rules violation. i said I believe in Woodson long term, but i think this was just a bad, stubborn decision, and an unnecessarily costly one.

I don’t follow the attempt to spin it to what have they done to deserve leniency. That’s just not the point. The point is whether suspending all 5 for what was a minor rules violation in a key game was excessive and poorly thought out. To me it was, to you it wasn’t— that’s ok. And i watched the game, we would’ve won with the missing 5 players. if you want to spin it, how about giving examples of college teams who went into a game missing 5 contributing players, including their starting — really only - point guard and won? Good hunting. Or, how did the Galloway point guard conversation go? Yeah, of course missing all 5 made it much less likely we’d win

Yeah this is where we just disagree — which is fine, reasonable disagreement. The violation was minor, the punishment may end up tanking the whole season. To me that’s no bueno, stubbornness over everything.

Who’s acting? you really think missing all 5 players didnt cause that loss? Was Galloway about ready to drop dead, completely gassed before he fouled out because he had to play what was for him extreme minutes? Didn’t effect the outcome? Of course it did

Addressed this already but there are all kinds if punishments used by coaches short of benching 5 players and causing a loss. Early morning practices with sprints etc. that’s pretty common, happens with other teams a lot. But we have to bench 5? this penalized the whole team by causing a loss and just maybe missing the ncaa tourney. Attitude? It’s not an attitude, it’s about what the appropriate penalty or punishment was for what was a relatively minor team rule violation. Like i said, may not be popular, but it’s not about attitude

I agree a rules violation has to have consequences. But the consequence doesn’t have to be sitting 5 players in a game — it just doesn’t. There are all sorts of alternative punishments / rule enforcement measures that other coaches employ all the time. Sprints, early morning practices with sprints etc, a day at the football stadium running stairs, etc. The effect here is to effectively penalize everyone, by causing a team loss. That has its own consequences. It was a shortsighted decision, imo, and has affected the team’s ncaa chances

Probably not a popular view, but I agree. The thing is, the 'team rules' violation wasn't anything major, that's why all 5 were back for the next game. That NWU game was potentially a major W for this team. It clearly was the game right before a really tough slate of games. It also was the start of this big losing streak. It may well have contributed to it - not just the NWU loss. When you bench 5 guys causing a loss, it has consequences. When your team is on the cusp of making the tourney for the first time since 2016, and you, as coach, bench 5 players in a road game, almost guaranteeing a loss, for a team rules violation that wasn't a big one, your decision should be questioned. I've said I believe in Woodson long term. I do. However, I thought that was a really shortsighted, stubborn move to bench all 5 in that game, and I do think it has played a real role in this losing streak. JMO.

I won't happen, but it would be interesting for sure.

I don't think this is true at this point, with the sweeping transfer rules. I mean, Franklin transferred from IU. There were a number of strong players who transferred from multiple teams it's just a different world now in college ball.

Largely agree. Galloway brings it on both ends, and he's really just scratching the surface. I don't think he's ever going to develop a good jump shot though -- think the wrist/hand injuries have done in his shot. That said, he's just going to get better in most aspects of his game, and he's a guy I almost always want out there. He's one of those guys who raises the level of play -- he's a key piece, imo, and a guy I really enjoy rooting for. On the others, Bates and Geronimo are going to be studs, they're already well on their way but they're still young/developing. I expect Leal to take a step up next season and provide us with more shooting. I would definitely take Race and Rob back -- and man are we missing Rob's D -- though I don't expect either back at this point. We need to get back to being a guard-oriented team. We have a young stud coming in in Hood-S, but we need more athletic shooting wings and guards. The focus on the inside game is killing us.

I agree wholeheartedly with all of this, at least generally, as based on the stats. On a stat basis, you have to shoot 3's, and broken record that I am, that's one of the reasons I keep wondering why in the world we aren't shooting more of them when we added Stewart and Kopp to the lineup specifically to do just that. On the flip side, having a guy who can and will hit from the elbow or bank shot etc. also opens the floor, pulling defenders. I don't think that's adequately picked up in stats on shooting percentages. On the pro level, for the extreme example, look at DeRozan, who is having a career year, and the value he adds to his team's offense. This year he's averaging 28 ppg, shooting 54% 2's and just 34% 3's, with an eFG% of 53%, and his current scoring streak matches Wilt, 6 conseq games scoring at least 35 while shooting over 50% and he's doing that with a mid-range game. That's kind of crazy, he's an exception, but his game and the value he adds often gets lost in the numbers game.

Just beat Wisconsin! That's all I've got

IU - 68 Wisconsin - 65 It's time!

You may be right — but it’s the wrong reason to start Kopp. His D is better than Stewart’s but he’s not bringing outside scoring, and that’s the primary reason he’a starting (along with vet leadership). Can’t win many without an outside game to open the floor and Kopp just isn’t bringing it. (Would love it if he turned around and exploded from deep, but he just hasn’t been doing that). Imo, adding Galloway shores up the D, can afford to have Stew out there defensively (though we really miss Rob). Have to put up more points to win

Yeah, I'd start TJD Race Galloway Stewart X for the outside shooting, and with Galloway I think Stewart gets more shots -- we need him shooting, dude can drill it and when he does it opens the floor. I am big on Bates, but he hasn't been consistent, still a frosh who looked like he hit the frosh wall for several games, and imo we need a real, consistent, deep shooter on the floor.

Really think Stewart should start. His outside shooting is hands down legit and creates spacing. With Galloway starting the defense is improved along with ball movement (no, not as point), Kopp is not shooting at the level where defenses have to worry about him. Side note, IIRC Knight did the same suspension thing to Woodson, it worked for him. Here? I think it was a ridiculous move at a really inopportune time. There are all sorts of ways to enforce team rules, for what was just not a very big deal (and why all of them were back after just 1 game), that fall short of risking our season by sitting them as a group. Really think that was a bad decision (I'm probably in the minority here, and that's fine, reasonable minds will differ). I guaranty you guys like Izzo would not have risked their season over that. Hopefully, we'll see a very locked in, intense game from our Hoosiers tomorrow.

I don't think he gets a 'free pass' there's plenty of fair criticism. But the idea that he should suddenly turn around a program that hasn't been in the tourney since 2016? Well, that would be just insanity to me, and most.