IUHoosierJoe

Auburn 75, Indiana 66

Manchester was undefeated until that final game.

We have to improve day by day. James Madison was a better team with better players and coaches than we were this year, regardless of level. Getting most of their coaches and a few of their players is an excellent start with our improvement.

Good. Going for it on 4th down, especially when you have an opportunity to put an easy 3 points on the board, is way overrated.

Apparently so.

Wow, they were as bad as us this year.

Agree with you on the KenPom comment as someone who has produced and occasionally published sports ratings as a hobby since the late-90s. And I absolutely understand why people prefer tempo-adjusted stats and ratings. It seems to make perfect sense. Except the scoreboard isn’t adjusted for tempo. And while the argument is certainly true that a slow-paced team would have won a game by 25 instead of 20 if they played at an “average” tempo, the scoreboard still says they won by 20.

Just a guess, but he may have found a client to sell them to since USA Today no longer carries them. Maybe they will appear somewhere else soon. He’s still updating the other sports.

Michigan 81, Indiana 69

For computer-rating geeks like myself, there are a few systems out there that rank teams by "strength of record" or "resume," and I produce some myself. Every one that's updated so far, including mine, has Washington #1 and Michigan #2. After that, it's crapshoot. I have Texas #3 and Alabama #4. ESPN has Florida State #3 and Alabama #4. Anderson-Hester has Florida State #3 and Ohio State #4. Colley Matrix , like mine, has Texas #3 and Alabama #4. I guess the bottom line is, the committee has a tough job on its hands.

Agree with this. I'm not sure it's ever been really clear, either with the football or basketball selection committees, what they mean by the "best" teams. I've noticed in interviews when they are asked how they determined how one team is better than another, they actually go right back to comparing resumes.

The bad news is it’s still factoring in the pre-season ratings. Their NET ranking would be significantly worse than 69.

What he said is exactly why we hired him. He was playing to the crowd, cultivating interest in the program, and developing our new brand (“we’re not backing down from anyone”). It was as brilliant a use of 45 seconds as you’ll ever see.

No limit to how good we can be.

Indiana 68, Maryland 65

lol….Allen and Hiller bickering….around middle 4th quarter, it was obvious Tuttle was told he was going into the game. Penix looked like he was hurt and couldn’t escape the pass rush. Tuttle put his helmet on and came over and talked to the OL (sitting right in front of us) and talked to the other offensive players. But when IU got the ball back, Penix went back out on the field. Tuttle just stood there with a stunned look on his face. Nobody even came to talk to him that I saw. Told my son right then Tuttle won’t be here much longer.

Was at that game with my son, in the front row right behind the Indiana bench. Saw a lot of telling things happen on the sideline in the second half of that game. And I agree, that’s when it all came crashing down.

Check his resume closer. He's more like flavor of the decade.

It’s a passing offense. His OC is Mike Shanahan. I’m assuming he’s the son of the NFL coach but don’t know for sure.

I’m with you on your top 3

List your experience hiring Athletic Directors.

Going by your theory, Dolson knows a hell of lot better than you who to hire. After all, he has experience as an Athletic Director.

Who knows, maybe he’s a candidate to get his old job back, lol.

No doubt he inherited a mess. Still, in his 5 years before he hired Tom Allen, he was 8-32 in the Big 10. The first bowl game he went to, we were 2-6 in the Big 10.

The problem I had with the Kevin Wilson 55-52 scores is we almost always had the 52.