str8baller

Historically that’s always been a good guess with Wisconsin. I will say that I don’t think Gard seems to have Bo’s magic touch in that regard. Gard was left Happ by Bo. He got the OSU kid as a transfer. Ruevers never panned out and they look a little thin there now. But it wouldn’t surprise me if you turn out to be right.

Did he get ejected for that?

the point you’re getting at is we’re kind of screwed this year by historically bad Mac-type teams, and I agree that that’s the main culprit. But we do put reliably bad 300-level teams on every year. I’m talking about the Jackson St’s, Howard’s, Chicago St’s, etc …that we always have on our schedule once or twice every year. Those teams are reliably 300+ (Or close) almost every year. Those games are a waste of time. They can’t help the players that much because they’re not competitive. Winning by 40 doesn’t off-set the crappy SOS hit because most formulas have a max score cut-off. They’re there because they are a cheap buy and season tix are sold no matter what. But they’re a waste for everyone and help bring the SOS down every year. I wasn’t really talking about E Michigan, because you’re correct that in most other years they’d be on the right side of 250, or better. (They were 290 last year though, so it’s not completely unexpected that they would suck again).

It shouldn’t. But it is what you get when you have people using statistics and formulas they don’t understand along with a general non-understanding a basic stats. The football committee is worse than the basketball one, imo. I always love when one of the members explains something with the rationale of I give them credit for being ranked 5th (or whatever) in ABC formula, but I had to ding them for their SOS rating when inevitably the SOS was already calculated in the ABC formula they were using. I always want to scream at my tv “hey dingus you just factored in SOS twice…why did you use a SOS weighted system if you wanted to factor in SOS separately in your head!!!” But nobody listens… Either way, our trash non-conf schedule is an embarrassment. Literally swap out the 325 ranked buy games for teams in the 250’s and we’re not in this discussion.

I get that it’s been almost 25 years since we have had any sustained success and that for younger fans Crean represents the high water mark got the program. But it still makes me sad. Is one helluva sign of how far this program has fallen that people are talking about getting Crean back. I guess the good news, for some, is that Crean is now available after getting fired from UGA. ***Just for historical perspective, winning the B1G is a bare minimum accomplishment that every coach who’s coached at IU at least 4 years over the last hundred years has accomplished…until Archie. Btw, that stat would be every coach who was here at least 3 seasons, but Harry Good’s 18-3 team finished in second place when he was coaching for McCracken while the latter served in WW2. In other words, the program elevates coaches, even bad coaches. But we still need a good coach to be a top program in the country. We’re the flagship university in the most basketball crazed place in the world. This should not be as hard as we’ve made it the last two decades.

We had two top 5 lottery picks. One a junior and one a senior, plus tons of experienced role players. Michigan didn’t seem to have much trouble with them. We looked lost against the 2-3, like we always did under Crean, so much so that Bohiem was poking fun of Crean after the game.

I don’t pay attention to recruiting, so I have no idea what he was supposed to do according to some. From my perspective, I’m fairly high on him because he’s the type of player you need in your roster to eventually be successful. He’s long, fairly athletic and decently skilled. He can get his own shot and handle the rock and then guard multiple positions on the floor at the other end of the court. He didn’t do any of those things well this year. But he’sa freshman. Most freshman don’t. He should be here 3-4 years. He’s has the potential to be type of guys that as a Junior or senior you see on a team like Villanova who plays good, hard nosed basketball and you say “why don’t we have guys like that?” Nothing is for certain. You have to have multiple guys like that and hope a few work out. I’d say Galloway, Geronimo and Bates are in that category. The more you have, the better the chance you have at getting a couple Jrs or Seniors who can take you far in the tourney. Outside of UK and Duke, very few teams are driven by stud freshman.

Yea…his offense was a gimmicky. And anyone who took away that gimmick (basically selling everything other aspect of the game to get into transition) stalled IU’s offense in it’s tracks whether that was playing zone or controlling the pace and forcing us into half court (Bo Ryan). Crean could recruit and he was a good salesman. But he was not a good coach.

I really like Geronimo and think one of him and Galloway or Bates have good chance of really breaking out next year. But Geronimo and Bates have the same issue of getting lost or making one boneheaded play on defense every 5 min or so. Just basic freshman stuff, but I imagine it drives Woody crazy, especially since defense is about all we can consistently rely on. I’m with you in hoping we don’t lose them. Losing our talented young guys would hurt, because they’re the one bright spot on this roster.

I’d say so. He’s made the tourney every year (minus 2020 when they would’ve made it) , but been bounced a little early. If that gets him on the hot seat at O$U they have some pretty high expectations for a football school.

You keep saying that, but looking at the criteria published by the NCAA shows they can consider about anything, including all sorts of systems, rankings, and metrics. In fact the first metric listed for committee consideration is…the “eye test!” It’s literally quite a subjective process. I think it’s a little silly to think 12 individuals won’t place any emphasis on the most popular poll in the sport. In fact, a committee member doesn’t have to factor in anything, and could make their entire analysis based on the AP poll if they so choose. (That would make them qualified for the football selection committee too, btw). This is especially true of a committee selection pieces that is a glorified poll itself. NET is neat. But pointless. I doubt if more than 1 member could explain it in full. 5 years from now we’ll look at NET people the same way we currently look at the past folk who spent a bunch of time discussing the stupid RPI.

You don’t need any time on the court at all to improve. Individual improvement takes place in the off-season.

As I wrote earlier, I would hope the staff would take the time to address the roster, mainly by focusing on the transfer market. Given Woody’s newness to college basketball, it would seem that time spent there could be just as advantageous as extra practice and playing time for a bunch of upperclassman that likely won’t be here in two years or even next year.

Man…O$U faltering down the stretch and out of the top 25 hurts us a little. Blowing that game in Madison hurts us the most. Had we not engaged in that epic collapse, I think we’d almost surely be playing for seeding right now. That game will haunt me for a while. Let’s hope it doesn’t come back to haunt the team.

Wisconsin f’d us again. I’d love to have had another shot at them. We played them 80 min total and led about 75min of it.

My problem with Alford is that he’s been given the chance twice in major confs and has been lackluster both times. Very good mid major coach, but not the level of coach that will succeed at IU.

Tough to win without Johnny Davis, especially in close games down the stretch.

Ultimately they can consider just about anything they want. They needed an amazing conference season to offset their pre-conf play. The higher they finish certainly can’t hurt them in the eyes of some voters. But I had forgotten about that Nebraska team. After looking them up they closed out the season going something like 7-1 versus the dregs of the B1G. And when I say “dregs” I mean pretty much the whole Big ten. Holy crap was the conference bad that year. Even though Nebraska tied for 4th, nobody behind them made the tourney either. Maybe I should’ve said “it’s rare for a 4th place team in a deep and good conference to miss the tourney, even despite a bad non-conf.”

That is amazing considering how they started off. Just finishing 4th in the B1G would seem to have them squarely in the tourney.

You’re arguing emotion and really not engaging in any debate as to how it helps us. We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I most likely won’t watch it. Or won’t go out of my way, anyways. I’ve made my case in several replies now. I think we do not gain much. I’m sure we’ll accept. We’ll see if it pays off next year or in 2024 (to further the ‘85 analogy).

But it’s not ‘85 and we’re not coached by Knight. Our best player isn’t a soph who can use experience. In fact, not a single full-time starter this season will be here in 2 years. With the transfer market and 1-and-dones you don’t team build anything like Knight did in ‘85. The comparison falls pretty flat for me and is the type of “this is what we’ve always done” rationale that generally leaves IU a step behind other programs for over two decades now.

Nope. I’m saying we’re too bad to play in it. In other words we won’t gain anything. (Also, It’s not 85 and we’re not coached by Knight. The comparison fails on many levels). See the following point. Didn’t seem to help us much.

But there’s plenty of evidence UK cheated. And nobody outside of UK believes they’re clean. That’s not true of Knight. Unless you know something nobody else does.

Sure. If you ignore the rest of our season that makes sense in a vacuum. The problem is we didn’t really win on the road in the B1G. We lost a million close games at full strength—mainly because of guys like Johnson. More likely than not, that game is a loss no matter the roster.