Allen was the correct choice

[Old Friend 8,582]

35 minutes ago, cthomas said:

We just signed one of our better classes and it is still projected 10th best in conference. Not only that, but the past few have been in the same range. I don't see how we can expect better results as long as our recruiting stays at this level.

Let's take a step back from this and really look at it.

First of all....so what?   Do you really believe football recruit rankings are accurate on any level beyond the top few kids at each position?  How does one rate the #32 offensive guard in the country compared to the #35 offensive guard?  (rankings this close can make a HUGE difference in where a class is rated) And this is where they are as 17 year old kids.  Football rankings mean Z E R O, in large part because freshmen don't come in and play right away much of the time and things change drastically.  Indiana has plenty of talent, lots of speed, and several playmakers in this class.  Let's let them develop before we complain, okay?  They'll be different at 20 than they are at 17.  Breathe.

Second of all, football classes vary because different teams have different needs; and rankings can get skewed.  We didn't stock up on LB's this year; and you know as well as I do LB's rankings get inflated because they make so many big plays.   We also didn't add many O-linemen, and many tackles are ranked highly as well.  

Indiana's class is ranked #34 (ahead of 8 Big Ten schools) in the country by Rivals and #44 by 247.  Think of that by itself.  Just for a second; and be realistic with it if you're into rankings.   This "level" of recruiting is the highest in Indiana's history, yet it's STILL not good enough.    Tom Allen has barely had his recruits playing yet.   He brings in Indiana's highest rated recruiting class; and you find the negative in it.  I wonder which is more of a problem?   A large part of our fan base seems unrealistic as it relates to this program and its true ceiling.   (consistently, I mean...there will always be an anomaly here and there)

We play in - bar none - the toughest division in college football.  If you think we're beating Ohio State, Michigan, or Penn State on a regular basis, you're fooling yourself.  Don't mean to be a downer...just telling it like it is.   Indiana needs a QB.  We have at least 2 in this class who look to be better than anything we had last season.   We needed DE's and pass rushers, and we got three 6'5" kids all in the top 40 nationally at that position (if we DO care about rankings).   We needed RB's, and we have two very good ones.   We needed size at WR and we added a 6'2" kid and a 6'3" kid, both of whom had outstanding seasons.  We needed to get more athletic; and this class is loaded with speed.   This class is loaded with kids from the south (5 kids from Florida alone).   We kept Indiana's Mr. Foiotball home.  We got the state's #1 defensive end.  We got return game help.

Finally, so many high school kids are ranked on statistics earned against inferior competition, I'm not convinced high school rankings amount to much more than fodder for fans to get all worked up over.

 

[cthomas 6,564]

58 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

Let's take a step back from this and really look at it.

First of all....so what?   Do you really believe football recruit rankings are accurate on any level beyond the top few kids at each position?  How does one rate the #32 offensive guard in the country compared to the #35 offensive guard?  (rankings this close can make a HUGE difference in where a class is rated) And this is where they are as 17 year old kids.  Football rankings mean Z E R O, in large part because freshmen don't come in and play right away much of the time and things change drastically.  Indiana has plenty of talent, lots of speed, and several playmakers in this class.  Let's let them develop before we complain, okay?  They'll be different at 20 than they are at 17.  Breathe.

Second of all, football classes vary because different teams have different needs; and rankings can get skewed.  We didn't stock up on LB's this year; and you know as well as I do LB's rankings get inflated because they make so many big plays.   We also didn't add many O-linemen, and many tackles are ranked highly as well.  

Indiana's class is ranked #34 (ahead of 8 Big Ten schools) in the country by Rivals and #44 by 247.  Think of that by itself.  Just for a second; and be realistic with it if you're into rankings.   This "level" of recruiting is the highest in Indiana's history, yet it's STILL not good enough.    Tom Allen has barely had his recruits playing yet.   He brings in Indiana's highest rated recruiting class; and you find the negative in it.  I wonder which is more of a problem?   A large part of our fan base seems unrealistic as it relates to this program and its true ceiling.   (consistently, I mean...there will always be an anomaly here and there)

We play in - bar none - the toughest division in college football.  If you think we're beating Ohio State, Michigan, or Penn State on a regular basis, you're fooling yourself.  Don't mean to be a downer...just telling it like it is.   Indiana needs a QB.  We have at least 2 in this class who look to be better than anything we had last season.   We needed DE's and pass rushers, and we got three 6'5" kids all in the top 40 nationally at that position (if we DO care about rankings).   We needed RB's, and we have two very good ones.   We needed size at WR and we added a 6'2" kid and a 6'3" kid, both of whom had outstanding seasons.  We needed to get more athletic; and this class is loaded with speed.   This class is loaded with kids from the south (5 kids from Florida alone).   We kept Indiana's Mr. Foiotball home.  We got the state's #1 defensive end.  We got return game help.

Finally, so many high school kids are ranked on statistics earned against inferior competition, I'm not convinced high school rankings amount to much more than fodder for fans to get all worked up over.

 

I'm not a ratings mean everything guy and I agree in principle with the points you are making and I have respected your viewpoint going way back. But, over time our results pretty much match what our recruiting says we will get. I know there is context to take into account. If we were in a different division or a different conference the program could be perceived in a completely different light. But we are where we are and our results are a matter of record. Admittedly, I'm an old guy and have been through the getting excited about incoming classes only to see the same season play out over and over. Sorry if this comes off as a rant but after three or four decades of mostly the same thing, it becomes hard to buy the hype of the next great class.

[TXHoosierDaddy 1,375]

16 hours ago, cthomas said:

We just signed one of our better classes and it is still projected 10th best in conference. Not only that, but the past few have been in the same range. I don't see how we can expect better results as long as our recruiting stays at this level.

We honestly have just been a couple pieces away from taking it to the next level. The last two years we took huge steps forward with our defense but were missing some key parts offensively. Before that, it was the opposite. We are closer than people think. I don't think we have consistently had the type of class that Allen just brought in. We have been a little inconsistent in that aspect. Continue to bring in these type of recruits and I am optimistic we are heading in the right direction. 

It also can't be stated enough how important it is to have a really good QB. We haven't had that since Sudfeld and i hope Pennix is the guy.  It hasn't been mentioned but I think he is the type of QB that Debord will thrive with. He did great things with Dobbs at UT. I'm getting ahead of myself but I am excited at the prospects. 

 

[LamarCheeks 21,274]

Has everyone noticed that after Ohio State's beatdown of USC last night, the B1G is 5-0 in bowl games. I think that perfect record is due in large part to us not qualifying for a bowl! 

[LIHoosier 27,391]

34 minutes ago, LamarCheeks said:

Has everyone noticed that after Ohio State's beatdown of USC last night, the B1G is 5-0 in bowl games. I think that perfect record is due in large part to us not qualifying for a bowl! 

Having a bowl game vs RichRod helps along with the Wildcats trying to be heroes going for 2 against the Wildcats. Thankfully the Wildcats stopped the Wildcats and held on. Go Wildcats!

[Old Friend 8,582]

On 12/22/2017 at 5:45 PM, cthomas said:

I'm not a ratings mean everything guy and I agree in principle with the points you are making and I have respected your viewpoint going way back. But, over time our results pretty much match what our recruiting says we will get. I know there is context to take into account. If we were in a different division or a different conference the program could be perceived in a completely different light. But we are where we are and our results are a matter of record. Admittedly, I'm an old guy and have been through the getting excited about incoming classes only to see the same season play out over and over. Sorry if this comes off as a rant but after three or four decades of mostly the same thing, it becomes hard to buy the hype of the next great class.

Sorry this is so late...   You make good points, but you also have to remember Indiana is the worst football program in the history of the Big Ten...including the University of Chicago.   This goes back WAY before 3-4 decades.  In Indiana's best days, we went 8-3; 7-3-1 in back to back seasons with perhaps the best running back in the history of college football and a team with 20+ NFL guys on it.

Indiana has been able to play with everyone on their schedule with their 1's.   We have played generally well against Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State with only a few exceptions.  Our problem....is depth.  Not skill.  Football players change.  Schemes are so different, talent (rankings) only matter if players are in the right system.  I can tell you first hand having coached for 20 years, when I was an assistant coach (basketball), I worked for 2 coaches who made basketball seem like a completely different game relative to the other.  Same is true in football.  

I am excited because this may be the highest rated class of all time at Indiana.  It IS good enough for me because I know where Indiana football is and has been.  I hate that we play in the division we do.    We are never going to beat the top 3 teams consistently any more than Nebraska will ever beat Indiana consistently in basketball.  At least not in the immediately foreseeable future.  Indiana should expect to be .500 or a game or two above 7 years out of 10.  That's the level Indiana can reasonably achieve.  That's just truth.  I don't like it but I accept it.  Once in a while, we may find an anomaly; but not often.  We're NOT in a different division, and we're not going to successfully compete against schools with budgets 10x what ours is and stadiums that consistently draw 105,000 people.  I hate it.  But it's our reality.

[ccgeneral 38,084]

I'll just put this here.

http://footballscoop.com/the-scoop-2/scoop-saturday-december-30-2017/

Dave Ballou will be the strength and conditioning coach at Indiana, sources tell FootballScoop. Ballou is currently the co-director of strength and conditioning at Notre Dame, and prior to that was the physical conditioning coach at IMG Academy. He also holds experience in the Indiana high school ranks, as does IU head coach Tom Allen. Ballou is a former Hoosier fullback and was recognized as the Hoosier Strength Challenge champion during his time on the roster.

 

[Old Friend 8,582]

2 hours ago, ccgeneral said:

I'll just put this here.

http://footballscoop.com/the-scoop-2/scoop-saturday-december-30-2017/

Dave Ballou will be the strength and conditioning coach at Indiana, sources tell FootballScoop. Ballou is currently the co-director of strength and conditioning at Notre Dame, and prior to that was the physical conditioning coach at IMG Academy. He also holds experience in the Indiana high school ranks, as does IU head coach Tom Allen. Ballou is a former Hoosier fullback and was recognized as the Hoosier Strength Challenge champion during his time on the roster.

 

Dad George was a coach at IU in the 80's.   This guy is an Indiana Hoosier.  Great hire.

[cthomas 6,564]

23 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Indiana has been able to play with everyone on their schedule with their 1's.   We have played generally well against Ohio State, Michigan, and Penn State with only a few exceptions.  Our problem....is depth. 

I think this is the source of the frustration. We play tough into the fourth quarter and then lose at the end because we lack the depth to keep the front line guys fresh. A little more depth, or a less demanding schedule, and we are at eight wins instead of six. That's a huge difference in bowl games and perception. I first started following IU football around 1960. The '67 team was the highpoint for me, although I thought Mallory might bring us back to those times. Don't get me wrong, it's been way worse than it is now. I remember Lee Corso talking about how good we were going to look in our new uniforms going into a season. When that's all you've got to promote, well.... You are correct on every point in your assessment of IU football. And, in some ways that also defines the problem. It's hard to build excitement about a program when most years five, six, or seven wins is the ceiling.

[Dennis 58]

1 hour ago, cthomas said:

I think this is the source of the frustration. We play tough into the fourth quarter and then lose at the end because we lack the depth to keep the front line guys fresh. A little more depth, or a less demanding schedule, and we are at eight wins instead of six. That's a huge difference in bowl games and perception. I first started following IU football around 1960. The '67 team was the highpoint for me, although I thought Mallory might bring us back to those times. Don't get me wrong, it's been way worse than it is now. I remember Lee Corso talking about how good we were going to look in our new uniforms going into a season. When that's all you've got to promote, well.... You are correct on every point in your assessment of IU football. And, in some ways that also defines the problem. It's hard to build excitement about a program when most years five, six, or seven wins is the ceiling.

I haven't reviewed the latest class as to rankings lately but we did get a few 4's.  This is what we need to attract - 4's and 5's.  Until we get consistently above .500, it will be hard to  attract them.  It will be a slow process to get these guys.  In the meantime, our coaches will have to do their best to get the most out of the 3's and a couple 4's to go against these top teams in our division with their 4's and many 5's.  More depth will help and is desperately needed.  This next class is a good start at getting the depth and stars we need for our program.  

We just need to let the staff get their thing  done while we wait which I hope isn't long.

[Old Friend 8,582]

1 hour ago, cthomas said:

I think this is the source of the frustration. We play tough into the fourth quarter and then lose at the end because we lack the depth to keep the front line guys fresh. A little more depth, or a less demanding schedule, and we are at eight wins instead of six. That's a huge difference in bowl games and perception. I first started following IU football around 1960. The '67 team was the highpoint for me, although I thought Mallory might bring us back to those times. Don't get me wrong, it's been way worse than it is now. I remember Lee Corso talking about how good we were going to look in our new uniforms going into a season. When that's all you've got to promote, well.... You are correct on every point in your assessment of IU football. And, in some ways that also defines the problem. It's hard to build excitement about a program when most years five, six, or seven wins is the ceiling.

The above is where I think you need to step back and assess.  Indiana is basically 0-3 to start every season.  We're not going to consistently beat Ohio State, Penn State, or Michigan. That's not a defeatist comment; it's just reality.   I hate it.  I really do. I think it's patently unfair to Indiana and Rutgers to play in this division; but we do.  Going 8-1 in the other 9 games is an awfully tough ask.   Your bottom point?   Couldn't agree more; but reality is what reality is. Jim Delaney will write you back if you send him a letter.

 

 

[cthomas 6,564]

14 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

The above is where I think you need to step back and assess.  Indiana is basically 0-3 to start every season.  We're not going to consistently beat Ohio State, Penn State, or Michigan. That's not a defeatist comment; it's just reality.   I hate it.  I really do. I think it's patently unfair to Indiana and Rutgers to play in this division; but we do.  Going 8-1 in the other 9 games is an awfully tough ask.   Your bottom point?   Couldn't agree more; but reality is what reality is. Jim Delaney will write you back if you send him a letter.

 

 

I know. Passion for the program creates angst under our circumstances. I wonder sometimes what our reality does to our recruiting. Do kids who want success as a team embrace the challenge or do they go somewhere that the path is easier?

 

[DChoosier 9,321]

15 hours ago, cthomas said:

I know. Passion for the program creates angst under our circumstances. I wonder sometimes what our reality does to our recruiting. Do kids who want success as a team embrace the challenge or do they go somewhere that the path is easier?

 

I think it depends on the kids and their confidence in their talant.

the question for a player is......Do I think I want to risk not getting any playing time in this unbelievable football centric environment in front of 100k fans until the end of the game or do I want to be sure I get playing time but in front of 8k at the end of the game and hope to get to the toilet bowl? 

[LamarCheeks 21,274]

I heard college football guru Bruce Feldman on the radio this morning, discussing the B1G's perfect bowl record with one game to play (Michigan-South Carolina). He mentioned that the conference had made some pretty good hires in the past few years: Urban Meyer, Paul Chryst, Jeff Brohm, James Franklin, Jim Harbaugh, P.J. Fleck and now, Scott Frost to Nebraska ... but he forgot to mention Tom Allen! 

[Hoosier Guy 8,095]

19 minutes ago, Iugradman said:

Because Allen was not a great hire.  Everyone says how hard it will be for IU to become respectable, and I don’t buy it. Almost every other power five school has been able to do it at one point. 

 

Hell, even Kansas was #2 like ten years ago haha. And I love to rag on Kansas football. They’re the epitome of terrible

[johnsoniu 6,979]

1 hour ago, Hoosier Guy said:

Hell, even Kansas was #2 like ten years ago haha. And I love to rag on Kansas football. They’re the epitome of terrible

Interesting example. They did that under Mark Mangino. A guy who had no D1 head coaching experience, was once a (gasp) high school coach, and it took him 4 years to have a .500 season. Their big year was his 6th. Given some of the comments in this thread, there is no way in hell this fan base would have 1) hired him  2) supported him  3) not made fools out of themselves belittling his weight problem.

And for what it's worth, KU got put on probation 2 years after that big season. 5 major violations, including academic fraud and lack of institutional control.

[WayneFleekHoosier 50,170]

Interesting example. They did that under Mark Mangino. A guy who had no D1 head coaching experience, was once a (gasp) high school coach, and it took him 4 years to have a .500 season. Their big year was his 6th. Given some of the comments in this thread, there is no way in hell this fan base would have 1) hired him  2) supported him  3) not made fools out of themselves belittling his weight problem.
And for what it's worth, KU got put on probation 2 years after that big season. 5 major violations, including academic fraud and lack of institutional control.

Moral: cheaters sometimes win? And in college athletics; cheating is generally necessary to win?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[johnsoniu 6,979]

3 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Moral: cheaters sometimes win? And in college athletics; cheating is generally necessary to win?


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

I was thinking he probably got a hefty bonus for distracting the NCAA from KUs basketball shenanigans

[Hoosier Guy 8,095]

59 minutes ago, johnsoniu said:

Interesting example. They did that under Mark Mangino. A guy who had no D1 head coaching experience, was once a (gasp) high school coach, and it took him 4 years to have a .500 season. Their big year was his 6th. Given some of the comments in this thread, there is no way in hell this fan base would have 1) hired him  2) supported him  3) not made fools out of themselves belittling his weight problem.

And for what it's worth, KU got put on probation 2 years after that big season. 5 major violations, including academic fraud and lack of institutional control.

I don’t want IU to be like Kansas lol

[IUHoosier5 2,106]

I don't post often really at all, but do read quite often. That being said, I had class with some football players, and one revealed to me that going into the Purdue game half of the team didn't care to win because they wanted a winter break. If that mindset exists in half the team, there are a lot more issues than previously thought imaginable.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners