2022-23 IUBB Schedule

[vemmeistars 202]

Virginia should be a top 25 team and IU would kill to have their recent history. But the atmosphere/entertainment value of hosting a top 10 Duke or UNC will be so much better than hosting a more talented version of Wisconsin. 

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

15 minutes ago, btownqb said:

They're absolutely a talented team and a stylistically different team. 

Stylistically different by a lot. 

They are not nearly as talented as Duke or UNC and stylistically far closer to a BIG team. 

[Brass Cannon 24,064]

Just now, hoosierbgh said:

They are not nearly as talented as Duke or UNC and stylistically far closer to a BIG team. 

Seems like a good reason to play them. Help get JHS and Malik up to speed.  It’s more important to do good that to look good. 

[btownqb 8,250]

9 minutes ago, hoosierbgh said:

They are not nearly as talented as Duke or UNC and stylistically far closer to a BIG team. 

I would prefer to play them. Their "style" doesn't bother me in the least bit. 

Talent wise-- is there anyone more talented than Duke, regularly? 

[btownqb 8,250]

20 minutes ago, vemmeistars said:

Virginia should be a top 25 team and IU would kill to have their recent history. But the atmosphere/entertainment value of hosting a top 10 Duke or UNC will be so much better than hosting a more talented version of Wisconsin. 

Yeah I can see AH being a little more ruckus for Duke/UNC. I can see that. 

But... lets not pretend like that place won't be rocking, regardless. 

[DWB 1,098]

I don't want to rock the boat, and while I understand that many of you want to front load our non-con with marquee names, I think we should be a little careful of what we wish for. 

Some are wanting Duke/NC, Kentucky, and other highly ranked opponents. Like 5-10 or so of them(or so it seems). I'm not so sure you'd like that if we went 1-9 against them. Or even 4-6.

The preseason is to prepare for your conference. Yes, you need to test the waters to see where you measure up, and not measure up against good competition. But I don't think we should be stuffing the non-con with (what seems like many want) with all ranked teams.

Should we play sub 250-300 ranked games? Probably not, but there are plenty of really competitive teams out there that aren't in the top 25-50 that would make us better, and get used to learning how to win. (or "get over the hump" as Woody says)

Just sayin'...

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

1 hour ago, Brass Cannon said:

Seems like a good reason to play them. Help get JHS and Malik up to speed.  It’s more important to do good that to look good. 

IMO, beating a talented but young Duke team with an unproven coach may be easier than a more experienced UVA early in the season. Such a win would certainly look a lot better to recruits. I don't think it will be Duke though. 

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

1 hour ago, btownqb said:

I would prefer to play them. Their "style" doesn't bother me in the least bit. 

Talent wise-- is there anyone more talented than Duke, regularly? 

No, there isn't, which makes a win potentially worth a whole lot more than just a check on the positive side of the ledger or bump in the tournament resume. 

[btownqb 8,250]

23 minutes ago, hoosierbgh said:

No, there isn't, which makes a win potentially worth a whole lot more than just a check on the positive side of the ledger or bump in the tournament resume. 

No arguing that.... unless UVA is a Top 1 or 2 seed, ranked top 10, and wins the ACC (like they have done more often than Duke has the past decade). 

But I didn't think we were arguing "whats the best resume builder"... that would more than likely be UNC much more than Duke this coming year. 

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

6 minutes ago, btownqb said:

No arguing that.... unless UVA is a Top 1 or 2 seed, ranked top 10, and wins the ACC (like they have done more often than Duke has the past decade). 

But I didn't think we were arguing "whats the best resume builder"... that would more than likely be UNC much more than Duke this coming year. 

I thought we were discussing who we'd prefer to see IU play in the Challenge. Being a likely better resume builder is a tertiary reason I'd rather see IU play Duke than Virginia. I would assume those wanting to see Virginia are factoring more into it than entertainment value as well. 

[TheWatShot 13,335]

Given the way karma tends to work with our fanbase, I could totally see us getting UVA at home, some of our fans moaning that it's not a flashy enough matchup, then UVA comes in and beats us 55-50. 

[Hardwood83 4,495]

2 hours ago, DWB said:

I don't want to rock the boat, and while I understand that many of you want to front load our non-con with marquee names, I think we should be a little careful of what we wish for. 

Some are wanting Duke/NC, Kentucky, and other highly ranked opponents. Like 5-10 or so of them(or so it seems). I'm not so sure you'd like that if we went 1-9 against them. Or even 4-6.

The preseason is to prepare for your conference. Yes, you need to test the waters to see where you measure up, and not measure up against good competition. But I don't think we should be stuffing the non-con with (what seems like many want) with all ranked teams.

Should we play sub 250-300 ranked games? Probably not, but there are plenty of really competitive teams out there that aren't in the top 25-50 that would make us better, and get used to learning how to win. (or "get over the hump" as Woody says)

Just sayin'...

I'm with you. It's not so much I want IU to PLAY top teams as I want them to BEAT top teams and I'm not confident of that yet. 

Of course I want big-time games & opponents, but mostly I just want IU to win and will worry about style points later. I am hopeful this season's team will be competitive and more capable than any in recent years, but I want to walk before running, so call me overly cautious. 

Btw, I'm probably an exception since discussing SOS and Bracketology make my eyes instantly glaze over. I don't think IU's problem has been weak schedules, it has been weak performance (see losing conference records.) Are they related? You can make that argument, but I don't think so. 

[btownqb 8,250]

1 hour ago, hoosierbgh said:

I thought we were discussing who we'd prefer to see IU play in the Challenge. Being a likely better resume builder is a tertiary reason I'd rather see IU play Duke than Virginia. I would assume those wanting to see Virginia are factoring more into it than entertainment value as well. 

I don't think there will be a measureable difference between a home win vs Duke in November and a home win vs UVA in Nov, by Selection Sunday. 

But is this like every year, then? We have to play UNC/Duke every year for us to be entertained? 

[btownqb 8,250]

35 minutes ago, Hardwood83 said:

I'm with you. It's not so much I want IU to PLAY top teams as I want them to BEAT top teams and I'm not confident of that yet. 

Of course I want big-time games & opponents, but mostly I just want IU to win and will worry about style points later. I am hopeful this season's team will be competitive and more capable than any in recent years, but I want to walk before running, so call me overly cautious. 

Btw, I'm probably an exception since discussing SOS and Bracketology make my eyes instantly glaze over. I don't think IU's problem has been weak schedules, it has been weak performance (see losing conference records.) Are they related? You can make that argument, but I don't think so. 

We are only discussing a game thats already on the schedule. We are playing someone from the ACC. We just don't know who, same with the Big East. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

2 hours ago, DWB said:

I don't want to rock the boat, and while I understand that many of you want to front load our non-con with marquee names, I think we should be a little careful of what we wish for. 

Some are wanting Duke/NC, Kentucky, and other highly ranked opponents. Like 5-10 or so of them(or so it seems). I'm not so sure you'd like that if we went 1-9 against them. Or even 4-6.

The preseason is to prepare for your conference. Yes, you need to test the waters to see where you measure up, and not measure up against good competition. But I don't think we should be stuffing the non-con with (what seems like many want) with all ranked teams.

Should we play sub 250-300 ranked games? Probably not, but there are plenty of really competitive teams out there that aren't in the top 25-50 that would make us better, and get used to learning how to win. (or "get over the hump" as Woody says)

Just sayin'...

Totally agree with you. Play 4 top teams and then a couple of lower level power 5 teams. The other 5 play against teams between 150-250

[Honkyman 1,670]

2 hours ago, DWB said:

I don't want to rock the boat, and while I understand that many of you want to front load our non-con with marquee names, I think we should be a little careful of what we wish for. 

The presumption is that this coming season IU will have a good team that can win some of those games against marquee names. Obviously, playing top competition is a risk. It is what Michigan State has done for some time. And some years Michigan State has emerged from their non-conference season with several losses only to be a better team and finish near the top in conference play. It appears there will be 3 or 4 marquee opponents in this year's non-conference play. Hopefully, IU will beat all of the easier teams and win at least 1 or 2 against the tougher teams.  If not, so be it. 

[Brass Cannon 24,064]

UVA is a top team same as Duke.  Heck there’s a decent chance they are better than Duke this year.  It would just be an example Virginia doing Virginia things.  
 

I’m tired of Duke and UNC personally.  Virginia is a nice change of pace and in addition they are a better learning experience for our young guys.  
 

 

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

22 minutes ago, btownqb said:

I don't think there will be a measureable difference between a home win vs Duke in November and a home win vs UVA in Nov, by Selection Sunday. 

But is this like every year, then? We have to play UNC/Duke every year for us to be entertained? 

Maybe, maybe not but it is at least debatable. Which of the two looks better to recruits is much less so, IMO. 

Who said every year? You're leaping all over the place, the conversation is about the coming year. Although, I'd prefer to not play UVA unless they were a clear cut national title contender or there was some other compelling reason. As it stands, I don't see any real, desirable reason to want to play Virginia this year or most others for that matter. What is so appealing about playing Virginia? I can understand not wanting to play Duke or UNC but there are other better options than UVA. 

[btownqb 8,250]

1 hour ago, hoosierbgh said:

Maybe, maybe not but it is at least debatable. Which of the two looks better to recruits is much less so, IMO. 

Who said every year? You're leaping all over the place, the conversation is about the coming year. Although, I'd prefer to not play UVA unless they were a clear cut national title contender or there was some other compelling reason. As it stands, I don't see any real, desirable reason to want to play Virginia this year or most others for that matter. What is so appealing about playing Virginia? I can understand not wanting to play Duke or UNC but there are other better options than UVA. 

Who? Louisville? Syracuse? FSU? 

No there isn't. 

[hoosierbgh 1,227]

24 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Who? Louisville? Syracuse? FSU? 

No there isn't. 

I can see why some wouldn't want to play Louisville this year but I'd have no problem kicking them while their down. Syracuse might be if IU hadn't just played them. The same for FSU. Miami would be better choice.

I'm still waiting on a compelling reason to want to play UVA so badly.