IU Basketball News and Notes

[IU Scott 2,375]

1 hour ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Honestly it’s hard for me not to be jealous of their success. Calipari’s been there for 13 years (12 if you take out 2020 when the tournament was canceled). During that span he’s made 7 of 12 elite 8s. We’ve made 5 of 12 tournaments. I can’t even imagine rooting for a team that’s playing for a final four berth in March over 50% of the time. 

I was born in 1970 and in my first 23 years IU went to the final 4 in 73, 76, 81, 87, 92

Went to the elite 8 in 75 which should been another final 4 and national champion. 84,93

Won the NIT in 79 and back then the NIT was a big deal.

Lost in sweet 16 in 78, 80,83,89,91

I did this off the top of my head but thinks it is pretty accurate. So that is 13 out of 24 years at least making the sweet 16

[Hoosierfan2017 25,030]

27 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I was born in 1970 and in my first 23 years IU went to the final 4 in 73, 76, 81, 87, 92

Went to the elite 8 in 75 which should been another final 4 and national champion. 84,93

Won the NIT in 79 and back then the NIT was a big deal.

Lost in sweet 16 in 80,82,91

I did this off the top of my head but thinks it is pretty accurate. So that is 11 out of 24 years at least making the sweet 16

I would love to have had that kind of IU fandom experience. Unfortunately, we’ve only made 4 sweet 16s and 1 elite 8 during my lifetime. The post-Knight years have not been ideal. What frustrates me is that I see little reason why we can’t have UK-type results here.

We have the history, we have the fanbase, we just don’t get the results. I’m not sure we ever will be more than a ‘once was.’ A lot of people have high hopes for this season, but idk. I have a lot of concerns. We’ll need JHS and Malik to really step it up this year, imo. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

3 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I would love to have had that kind of IU fandom experience. Unfortunately, we’ve only made 4 sweet 16s and 1 elite 8 during my lifetime. The post-Knight years have not been ideal. What frustrates me is that I see little reason why we can’t have UK-type results here.

We have the history, we have the fanbase, we just don’t get the results. I’m not sure we ever will be more than a ‘once was.’ A lot of people have high hopes for this season, but idk. I have a lot of concerns. We’ll need JHS and Malik to really step it up this year, imo. 

Actually I was off on this post and changed it because I forgot about sweet 16's in 78, 83 and 89 was wrong about 82 so it was 13 out of 23 years of making at least the sweet 16.  It was nice going into every game this king you will win every game.  There were no games during that time that I thought we had no shot of winning.

[TheWatShot 15,522]

8 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I would love to have had that kind of IU fandom experience. Unfortunately, we’ve only made 4 sweet 16s and 1 elite 8 during my lifetime. The post-Knight years have not been ideal. What frustrates me is that I see little reason why we can’t have UK-type results here.

We have the history, we have the fanbase, we just don’t get the results. I’m not sure we ever will be more than a ‘once was.’ A lot of people have high hopes for this season, but idk. I have a lot of concerns. We’ll need JHS and Malik to really step it up this year, imo. 

UK would never nuke its program like we did after Sampson, nor would they ever take pride in being as terrible as we were in the aftermath. I think that's when we officially turned in our blueblood card. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

4 minutes ago, TheWatShot said:

UK would never nuke its program like we did after Sampson, nor would they ever take pride in being as terrible as we were in the aftermath. I think that's when we officially turned in our blueblood card. 

We are a blue blood but not elite. To me blue blood means the history of the program. Elite to me where you are currently. 

I also don't ever want to have UK history because they have had more major violations than any program

[JSHoosier 22,225]

1 hour ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Honestly it’s hard for me not to be jealous of their success. Calipari’s been there for 13 years (12 if you take out 2020 when the tournament was canceled). During that span he’s made 7 of 12 elite 8s. We’ve made 5 of 12 tournaments. I can’t even imagine rooting for a team that’s playing for a final four berth in March over 50% of the time. 

The bolded was physically painful to read.  pUKe playing for a Final Four more than we've even made a 64-68 team field....

[JSHoosier 22,225]

7 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

We are a blue blood but not elite. To me blue blood means the history of the program. Elite to me where you are currently. 

I also don't ever want to have UK history because they have had more major violations than any program

We might be the only ones that give a crap about being "clean" (not that anyone really is).

IU: We care about the rules

NCAA: We literally made the rules and even we don't care

[IU Scott 2,375]

5 minutes ago, JSHoosier said:

We might be the only ones that give a crap about being "clean" (not that anyone really is).

IU: We care about the rules

NCAA: We literally made the rules and even we don't care

I was very proud and many other fans were as well that we won without cheating.  We looked down on UK because they had to cheat to win

[JSHoosier 22,225]

10 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I was very proud and many other fans were as well that we won without cheating.  We looked down on UK because they had to cheat to win

Even at IU's peak I wouldn't be surprised if we waded into the gray area.

When the agency that creates the rules and is entrusted to enforce them doesn't even care, then the rules aren't worth the paper they're written on.

 

 

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,506]

17 minutes ago, JSHoosier said:

We might be the only ones that give a crap about being "clean" (not that anyone really is).

IU: We care about the rules

NCAA: We literally made the rules and even we don't care

They literally don’t care.  It’s all an act. The real insiders have known what’s been going on forever.  For Indiana fans it’s just a convenient excuse because nobody really knows anyway.  Most fans were blind to the money recruiting even 3-4 years ago.  I’ve had countless discussion on this board trying to explain the dark underbelly of recruiting.  FBI scandal opened many eyes. NIL I think opened even more eyes. 
 

programs that pay to win and really want to win usually do pretty well.  

[rcbowla 8,281]

I would love to have had that kind of IU fandom experience. Unfortunately, we’ve only made 4 sweet 16s and 1 elite 8 during my lifetime. The post-Knight years have not been ideal. What frustrates me is that I see little reason why we can’t have UK-type results here.
We have the history, we have the fanbase, we just don’t get the results. I’m not sure we ever will be more than a ‘once was.’ A lot of people have high hopes for this season, but idk. I have a lot of concerns. We’ll need JHS and Malik to really step it up this year, imo. 

I have withheld saying so but I too have many concerns and less optimism than most in regards to this season. I think the potential is there and I like the new additions in theory. I also am curious how we make a massive leap from fringe tourney team to winning B1G when we will still likely struggle at the things we struggled at last year. I get that JHS and Malik are huge talents but too often we get hope from new pieces only to have those hopes fall short of reality.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

[IU Scott 2,375]

11 minutes ago, rcs29 said:

I have withheld saying so but I too have many concerns and less optimism than most in regards to this season. I think the potential is there and I like the new additions in theory. I also am curious how we make a massive leap from fringe tourney team to winning B1G when we will still likely struggle at the things we struggled at last year. I get that JHS and Malik are huge talents but too often we get hope from new pieces only to have those hopes fall short of reality.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk
 

 not me I think this team will win the big ten. I think we will see improvements from guys like Bates and Geronimo and think three of the freshman will be key contributors.  I also think with how well Johnson played at the end of the year we will see even better for the whole year.

Also with how much the rest of the conference lost and how much experience we got coming back is another reason for me being optimistic. 

[hoosierbgh 1,276]

11 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Also with how much the rest of the conference lost and how much experience we got coming back is another reason for me being optimistic. 

I don't know that I would even call it optimism. If IU doesn't improve one iota from last year, then they'd still have a good chance to run roughshod over most of the rest of the Big 10. That's how much the Big lost from last year. How plausible is that IU doesn't improve at least slightly? That the returning players aren't better in year two of the new system? That none of the new players contribute anything? 

[IU Scott 2,375]

5 minutes ago, hoosierbgh said:

I don't know that I would even call it optimism. If IU doesn't improve one iota from last year, then they'd still have a good chance to run roughshod over most of the rest of the Big 10. That's how much the Big lost from last year. How plausible is that IU doesn't improve at least slightly? That the returning players aren't better in year two of the new system? That none of the new players contribute anything? 

Did you not read the rest of the post on why I think this team will be better and win the conference. I see no reason to start the season looking at things as cup is half empty instead of half full.

 

[hoosierbgh 1,276]

4 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Did you not read the rest of the post on why I think this team will be better and win the conference. I see no reason to start the season looking at things as cup is half empty instead of half full.

 

Yes, I thought you covered the first part very well. I wasn't disagreeing with the part I quoted, just expanding on it. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

11 minutes ago, hoosierbgh said:

Yes, I thought you covered the first part very well. I wasn't disagreeing with the part I quoted, just expanding on it. 

My bad

[JSHoosier 22,225]

7 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

They literally don’t care.  It’s all an act. The real insiders have known what’s been going on forever.  For Indiana fans it’s just a convenient excuse because nobody really knows anyway.  Most fans were blind to the money recruiting even 3-4 years ago.  I’ve had countless discussion on this board trying to explain the dark underbelly of recruiting.  FBI scandal opened many eyes. NIL I think opened even more eyes. 
 

programs that pay to win and really want to win usually do pretty well.  

And as I said, if the agency that creates and is supposed to enforce the rules doesn't care, then those so called "rules" are meaningless.  So getting in the muck is just playing by what's actually established.

Now I can't resist..

Louisville: Rules? I thought she went by Chastity?

[Chris007 62,588]

16 hours ago, JSHoosier said:

Even at IU's peak I wouldn't be surprised if we waded into the gray area.

When the agency that creates the rules and is entrusted to enforce them doesn't even care, then the rules aren't worth the paper they're written on.

 

 

We were in the gray area for sure if not more during the RMK era. Players might not have gotten money but they got lots of other services for free around town. At least one player's parent got a job they weren't qualified for. So things like that happened. Not handing over money to kids but got services for being an IU player. 

[bigrod 3,200]

45 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

We were in the gray area for sure if not more during the RMK era. Players might not have gotten money but they got lots of other services for free around town. At least one player's parent got a job they weren't qualified for. So things like that happened. Not handing over money to kids but got services for being an IU player. 

I personally don't espouse to the all-or-nothing attitude. That's like saying someone who breaks a speeding law is capable of murder.

I'm not sure what you can do to stop the gray area stuff in college. I had very little info about what was happening around the program, but knew some things definitely didn't pass the eyeball test. I'm also sure that RMK knew it was happening, but as long as it wasn't going through the program, he knew he couldn't stop it (or maybe really didn't care to). I never heard of him giving those boosters any special privileges like other programs do, but like I said, I really had no inside info.

[HoosierHoopster 8,404]

2 hours ago, Chris007 said:

We were in the gray area for sure if not more during the RMK era. Players might not have gotten money but they got lots of other services for free around town. At least one player's parent got a job they weren't qualified for. So things like that happened. Not handing over money to kids but got services for being an IU player. 

Agreed but it's a far cry from some 'grey' area stuff that is not coach/assistant-coach driven and doesn't involve paying players, etc. to the type of historical dirty-program stuff we've seen from programs like UK (the most sanctioned program ever), Louisville (oh sure, let's have IU setting up strippers for recruits), UNC (decades of fake classes, yeah, count me out), etc. 

The NCAA doesn't care stuff doesn't fly with me either. Cal left not one but two programs behind with forfeited season records, because of NCAA infractions. Of course programs have been banned from NCAA tourney play, etc. The NCAA has largely been a joke, I've been probably one of the most vocal 'haters' on the NCAA, but not because it doesn't care and ignores infractions, it's because it's been an inept, inconsistent association that has basically zero enforcement authority without the cooperation of the school involved. UNC fought tooth and nail despite all kinds of proof of its fake classes for basketball and football players, the NCAA had no actual power to do anything. It did go after Ville, however, etc. IU in contrast to the UNC's of the world self-sanctioned in the face of those silly Sampson 'phone gate' but 'major' infractions, while the NCAA went hard against Sampson because he'd escaped them when they went after Okla. 

In the 'grey' for recruiting etc., with an active compliance program, and being a dirty program are two entirely different things. Count me out of the let's play dirty mantra. We have NIL now, so most of this is irrelevant now anyway (though the lack of consistent NIL regs / requirements across the field is a problem).