IUBB vs #2 Kansas - Saturday, 12.16.23 @ 12:30 on CBS

[Chris007 43,173]

7 minutes ago, Banksyrules said:

I just think many things can be true with this team.

1. This is a team that hasn't seen its peak by a far margin. We knew that coming in.

2.Yet even though we might be awesome by the end of the season it might be too late. Unless we're top 3 or maybe 4 in the big ten that puts us on the outside looking in.   This past weekend the Big ten had good wins but the committee might hate us like they hate FSU in football.

3. The key  to see how the program moves forward is if one Queen and a couple legit shooting guards join the recruiting class. In the past a sudden lack of quality or depth of  commitments was a tell if the program was in neutral or stalled and two try to offer a ton of money so that Mgbako stays another year so we don't have a gap that we need to address next year.  Ware I presume is gone  but if IU needs to turn a corner we somehow have to keep Mgbako (like Filipowski stayed in duke).      

We're at that moment we're we might revert to what we've been used to the past 25 years or take a leap forward. I hope it works out.  

I keep hearing the Big Ten is down but we're ranked #2 in net. I watched MSU destroy the #6 team, Purdue take down #1, Nebraska beat KSU. We have a chance at some big quad 1 wins this BT season

[Banksyrules 4,355]

1 minute ago, Chris007 said:

I keep hearing the Big Ten is down but we're ranked #2 in net. I watched MSU destroy the #6 team, Purdue take down #1, Nebraska beat KSU. We have a chance at some big quad 1 wins this BT season

Let me clarify. I agree let's hope the committee agrees as well. Before last weekend though we definitely had that label as a poor conference. 

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

16 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

I keep hearing the Big Ten is down but we're ranked #2 in net. I watched MSU destroy the #6 team, Purdue take down #1, Nebraska beat KSU. We have a chance at some big quad 1 wins this BT season

Compared to where the B1G usually is yes it is considered down.    Definitely will be big Q1 wins available however those will be mostly road games.  The problem is that since the B1G didn’t do as well in the non con there are only currently 3 B1G teams in top 30 which means as of now teams only have 3 chances at a Q1 win on your home court whereas in the past you would have 5 to 6 chances.   I’m pretty sure IU won’t get a chance to play Illinois at home.     You are correct B1G has some big wins this year but they also have crippling losses as well.     IU will have plenty of opportunities for some tournament quality wins.   B1G as a whole will have less spots for teams to compete with for then they usually do 

[IU_FanClub 1,643]

Do I wish we won one of these big games so far this year absolutely. However I learned my lesson for good last year on when to believe the sky is falling. We have a lot of games left and while we have not gotten anything done outside of a current Q1 win at Michigan, I am not going to give this season an evaluation with this much left in front of us. I really think we will win at least 13 Big Ten games and if we can bottle up some of what we did Saturday and keep that going we can do even more. 

Saturday was one of the biggest punches in the dick this team has given me but it is hard to look at the game objectively and not feel encouraged moving forward.

 

Again I was one of the people last year that lost their heads after that PSU game and we immediately went on one of the most impressive winning streaks in the last decade right after. The sky is not falling we have a lot of games left to play, let's just beat some @$$ the next two weeks so the computers stop treating us like the ugly stepchild lol.

[realTomCrean 1,480]

14 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Compared to where the B1G usually is yes it is considered down.    Definitely will be big Q1 wins available however those will be mostly road games.  The problem is that since the B1G didn’t do as well in the non con there are only currently 3 B1G teams in top 30 which means as of now teams only have 3 chances at a Q1 win on your home court whereas in the past you would have 5 to 6 chances.   I’m pretty sure IU won’t get a chance to play Illinois at home.     You are correct B1G has some big wins this year but they also have crippling losses as well.     IU will have plenty of opportunities for some tournament quality wins.   B1G as a whole will have less spots for teams to compete with for then they usually do 

What's more important, Q1 wins or no Q3/Q4 losses? Let's say IU is undefeated in Q3/4

[Scotty R 2,074]

2 hours ago, Kentuckysucks said:

We have 2 problems.  One we hold onto to coaches way too long.  Second, our administration is extremely picky.  They refuse to hire any surefire winner if that guy has even an ounce of baggage in his past.  Think Bruce Pearl.  If they ever hire a big name it would have to be a Brad Stevens or a Jay Wright.  My chances of winning the Powerball are about as likely as that.  We are just too holy as Chris once said.  

Since 2001 we had  6 coaches so it doesn't blook like we hold coaches that long

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

8 minutes ago, realTomCrean said:

What's more important, Q1 wins or no Q3/Q4 losses? Let's say IU is undefeated in Q3/4

Depends on what the committee for this year finds more important.   Just got to wait and see on this year’s committee.  They release an early top 16 after the new year which gives us a glimpse in what they are finding important.  For example last year IU was a 4seed in the initial release which showed us they valued top road wins above some others.   If you are asking me personally I would value the Q1 wins but the real answer is they are are equally important to the overall resume.  Each is a piece to the puzzle 

[go iu bb 5,308]

13 minutes ago, Scotty R said:

Since 2001 we had  6 coaches so it doesn't blook like we hold coaches that long

Counting DD disingenuous and intentionally skews the numbers. He was just an interim HC.

Let's look at them:

Davis: '00-'06. In '03-'04 went 14-15 then the next year 15-14. He still wasn't fired so he was kept around at least 1 year too long although an argument could be made that he should've been let go even earlier.

Sampson: Less than 2 seasons as HC. We know why he was fired and it had nothing to do with his W-L record.

Crean: '08-'17. Up and down the whole time. It was obvious the whole time he wouldn't be able to consistently field a good team and make the tournament. There are many points in his time at IU that he could've justifiably been fired for that lack of consistency. Especially when you look at APR and player arrests during his time.

Miller: '17-'21. Never performed well and looked completely lost while doing so. Should have been fired 1 or 2 years before he was.

Which of these coaches do you think should have been kept longer?

[IU_FanClub 1,643]

2 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

Counting DD disingenuous and intentionally skews the numbers. He was just an interim HC.

Let's look at them:

Davis: '00-'06. In '03-'04 went 14-15 then the next year 15-14. He still wasn't fired so he was kept around at least 1 year too long although an argument could be made that he should've been let go even earlier.

Sampson: Less than 2 seasons as HC. We know why he was fired and it had nothing to do with his W-L record.

Crean: '08-'17. Up and down the whole time. It was obvious the whole time he wouldn't be able to consistently field a good team and make the tournament. There are many points in his time at IU that he could've justifiably been fired for that lack of consistency. Especially when you look at APR and player arrests during his time.

Miller: '17-'21. Never performed well and looked completely lost while doing so. Should have been fired 1 or 2 years before he was.

I try my best to block little Archie out of my mind but every time I think about his tenure it gets worse and worse. Quite honestly might be one of the worst coaching hires in the history of sports.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,484]

55 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

I keep hearing the Big Ten is down but we're ranked #2 in net. I watched MSU destroy the #6 team, Purdue take down #1, Nebraska beat KSU. We have a chance at some big quad 1 wins this BT season

Big Ten is 20-23 against the Big 12, Big East, Pac-12, SEC and ACC. Thank God for Purdue I guess or the B1G would be 15-23.

Wins: Georgetown, Seton Hall x2, Baylor, Butler, St. Johns, Stanford, Oregon State, Kansas State, Alabama x2, UCLA, Xavier, Tennessee, Marquette x2, Arizona, Louisville, Virginia, DePaul

Losses: Wake Forest, Duke, Arizona x2, Creighton x2, Oklahoma, Iowa State, Texas A&M x2, Georgia Tech, Texas Tech, Oregon, Villanova, Missouri, UConn, Auburn, Kansas, Tennessee x2, Providence, Mississippi State, Marquette

Outside of that the Big Ten has wins over Gonzaga(Purdue) and FAU(Illinois).

The Big Ten(especially outside of Purdue) hasn't been good. Take out the Xavier, Tennessee, Marquette, Alabama and Arizona wins from Purdue and it looks much worse on the conference.

[Scotty R 2,074]

4 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

Counting DD disingenuous and intentionally skews the numbers. He was just an interim HC.

Let's look at them:

Davis: '00-'06. In '03-'04 went 14-15 then the next year 15-14. He still wasn't fired so he was kept around at least 1 year too long although an argument could be made that he should've been let go even earlier.

Sampson: Less than 2 seasons as HC. We know why he was fired and it had nothing to do with his W-L record.

Crean: '08-'17. Up and down the whole time. It was obvious the whole time he wouldn't be able to consistently field a good team and make the tournament. There are many points in his time at IU that he could've justifiably been fired for that lack of consistency. Especially when you look at APR and player arrests during his time.

Miller: '17-'21. Never performed well and looked completely lost while doing so. Should have been fired 1 or 2 years before he was.

Which of these coaches do you think should have been kept longer?

I didn't say they shouldn't have been fired but it is not like we are keeping guys a lot longer than they should have. They probably should have fired Davis a year earlier.

[go iu bb 5,308]

15 minutes ago, Scotty R said:

I didn't say they shouldn't have been fired but it is not like we are keeping guys a lot longer than they should have. They probably should have fired Davis a year earlier.

So you agree they kept Davis around too long. You also say that the others shouldn't have been kept longer. So even if you think they didn't keep Crean and Miller around too long, you do agree that they kept 1/3 of the coaches they fired for performance too long and didn't fire the other 2 too early.

In other words, you throw out an argument like you did to say IU doesn't hold on to coaches too long but when broken down you actually agree that they do at least some of the time and don't fire them too soon.

[Scotty R 2,074]

1 minute ago, go iu bb said:

So you agree they kept Davis around too long. You also say that the others shouldn't have been kept longer. So even if you think they didn't keep Crean and Miller around too long, you do agree that they kept 1/3 of the coaches they fired for performance too long and didn't fire the other 2 too early.

If you take DD out of the equation you still had 5 coaches in 22 years. That is an average of a little more than 4 years in their time at IU.  I would assume that is pretty much on average throughout the country So no I don't think we keep coaches longer than other teams do.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,484]

3 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

So you agree they kept Davis around too long. You also say that the others shouldn't have been kept longer. So even if you think they didn't keep Crean and Miller around too long, you do agree that they kept 1/3 of the coaches they fired for performance too long and didn't fire the other 2 too early.

Davis should have been gone after Year 1. Why? Any serious program would have thrown money at Pitino who was coming back to college. Outside of hookers.. worked pretty well for Louisville.

[Home Jersey 5,732]

Can the guys who want to gripe about what we should or shouldn't have done in 2000-2002 maybe start a thread for that? 

[go iu bb 5,308]

Just now, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Davis should have been gone after Year 1. Why? Any serious program would have thrown money at Pitino who was coming back to college. Outside of hookers.. worked pretty well for Louisville.

Indeed. They should've at least done a real coaching search. But since they didn't he still should've been fired earlier just based on performance.

[Golfman25 4,859]

35 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

So you agree they kept Davis around too long. You also say that the others shouldn't have been kept longer. So even if you think they didn't keep Crean and Miller around too long, you do agree that they kept 1/3 of the coaches they fired for performance too long and didn't fire the other 2 too early.

In other words, you throw out an argument like you did to say IU doesn't hold on to coaches too long but when broken down you actually agree that they do at least some of the time and don't fire them too soon.

As long as we fire Woodson in a timely fashion, all good.  

[Golfman25 4,859]

29 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

Can the guys who want to gripe about what we should or shouldn't have done in 2000-2002 maybe start a thread for that? 

Game tomorrow.  Only a few more hours to blather on, until the sky will be falling again.  

[Kentuckysucks 2,187]

Good read.

 

 

 

[AZ Hoosier 6,259]

4 minutes ago, Kentuckysucks said:

Good read.

 

 

 

Who were the two coaches who "coaches begged to coach IU in the 2000s. They combine for 8 Final 4s & 1 National Championship since. 1 had a contract drawn up + staff assembled..."?

I'd guess that one was Brad Stevens... he had stated while he was at Butler that IU was his dream job...