Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[AZ Hoosier 7,445]

48 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

That doesn't work with this coach. His teams tend to get blown out by good teams, even his best team did.

... and squeaks past powerhouses like Army, Morehead State and Florida Gulf Coast... and don't forget losing twice to Penn State, thrice to Nebraska (blown out twice). 

Mike Woodson, doing his job since 2021.

[AZ Hoosier 7,445]

30 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Josh did 

Clearly ahead of his time.

[AH1971 1,518]

39 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

You are the tournament expert -- if IU had won one of the three games against U Conn, Kansas, and Auburn and blew out teams that they should have in the non conference, would the non-conference schedule been good enough?

Iowa State was a top 15 NET team before the B12 started by virtue of beating 9 Q4 opponents by an average margin of 37 points. This all despite not having a Q1 non-conference win. Should be noted that several B12 teams deployed a similar scheduling strategy and therefore completely manipulated the NET system. When you have a bunch of teams beat up on each other with artificially inflated NET rankings during the conference slate, the likelihood of dropping significantly is minimal.

Had IU beaten Wright St, FGCU, Army, Morehead, etc by 20+ points, you’re probably looking at a 20-25 spot swing in the rankings. Beat any of the Q1 opponents and you’re looking at another ~10 spot swing. That’s roughly 30-35 spots. NET would have still been in the low to mid 60’s. Would have been close but not inconceivable.

[go iu bb 6,284]

11 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Had IU beaten Wright St, FGCU, Army, Morehead, etc by 20+ points, you’re probably looking at a 20-25 spot swing in the rankings. Beat any of the Q1 opponents and you’re looking at another ~10 spot swing. That’s roughly 30-35 spots. NET would have still been in the low to mid 60’s. Would have been close but not inconceivable.

So if IU was a better team their NET ranking would've been better? Ground breaking stuff right there.

[AH1971 1,518]

26 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

So if IU was a better team their NET ranking would've been better? Ground breaking stuff right there.

In my scenario above, IU’s record changes by 1 game in the W-L column. I’m speaking to the lunacy and inconsistencies of the NET that unfortunately IU and many other B10 teams were a year late in discovering. The B12 besides Houston and Baylor was largely s*** last year despite a bunch of computers telling us otherwise. Because they had been manipulated.

But you knew that.

[WayneFleekHoosier 48,583]

New Indiana repurposed on BTownBanners is lowkey making me despise my Alma mater.  And the QAnon references from them. lol. Same group for sure. Gross. 

[RaceToTheTop 26,219]

1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

Depends on how many of the Q1 wins were Q1a.   Neither 

The first was IU's in the hypothetical situation that they had beaten one of the U Conn, Kansas, Auburn trio -- the question I had asked is would IU have been in if they hadn't beaten one of those three and blown out the non-con they should have.  U Conn and Auburn were Q1a games, Kansas was Q1b (just below 1a), so for the sake of argument let's just say that team A had one 1a win.

The second team was Northwestern.  They had two 1a wins but I do need to amend the 5-8 quad 1 record -- it was actually 4-7.  The tournament games were put on Warren Nolan's sheet but shouldn't have been there.  Northwestern put a non-conference schedule were they played SEVEN teams with a NET of 274 or worse (IU had one) and the Wildcats actually lost to one of those teams.  Strength of victory for IU:  133.  Strength of loss:  35.  Northwestern strength of victory:  135.  Strength of loss:  58.

My contention is simply that Northwestern wasn't even really on the bubble -- they were a 9 seed.  But in the scenario I provided -- IU getting one more win and beating bad teams by a decent margin -- I don't see much difference between IU and Northwestern in that scenario.  IMO, Northwestern should have been a bubble team just making it instead of a 9 seed.

[RaceToTheTop 26,219]

1 hour ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

 And the QAnon references from them. lol. Same group for sure. Gross. 

I was told there would be no Q&A.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,713]

8 hours ago, Uspshoosier said:

Josh did 

A lot of us said the results sucked.

[IUCrazy2 2,497]

9 hours ago, Scotty R said:

So coaches can't win either way because if you schedule better teams and lose they get roasted. You play a soft schedule but win you get roasted.

It is obvious that that at least last  year the committee put more emphasis on the metrics and rewarded beating bad teams by a lot. You shouldn't blame the coaches for taking taking advantage of this.  The pressure on coaches to make the tournament is so great they will do what it takes to get in.

Now you are finally getting there. Particularly with the last sentence. People criticize when you say you are coming to win championships and that Indiana should be playing the big schools and then get absolutely hammered, not just lose, but run off the court, by the big name schools and then fail to make the tournament.  Then, the very next year you drop all of those big name games and start gaming the quadrant system.  And why?  Because of your last sentence.  So we are in agreement.  This is a mediocre schedule designed to get Woodson the type of wins that are still gimmes but look good plugged into a computer because having Kansas, Arizona, UConn, etc. as guaranteed games didn't work out in his favor the past few years and helped lead him to miss the tournament.

I agree Scott.  We dumbed it down for Mike this year.  

[Uspshoosier 46,171]

6 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

My contention is simply that Northwestern wasn't even really on the bubble -- they were a 9 seed.

Beating the #1 overall seed was like having bonus points.  Even though they were home games they beat Purdue and Illinois at home. 2 teams that ended up going to the Elite 8.  5 wins against tourney quality teams.  They basically gave  them a pass for losing to Chicago St.   even if IU wins a Q1a game like you are saying that would have only been their 3 win against a tourney quality team.   They would have been closer to the cutline but still not enough in my eyes to move to the right side of the bubble unless that win was @Purdue or UConn.  

[PartyintheVillas 36]

10 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

New Indiana repurposed on BTownBanners is lowkey making me despise my Alma mater.  And the QAnon references from them. lol. Same group for sure. Gross. 

They do use the same mis-information patterns. I don't think anyone here is smart enough to know they're using those patterns, but you can throw a political name in for Woodson, and it tracks the same. Sadly even if Coach Woodson wins big this season (and beyond), most of them will never allow themselves to change their mind on him. Nothing good will ever be to his credit and nothing bad will ever be anyone else's fault.

[Scotty R 2,230]

3 hours ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Now you are finally getting there. Particularly with the last sentence. People criticize when you say you are coming to win championships and that Indiana should be playing the big schools and then get absolutely hammered, not just lose, but run off the court, by the big name schools and then fail to make the tournament.  Then, the very next year you drop all of those big name games and start gaming the quadrant system.  And why?  Because of your last sentence.  So we are in agreement.  This is a mediocre schedule designed to get Woodson the type of wins that are still gimmes but look good plugged into a computer because having Kansas, Arizona, UConn, etc. as guaranteed games didn't work out in his favor the past few years and helped lead him to miss the tournament.

I agree Scott.  We dumbed it down for Mike this year.  

Do I think it is really good schedule no but I don't think it is bad either. I would say it is an average schedule that looks like a lot of power 5 teams schedule. No I don't think we dumb down the schedule because of the coaches abilities. 

[AZ Hoosier 7,445]

They do use the same mis-information patterns. I don't think anyone here is smart enough to know they're using those patterns, but you can throw a political name in for Woodson, and it tracks the same. Sadly even if Coach Woodson wins big this season (and beyond), most of them will never allow themselves to change their mind on him. Nothing good will ever be to his credit and nothing bad will ever be anyone else's fault.

Naw… there’s plenty of blame to spread around the BoT, the administration, the entire athletics department and the men’s basketball program. This thing has been mismanaged from the last several years of the RMK era.

[WayneFleekHoosier 48,583]

36 minutes ago, Schreckbagger said:

So, show me the "burner accounts" and proof they're tied to the IU administration/coaching staff then.  Oops, you can't.  

Yes, GROSS lies by many Haters here. It's eerily similar to the Qanon BS for sure.

 

 

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Because besides Tyme, they aren’t Burners. They aren’t “tied” to some account. It’s a paid OP to try change the image of Mike Woodson by someone who wants to defend Mike Woodson. You can do the semantic trick all you want to defy the truth.  It is gross. I don’t even dislike Mike Woodson or necessarily what he is trying to do but the social media presence is beyond annoying.   Conflating QAnon into anything IU basketball related is a strange move. 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,713]

Am I the only one not upset about the schedule release? 3 games in the Battle 4 Atlantis and South Carolina. Good enough for me.

[PartyintheVillas 36]

3 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Am I the only one not upset about the schedule release? 3 games in the Battle 4 Atlantis and South Carolina. Good enough for me.

I'm not good or bad with it. It's fine.

[WayneFleekHoosier 48,583]

6 minutes ago, Schreckbagger said:

Paid Op....bahahaha 

 

Outlandish statements like that without receipts are typical of that movement.

 

Are you the BIG Q?

 

Again, provide proof.

 

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You aren’t even an Indiana fan Shrek!

 

You expect me to find Paid receipts to a social media operation?  You didn’t respond to the Amplifier being used by Tyme that was mentioned yesterday. Call conspiracy BS all you want. 
 
I’m wise enough to put 2 and 2 together and iubb Twitter changed when Woodson lost the crowd. Defending/attacking with coordinated messaging. They surged for the transfer portal and have been pushing since.  
 

arguing with you is fruitless because you are just a defender and aren’t really looking for truth. 

[AH1971 1,518]

6 minutes ago, PartyintheVillas said:

I'm not good or bad with it. It's fine.

It's adequate. Few tune-up games to start the season, fun preseason tournament with a mixture of good to elite teams, and we avoid a ton of cupcake/sub-300 opponents that drag down SOS in December leading up to conference season. Nobody has won a national title in November and December, schedule gives the team multiple chances at quality non-conference wins to pad the resume. I have no issues with it, nobody else should either. 

[WayneFleekHoosier 48,583]

Just now, AH1971 said:

It's adequate. Few tune-up games to start the season, fun preseason tournament with a mixture of good to elite teams, and we avoid a ton of cupcake/sub-300 opponents that drag down SOS in December leading up to conference season. Nobody has won a national title in November and December, schedule gives the team multiple chances at quality non-conference wins to pad the resume. I have no issues with it, nobody else should either. 

If we make the final of the Bahamas tournament it will be decent/average for a Blueblood. If we don’t and depending on who we face it could be bad/awful. 
 

South Carolina IS not going to be who they were last year.