Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
33 minutes ago, OKHOOSIER said:

I tend to agree with you here on some level, but at a certain point "outside" optics need to stop mattering (though I could argue the booing, the bad losses, and the chants negate that argument entirely). The administration needs to be doing what is in the best interest of Indiana Basketball winning basketball games not worrying about if pundits think we fired Woody too soon. Our program is already embarrassing on a national scale, even debating the "optics" of firing a coach with his record simply reinforces the national narrative that we are not an elite program, much less a blue blood. 

Exactly. I don't care if Donna who likes Woodson because she went to school with him 45 years ago and watches 2 games year would think he got a raw deal.

And how could any of the pundits defend him at this point? Here's a preseason ranking that had us 18th, based on the sheer amount of talent we were bringing in. Now we're at or outside the top 60 in both Kenpom and Net, despite probably being top 5 in NIL spent. We're an extremely mediocre basketball team that is not improving and having off the court issues which call into quesiton how focused/locked in these players are. If pundits want to defend him, then I would question whether they have ulterior motives.

2024-25 preseason top 25 men's college basketball rankings - ESPN

(To be clear, I'm quoting you and agreeing with your sentiments)

 

Posted
Still blows me away that we went from firing a guy who got 3 sweet 16's and 2 big ten titles in 5 years to defending a coach who's biggest achievement is almost getting to the sweet 16 once in 4 years.

And the one year he was 9-11 in conference. Most years that will never get you in the ncaa. Screw the optics. Woodson needs to go now

 

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Posted
Just now, coonhounds said:

When did we almost get to a sweet 16? We got blown out vs miami. It really didn't feel close

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk
 

Exactly.

Posted
When did we almost get to a sweet 16? We got blown out vs miami. It really didn't feel close

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Iu 69
Miami 85

St . Marys 82
Iu 53

Complete blowouts. But the excuse vs st marys was we were tired because of too many games. Lol.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

Posted
19 minutes ago, HoosierX said:

Exactly. I don't care if Donna who likes Woodson because she went to school with him 45 years ago and watches 2 games year would think he got a raw deal.

And how could any of the pundits defend him at this point? Here's a preseason ranking that had us 18th, based on the sheer amount of talent we were bringing in. Now we're at or outside the top 60 in both Kenpom and Net, despite probably being top 5 in NIL spent. We're an extremely mediocre basketball team that is not improving and having off the court issues which call into quesiton how focused/locked in these players are. If pundits want to defend him, then I would question whether they have ulterior motives.

2024-25 preseason top 25 men's college basketball rankings - ESPN

(To be clear, I'm quoting you and agreeing with your sentiments)

 

Donna doesn’t support him because she once went to school with him.  It’s a lot dirtier than that.  Ask yourself, why did Cora Breckenridge support Mike Davis so much?

Posted
7 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

Iu 69
Miami 85

St . Marys 82
Iu 53

Complete blowouts. But the excuse vs st marys was we were tired because of too many games. Lol.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
 

Yeah, Armond Hill still hasn’t caught up with his sleep since that trip.  

Posted
24 minutes ago, coonhounds said:

When did we almost get to a sweet 16? We got blown out vs miami. It really didn't feel close

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk
 

Sweet 16 is the third round, Woodson made it to the second round. Ergo, Woodson almost made the Sweet 16. It's not that hard to figure out. That wasn't even the point of my comment anyway. Good Lord people.....

Posted
Sweet 16 is the third round, Woodson made it to the second round. Ergo, Woodson almost made the Sweet 16. It's not that hard to figure out. That wasn't even the point of my comment anyway. Good Lord people.....
Sorry lol. That is my fault.


Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

Posted

A commitment today doesn’t move the needle one smidge. Year 5 for Woodson would be no different than year 1. We’ve seen the same basketball the last four years, except this year we’re seeing a more expensive product without any improvements. 
 

Fire Mike Woodson! 

Posted
A commitment today doesn’t move the needle one smidge. Year 5 for Woodson would be no different than year 1. We’ve seen the same basketball the last four years, except this year we’re seeing a more expensive product without any improvements. 
 
Fire Mike Woodson! 
Barely anyone is talking about the verbal. That shows the level of interest in the program right now.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

Posted
23 hours ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I actually agree with never been got Scott on this. We shouldn’t just take it as a given that Woodson is gone next year.

IU cares about optics more than anything else. They will care about the optics of firing an alum who made 3 tournaments in 4 years. It shouldn’t matter. Anyone with a pulse can see the issues over the past four years. But the IU administration will care. That’s why I’m so adamant that it’s vital we miss the tournament this year. 

Your “never been got Scott” comment has me rolling. Is that a common saying that I’ve never heard before or did you just come up with it? Because the funny thing is my name is Scott as well. And I have never heard it before. If you just came up with it genius.

Posted

people concerned that we make the tournament and he stays because of optics?  Short of making the tournament and actually getting a first round win, are the optics of firing a 66 year old coach with elite NIL who has never been to the round of 32 really bad optics?  Cause I don’t see it.  This team was picked to finish second in the conference.

Posted
FWIW, most three point shots in general are open shots…..players shouldn’t be taking them if they are well contested.  That said, there is a reason that teams shoot a high percentage when they shoot a lot of them — they are getting mostly open looks.  
 
Northwestern took 27 threes against IU…that’s a season high.  Simply means the defense was giving too many open looks, which sucks.
Yeah but Woodson said he is going to get that fixed. Lol.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

Posted
4 hours ago, Hornsby said:

No stroke. In fact I think Maryland can stick it to the king Sunday and the boo birds will be out in full force.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
 

So definitely alcohol then?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...