2025-2026 IUBB Schedule

[HoosierHoopster]

2 hours ago, Hardwood83 said:

At UCLA then at USC in a 4day stretch sure sucks. Do they just stay on the West coast that week? 

 

Well, let's think about that...

[Hovadipo]

9 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

I LOVE that football is relevant again.  And I know that is VERY costly and NECESSARY. I also know at the current time our basketball resources are capped because of it.

 

Maybe this is what you were saying two paragraphs below the current one, but…

I don’t think basketball resources are capped because of football. Football is being funded well because we finally have people in charge that realize how necessary it is and because they found a guy that knows what to do with the funding. I think basketball funding is capped because people are tired of setting their money on fire for s***ty basketball, not because the money doesn’t exist. If DDV shows proof of concept over the course of a couple years, he’ll have no problem getting as much money as he needs. Hell, some of those money folks will be back in if he finds a way to do damage before Christmas this year. 

[Pagoda]

Two thoughts:

1) I’m not entirely buying Raby’s NIL claims until it’s corroborated by some other folks who cover IUBB.

2) I’m not too worried about money for basketball.  If CDD can coach, our fans are gonna freak out with excitement and the money will flow in (as Hovadipo said too).

[WayneFleekHoosier]

2 minutes ago, Pagoda said:

Two thoughts:

1) I’m not entirely buying Raby’s NIL claims until it’s corroborated by some other folks who cover IUBB.

2) I’m not too worried about money for basketball.  If CDD can coach, our fans are gonna freak out with excitement and the money will flow in (as Hovadipo said too).

As I stated in Ethan Taylor thread.  The money narrative is being spread around. So, Rabjohns is probably just setting the table to help explain a lot of recruiting misses. That’s a bold claim from Rabjohns without some backing.  It’s not going to make DD job any easier and it’s likely not what he thought coming into the gig. It’s also maybe why it leaked. Time will tell. 

[Stuhoo]

42 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

As I stated in Ethan Taylor thread.  The money narrative is being spread around. So, Rabjohns is probably just setting the table to help explain a lot of recruiting misses. That’s a bold claim from Rabjohns without some backing.  It’s not going to make DD job any easier and it’s likely not what he thought coming into the gig. It’s also maybe why it leaked. Time will tell. 

The current "money narrative" is that NIL is a convoluted, ill-defined mess for the 2026 class, and absolutely no one knows what the rules are. If it were any way else, some of the top kids would have already signed. Instead, only about 20% of the top 100 is committed. Those 'big money' schools like Duke, UK, UL, KU, and BYU? So far combined they only have one signed recruit (BYU has the #92 kid signed).  Siena and VCU collectively have more signed, ranked players than UK, UL, KU, Duke, and BYU.

The tricky part is that by the time the 2026 class needs to sign, the whole thing might still be a convoluted, ill-defined mess. So those money guarantees might not be as much in play this time around as you might think.

 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

26 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

The current "money narrative" is that NIL is a convoluted, ill-defined mess for the 2026 class, and absolutely no one knows what the rules are. If it were any way else, some of the top kids would have already signed. Instead, only about 20% of the top 100 is committed. Those 'big money' schools like Duke, UK, UL, KU, and BYU? So far combined they only have one signed recruit (BYU has the #92 kid signed).  Siena and VCU collectively have more signed, ranked players than UK, UL, KU, Duke, and BYU.

The tricky part is that by the time the 2026 class needs to sign, the whole thing might still be a convoluted, ill-defined mess. So those money guarantees might not be as much in play this time around as you might think.

 

The top is gonna top.  Smart for desirable players to hold off, unless they get their offer.  We will get outbid consistently for these top end guys.  We will have to make up our mind what it’s going to take while the top is topping.  Rabjohns comments and timing isn’t to be ignored.  And now that podcast media is pointing to it, you know it becomes negative recruiting.  2026 might be confusing but those that figure it out first will be ahead of the game.  Much of college basketball is trying to get salaries back to the norm, while the top will top.  Nothing has changed, except the market.  We decide where we stand in it.  

[str8baller]

15 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

If it were any way else, some of the top kids would have already signed. Instead, only about 20% of the top 100 is committed. Those 'big money' schools like Duke, UK, UL, KU, and BYU? So far combined they only have one signed recruit (BYU has the #92 kid signed).  Siena and VCU collectively have more signed, ranked players than UK, UL, KU, Duke, and BYU.

I’m surprised to see this much hand-wringing about HS recruiting. Football has decidedly moved to the “let the small schools have the freshman, we’ll get them in the portal” model. It seems basketball has trended that way. Pitino expressly said as much the other day: as long as he has money he isn’t messing with HS recruiting.  
 

Maybe 10, probably more like 5, freshman move the needle each year. Outside of that you might grab a talented guy to stash. But I wouldn’t expect teams with real money to spend it on more than 1 or 2 freshman, and maybe another project or two at essentially no cost.  
 

Kansas has been the most stable program for decades but has been absolutely directionless since NIL. I can’t imagine worrying about what they’re doing at this point. UK fans were pissed when we outbid them for Wilkerson. If they want to compensate by developing 4* recruits, more power to them.  Could you imagine spending 20% of your budget on a 5* and a Lander or Hanner Parea shows up on campus? You better have a Zeller or TJD, or you’re immediately behind the 8-ball to start. 
 

Unless transfer rules get established development of freshman is going to be a small school niche while the big boys largely buy their players on the open market.  
 

(Fwiw, I suspect deep down guys like Rabjohns and Peegs understand this is a direct threat to their business model and have a vested interest in a narrative that over inflates the value of HS recruiting compared to what is actually happening. )

[HoosierHoopster]

1 hour ago, str8baller said:

 

Unless transfer rules get established development of freshman is going to be a small school niche while the big boys largely buy their players on the 

As a kind of funny (not so funny) analogy to the professional world, this id basically exactly what big law does. Smaller law firms, boutiques like mine, recruit and develop young talented kids out of law school, investing 1-2 years in money, training, giving them practical experience, courtroom time, depositions, client interaction, we grow them from raw, smart kids into young lawyers, and then big firms poach them after those 2 or so years, with big money. NIL is not just more like the pros it’s more like the professional world — and man in that respect I hate it. I just lost my best young associate yesterday to big law, I “recruited” her out of law school, hired her beating out the comp, and my litigation team trained her for 2 years, but then as is now typical, big law poached her with the money (my firm has unfortunately become known for developing good young attorneys). 

I still believe in the value of recruiting and developing college kids in the program, building a core and culture, not having to try to mesh a whole squad like this year, which is obviously ridiculous, but yeah generally there will always be good, developed, proven and experienced talent in the portal and missing on frosh is less of a problem than it was before 

[Pagoda]

FWIW I’d note there is a difference between football and bball.

The best football programs are still heavily focused on high school recruiting and they’re lighter in the portal — they use it to patch holes.  They want players in their program over multiple years where they can develop them in their system.

Basketball is a bit different.  Portal players work better and the best programs have got great results with them.

Why?  My guesses: In football, players don’t change teams much growing up — they mostly just play on one local team.  Basketball?  Top players are switching high schools/prep schools and AAU teams all the time.  Transferring comes more naturally in basketball, and it’s also easier to integrate transfers in basketball than football.

I don’t really have a conclusion or a point.  I just think it’s interesting CBB teams have had more success with transfers than CFB teams.  Part of the big challenge with IUFB is still all the transfers we have to get because HS recruiting/player dev takes time to ramp up.

As for IUBB, I’m in the camp we want a mix of HS and portal players.  What I care about more than HS vs portal is getting guys with a few years of eligibility — we need to get some year over year stability/culture from a core of multi-year guys.  And to that core we can sprinkle in some one-year guys who are studs or patch needs.  Multi-year players can be portal or high school, and frankly kids from small college programs can be safer bets than HS players (though maybe they’re more expensive).

It’s hard.  Good luck to CDD and staff.

[Scotty R]

1 hour ago, str8baller said:

I’m surprised to see this much hand-wringing about HS recruiting. Football has decidedly moved to the “let the small schools have the freshman, we’ll get them in the portal” model. It seems basketball has trended that way. Pitino expressly said as much the other day: as long as he has money he isn’t messing with HS recruiting.  
 

Maybe 10, probably more like 5, freshman move the needle each year. Outside of that you might grab a talented guy to stash. But I wouldn’t expect teams with real money to spend it on more than 1 or 2 freshman, and maybe another project or two at essentially no cost.  
 

Kansas has been the most stable program for decades but has been absolutely directionless since NIL. I can’t imagine worrying about what they’re doing at this point. UK fans were pissed when we outbid them for Wilkerson. If they want to compensate by developing 4* recruits, more power to them.  Could you imagine spending 20% of your budget on a 5* and a Lander or Hanner Parea shows up on campus? You better have a Zeller or TJD, or you’re immediately behind the 8-ball to start. 
 

Unless transfer rules get established development of freshman is going to be a small school niche while the big boys largely buy their players on the open market.  
 

(Fwiw, I suspect deep down guys like Rabjohns and Peegs understand this is a direct threat to their business model and have a vested interest in a narrative that over inflates the value of HS recruiting compared to what is actually happening. )

I still think for long term success your foundation still needs to be high school recruits or transfers who have 2-3 eligibility left. I don't think you can sustain success by bringing in 8-10 transfers each year.

[WayneFleekHoosier]

3 hours ago, str8baller said:

I’m surprised to see this much hand-wringing about HS recruiting. Football has decidedly moved to the “let the small schools have the freshman, we’ll get them in the portal” model. It seems basketball has trended that way. Pitino expressly said as much the other day: as long as he has money he isn’t messing with HS recruiting.  
 

Maybe 10, probably more like 5, freshman move the needle each year. Outside of that you might grab a talented guy to stash. But I wouldn’t expect teams with real money to spend it on more than 1 or 2 freshman, and maybe another project or two at essentially no cost.  
 

Kansas has been the most stable program for decades but has been absolutely directionless since NIL. I can’t imagine worrying about what they’re doing at this point. UK fans were pissed when we outbid them for Wilkerson. If they want to compensate by developing 4* recruits, more power to them.  Could you imagine spending 20% of your budget on a 5* and a Lander or Hanner Parea shows up on campus? You better have a Zeller or TJD, or you’re immediately behind the 8-ball to start. 
 

Unless transfer rules get established development of freshman is going to be a small school niche while the big boys largely buy their players on the open market.  
 

(Fwiw, I suspect deep down guys like Rabjohns and Peegs understand this is a direct threat to their business model and have a vested interest in a narrative that over inflates the value of HS recruiting compared to what is actually happening. )

DeVries has outwardly said he wants to build through high school.  HS players outside of the top 5-10 are far “cheaper” than the top rated transfers.  I think the budget plays a roll in DeVries decision.  I think a good scouting eye, a great development system, and a strong on-court coaching staff can overcome some talent deficit.  

We will get some of those answers soon.  If DeVries gets things rolling with this group a lot of my angst will go away.  I know certain programs are going to be good even if I don’t follow their recruiting.  I think DeVries is still figuring things out.  Is he in for a rude awakening this season?  If so, how does he adjust?  If not, the momentum will build and confidence will grow.  
 

So long as the resources are more than revenue sharing and we aren’t on a basic even playing field with other B1G teams and we aren’t putting ourselves at a big advantage.  Re:Michigan under Dusty.  (His trajectory is the dream in results and recruiting)

[IUHoosierJoe]

14 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

DeVries has outwardly said he wants to build through high school.  HS players outside of the top 5-10 are far “cheaper” than the top rated transfers.  I think the budget plays a roll in DeVries decision.  I think a good scouting eye, a great development system, and a strong on-court coaching staff can overcome some talent deficit.  

We will get some of those answers soon.  If DeVries gets things rolling with this group a lot of my angst will go away.  I know certain programs are going to be good even if I don’t follow their recruiting.  I think DeVries is still figuring things out.  Is he in for a rude awakening this season?  If so, how does he adjust?  If not, the momentum will build and confidence will grow.  
 

So long as the resources are more than revenue sharing and we aren’t on a basic even playing field with other B1G teams and we aren’t putting ourselves at a big advantage.  Re:Michigan under Dusty.  (His trajectory is the dream in results and recruiting)

It’s funny how nobody wanted what Woodson did, then he gets fired and people decide they want to do it the way Woodson did.

[str8baller]

12 hours ago, Scotty R said:

I still think for long term success your foundation still needs to be high school recruits or transfers who have 2-3 eligibility left. I don't think you can sustain success by bringing in 8-10 transfers each year.

Nobody is doing that except new coaches. So I’m guessing that will work itself out.

[str8baller]

11 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

So long as the resources are more than revenue sharing and we aren’t on a basic even playing field with other B1G teams and we aren’t putting ourselves at a big advantage.  Re:Michigan under Dusty.  (His trajectory is the dream in results and recruiting)

We’re not going anywhere without top resources…coaches be damned. That’s the nature of the beast. But I haven’t seen anything yet that says we don’t have top resources. 

[HoosierMatty]

It has struck me that DeVries is not somebody who just wants to make the highest offer possible just because we can. My whole impression is he wants someone who wants to be here for the right reasons and not just the highest bidder. So to me he's more selective about when to make the highest offer.

Was it not the case we outbid UK for Lamar? As far a less money being there this year I'm sure there are many factors. Some of it is former donors who were butt hurt about Woody and may take awhile to come back. Some of it could be they are taking a wait and see approach because they basically torched their money the last few years. And some of it could be administrative bs being overly cautious and uncertainty about the new rules. As we see currently 2026 recruiting is a mess.

But I think if DeVries really wants someone and needs to ask for the money I feel like the call would be answered. And if we show improvement this year, get to the tournament, and more clarity on the rules, that money will come back. I just fail to see a world where we remain outside the top 10 in spending.

I am concerned about Rabby's report but I think we should just wait and see before we jump to conclusions.

[Jeff Flabjohns]

DDv has emphasized the importance of player fit & team culture every time he’s in front of a microphone. 

[Class of '66 Old Fart]

Mark your calendars

[Jeff Flabjohns]

Anybody hear about tix from the IU ticket office for Louisville yet? 

[eddy4iu]

2 hours ago, Jeff Flabjohns said:

Anybody hear about tix from the IU ticket office for Louisville yet? 

No. For comparison purposes the Marquette game is November 9th and I received confirmation that my order was filled on August 28th. So, by that precedent I would expect to be hearing something about the December 6th Louisville game in the first week of October.  But who knows?

[IU Prof]

3 hours ago, eddy4iu said:

No. For comparison purposes the Marquette game is November 9th and I received confirmation that my order was filled on August 28th. So, by that precedent I would expect to be hearing something about the December 6th Louisville game in the first week of October.  But who knows?

Did you learn your seat location on August 28th, or just that you had tickets?