IUBB at Kentucky - Saturday, 12.13.25 @ 7:30 on ESPN

[BGleas]

1 hour ago, IUHoosierJoe said:

I'm certainly not here to tell everyone how they should feel, but here are some facts that y'all might find interesting:

As of December 14, 2025, we are currently #26 in the NET rankings with a record of 8-3.  On December 14, 2024, Michigan, in Dusty May's first year, was #27 in the NET rankings with a record of 8-2, and Louisville, in Pat Kelsey's first year, was #58 in the NET rankings with a record of 6-5.

I don't have any statistics on what percentage of those two fan bases thought their respective seasons were over. 

One thing that is important to remember about Kelsey at Louisville is that he benefitted massively from being in a very weak ACC last season. 

If Louisville was in the Big Ten last season they're probably not in the tournament and people are questioning Kelsey. 

It is what it is and nothing changes what really happened, but he did get really lucky with how bad the ACC was last year. 

DeVries unfortunately doesn't have that luxury. 

[IUHoosierJoe]

2 minutes ago, BGleas said:

One thing that is important to remember about Kelsey at Louisville is that he benefitted massively from being in a very weak ACC last season. 

If Louisville was in the Big Ten last season they're probably not in the tournament and people are questioning Kelsey. 

It is what it is and nothing changes what really happened, but he did get really lucky with how bad the ACC was last year. 

DeVries unfortunately doesn't have that luxury. 

True. It's also true that Louisville finished #28 in the NET rankings after being #58 on 12/14/24. So, improvement is possible. If we improve even somewhat from our current #26 ranking, I'd think we'll be just fine, even though our competition will certainly be tougher than Louisville's was last year.

[Uspshoosier]

56 minutes ago, BGleas said:

One thing that is important to remember about Kelsey at Louisville is that he benefitted massively from being in a very weak ACC last season. 

Yeah they went 18-2 in the ACC and got a 8 seed in the ncaa tourney.  Of those 18 acc wins only 2 were against tourney quality teams and those were at home.  Should of only been 1 because NC shouldn’t of made it 

[HoosierDevils]

I feel like Dusty May is the only coach making the leap that truly had success from the get go. People forget that one of Kelsey’s big wins last season was the one against IU in the Bahamas, otherwise as people have pointed out they won games against KenPom sub 250 schools and in the ACC. This year Will Wade has no big noncon wins and was considered the best hire and new rosters, Ben McCollum got blasted by 30 to MSU and has no noncon wins to speak of (one of the easiest schedules of high major schools), Odom at UVa seems good but again no great wins, Sean Miller at Texas isn’t doing too great in year one, baby Pitino’s Xavier looks awful…I really think May’s success at Michigan has thrown people off—kinda like Cignetti in CFB. But major difference is May’s NIL budget is massive. Heck wouldn’t be surprised if he has more money to play with on a much smaller roster than Cig did his first year. 

[Golfman25]

3 hours ago, Kentuckysucks said:

I think most people just wanted him to do what Kelsey, Pope, and Dusty did in their first season.  Somehow it's always very doable at other schools but at IU it's always a multi year rebuild.

That is because the IU Brand has been decimated by 8+ years of chit.  We have everything one needs to be successful except execution.  Can CDD do it?  IDK, but he'd better start coaching so next year's recruits can see a future pointing up. 

[Golfman25]

6 hours ago, LIHoosier said:

Powerball is $1.1 Biiiiilllllion dollars on Monday. All the best.

When I win, I have some $$$ earmarked for IU.  :)   

[str8baller]

31 minutes ago, HoosierDevils said:

I feel like Dusty May is the only coach making the leap that truly had success from the get go.

May, Calipari, Pope, and Kelsey all made the tourney. 3/4 made the Sweet 16. 
 

We consider those schools our peers and that’s where the expectations come from. I suppose to be fair to Devries those schools probably don’t consider us a peer basketball program anymore and that may well be the case. 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

May, Calipari, Pope, and Kelsey all made the tourney. 3/4 made the Sweet 16. 
 
We consider those schools our peers and that’s where the expectations come from. I suppose to be fair to Devries those schools probably don’t consider us a peer basketball program anymore and that may well be the case. 

Indeed. We just never behave like a blueblood or an elite basketball school. Then the fans get blamed for expectations. Dolsen knows the fans have about had it. This off-season will be critical.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

[HoosierDevils]

27 minutes ago, str8baller said:

May, Calipari, Pope, and Kelsey all made the tourney. 3/4 made the Sweet 16. 
 

We consider those schools our peers and that’s where the expectations come from. I suppose to be fair to Devries those schools probably don’t consider us a peer basketball program anymore and that may well be the case. 

Good catch - I had definitely forgotten some of those though I don’t think the ones I missed negate what I said: I already discussed May and Kelsey. Jury is out on Pope in year 2 and Cal needed until late Jan/Feb to become a tournament team. At this stage Arkansas were not very good. 

[Hoosierfan2017]

3 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Indeed. We just never behave like a blueblood or an elite basketball school. Then the fans get blamed for expectations. Dolsen knows the fans have about had it. This off-season will be critical.


Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

Kentucky has went to 10 of the last 11 NCAA tournaments and just went to the Sweet 16 and they’re crashing out in mid December because of a slow start. I fully believe the UK fanbase would have burned Rupp Arena to the ground at some point over the last 25 years if they dealt with the same stretch we’ve dealt with as fans. But then certain folks blame the fans…

They’re close to getting their wish, though. Apathy is already largely here. The balcony is largely empty for all but the biggest of games these days. Generations raised on bad IU basketball won’t know any different, and they’ll continue to find other ways to entertain themselves. At least then the program won’t have to worry as much about pesky fan expectations….

[Rico]

3 hours ago, HoosierDevils said:

Good catch - I had definitely forgotten some of those though I don’t think the ones I missed negate what I said: I already discussed May and Kelsey. Jury is out on Pope in year 2 and Cal needed until late Jan/Feb to become a tournament team. At this stage Arkansas were not very good. 

Funny.  For all the grief we give Cal, the dude produces results.  I would leave him out of any discussions comparing him to CDD's 1st year.

[Old Friend]

21 hours ago, Shooter said:

Indiana was up 58-26 at halftime vs Penn State. If you think that brand of basketball was awful, you just don't enjoy modern basketball. Which is fine, your choice. There are probably some videos of 1970s basketball on YouTube that would be more your speed.

Condescending comment aside.....There is a very big difference between "modern basketball" and "bad basketball.'  My guess is - especially given your moniker - you don't know the difference between the two and think making shots against a team that doesn't even try defensively is modern.   

I would LOVE to know how little experience you have to have to watch that game last week and then two days ago and decide one game we "played" well and the next scored just half the points against a team which gave up 94 points to both Louisville and Gonzaga.  Indiana scored 60.  It takes an elementary school level of understanding to grasp "why," but when you focus solely on results shooting what amounted to driveway jump shots...you make the argument you just did.   

Modern basketball means "lots of shots that either go in or don't."  That's your argument?    Or maybe, given recent results, a team that doesn't move well, plays at half speed, and is lazy won't succeed unless their opponent is either just as lazy or inferior?   Did you watch Saturday and just say "damn.  If only we could make shots?"   The 18 turnovers didn't matter to you?  How about the 14 offensive rebounds Indiana gave up?  Or the 13 steals they allowed?   

Granted....we shot it like sh*t, but are you really telling me they just didn't drop and "oh well?"  That we pay DeVries what we pay him and everything is predicated on whether or not his team makes bad shots - which means early, or contested?  Like I said, a trained monkey could roll the ball out with that expectation.  How many winning programs can you name that play the way we played Saturday and just chuck it even on a night shots AREN'T dropping like they did against Penn State?  Speaking of YouTube....you will benefit from this series.   Come back and let's chat after you watch the series.  Bring your pom poms.

 

[Old Friend]

18 hours ago, Golfman25 said:

That is because the IU Brand has been decimated by TWENTY FIVE years of chit.  We have everything one needs to be successful except execution.  Can CDD do it?  IDK, but he'd better start coaching so next year's recruits can see a future pointing up. 

Fixed it for you above.

[Shooter]

2 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Condescending comment aside.....There is a very big difference between "modern basketball" and "bad basketball.'  My guess is - especially given your moniker - you don't know the difference between the two and think making shots against a team that doesn't even try defensively is modern.   

I would LOVE to know how little experience you have to have to watch that game last week and then two days ago and decide one game we "played" well and the next scored just half the points against a team which gave up 94 points to both Louisville and Gonzaga.  Indiana scored 60.  It takes an elementary school level of understanding to grasp "why," but when you focus solely on results shooting what amounted to driveway jump shots...you make the argument you just did.   

Modern basketball means "lots of shots that either go in or don't."  That's your argument?    Or maybe, given recent results, a team that doesn't move well, plays at half speed, and is lazy won't succeed unless their opponent is either just as lazy or inferior?   Did you watch Saturday and just say "damn.  If only we could make shots?"   The 18 turnovers didn't matter to you?  How about the 14 offensive rebounds Indiana gave up?  Or the 13 steals they allowed?   

Granted....we shot it like sh*t, but are you really telling me they just didn't drop and "oh well?"  That we pay DeVries what we pay him and everything is predicated on whether or not his team makes bad shots - which means early, or contested?  Like I said, a trained monkey could roll the ball out with that expectation.  How many winning programs can you name that play the way we played Saturday and just chuck it even on a night shots AREN'T dropping like they did against Penn State?  Speaking of YouTube....you will benefit from this series.   Come back and let's chat after you watch the series.  Bring your pom poms.

 

I was being serious. If you watched IU go up 58-26 at halftime and thought "this is awful" - why are you doing this to yourself? Go watch old games or find a different hobby that you actually enjoy.

[Hoosier987]

2 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Fixed it for you above.

I was going to say...we've only had a legit 3 teams that one can say could've won it all the last 25 years. Those teams were: 

01-02, 07-08, 12-13. Outside those 3 years...we've had a couple other good seasons...but not national championship caliber. 

[Old Friend]

5 minutes ago, Shooter said:

I was being serious. If you watched IU go up 58-26 at halftime and thought "this is awful" - why are you doing this to yourself? Go watch old games or find a different hobby that you actually enjoy.

If you have to put words in my mouth or create the argument, you lose.  And you have no idea what you're talking about.   You're picking out a snapshot and creating what I thought so you can argue against it; and being condescending on top of it?    If you want to debate actual history or basketball, I'm in.

Like I said, wave your pom poms and believe a good shooting game against a team that provided zero resistance is good basketball, you should probably stick to NBA all star games.  I said Saturday was awful.  And it was.  We moved the same way against Penn State but their defense was pathetic and yeah...we made shots.  We scored 113 points in 40 minutes.  I don't understand how anyone can watch that and while happy we were on the good side of it, not grasp the "why."   We had the same kids on the floor 4 days later, saw a team that hustled and tried, and looked slow, weak, lazy, and soft.  18 turnovers and allowed 14 offensive rebounds and 13 steals against us.   You're okay with that and think the loss happened because we just didn't shoot well?  Or believe we got the same quality of shots?  Hint : we didn't.  And we didn't move.  Or screen well.  Or get good angles.  Or cut with purpose.  Etc.  Same issues we had with Woodson.  The team Saturday looked no different and UK isn't any good.

This team is not going to finish any better than our last 8.  Our offense is pathetic and we got completely out hustled.  But you're okay with the 1 game in the last 4 with a positive result because we made non-contested shots not based on what we did but because the defense against us was awful?  If you were indeed being serious, you can lose the condescension.  You clearly have no expectations and don't understand the last 25 years.

[Goober]

Good post old friend. After about the first half of the Penn St game all I could see was, back yard basketball with little direction. I quit watching. Wasn’t excited about the product. They just hit shots on a very sub par team. Like I said then, I’ll watch again next year to see if IU actually has a TEAM, if not I’ll pick games to watch that has teams.

Always for IU but tired of wasting my life watching what they consider basketball. Before I get jumped on about being a band wagoner, I was at Knights first game as head coach and the Penn St game was the first I quit watching and didn’t see a minute of the Ky game. Didn’t need to.

[Golfman25]

3 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Fixed it for you above.

Yeah, I struggled with the time, but gave Credit to the Crean years as it seemed we righted the ship.  Been a miserable failure since, unfortunately.  

[Stuhoo]

39 minutes ago, Goober said:

Good post old friend. After about the first half of the Penn St game all I could see was, back yard basketball with little direction. I quit watching. Wasn’t excited about the product. They just hit shots on a very sub par team. Like I said then, I’ll watch again next year to see if IU actually has a TEAM, if not I’ll pick games to watch that has teams.

Always for IU but tired of wasting my life watching what they consider basketball. Before I get jumped on about being a band wagoner, I was at Knights first game as head coach and the Penn St game was the first I quit watching and didn’t see a minute of the Ky game. Didn’t need to.

I thought you quit watching for the year during the Minnesota game!  
:)

[Goober]

Nope it was Penn St. keep up