Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Been making this comp for years. Only big difference is Nebraska left the conference that, at the time, was mostly regional plus was their recruiting hot bed and no longer playing on the plains/Texas completely changed how they built their rosters. The thing that makes them like us is that they did it to themselves, just like we have for however long now. 

Posted
16 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

I did a little scan of the details; Indiana Basketball and Nebraska Football are remarkably similar:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebraska_Cornhuskers_football

Discuss

 

13 minutes ago, Hovadipo said:

Been making this comp for years. Only big difference is Nebraska left the conference that, at the time, was mostly regional plus was their recruiting hot bed and no longer playing on the plains/Texas completely changed how they built their rosters. The thing that makes them like us is that they did it to themselves, just like we have for however long now. 

I always thought ND Football was a better comp. But then they finally hired a competent coach. And followed it up with another and managed to learn how to leverage their resources in NIL to the point they're a top 10-15 program again. 
 

It really should be like that for IU basketball. It’s literally sitting right there. We may not be a top 2-3 program like we were during Knights run, and ND football isn’t like their past either, but a top 25-ish Bball program in this day in age really is a matter a basic competency.  
 

 

Posted

They feel similar, but I think the reasons for the declines are a little different, and Nebraska has harder to overcome issues:

  • CFB recruiting went from regional to national and roster/scholly limits were introduced.  They're in the middle of nowhere and it's hard for players and families to get to Lincoln.  Also, rules changes meant they couldn't have 150 player rosters anymore, which they used to use to find/develop talent.
  • Other schools replicated their strength and conditioning (and steroids) program, which for a while was a serious competitive advantage
  • Conference changes didn't help, they're not as big of a deal in the B1G
  • They struggled with a lot of bad coach hires

IU issues:

  • We suck at hiring coaches.  Probably mostly because it has historically been a very political process that's included a formal committee, the President, the Chairman of Board, big donors, and even sometimes the athletic director.  We've missed on plenty of good coaches I don't even want to list them all.  Though I have to admit this latest hire was Scott's call with almost no political meddling, and it's not going great so far.  
  • In the '00's and '10's we didn't play the under the table money game well.  We didn't pay guys like UK, KU, Duke, etc.  We didn't have agent relationships.  I thought the NIL era would fix this, but it hasn't.  

Frankly, at this point I can't explain why IUBB is so bad.  And perhaps whatever it is that is constantly holding back IUBB, it's actually harder to overcome than I thought.  We just need a good coach and seven good players.  Why is this so hard?

Posted

Kind of an interesting crossover irony ... 

Nebraska now has one of the nation's better basketball teams. 

We have THE nation's best football team. 

 

Posted
19 minutes ago, Pagoda said:

They feel similar, but I think the reasons for the declines are a little different, and Nebraska has harder to overcome issues:

  • CFB recruiting went from regional to national and roster/scholly limits were introduced.  They're in the middle of nowhere and it's hard for players and families to get to Lincoln.  Also, rules changes meant they couldn't have 150 player rosters anymore, which they used to use to find/develop talent.
  • Other schools replicated their strength and conditioning (and steroids) program, which for a while was a serious competitive advantage
  • Conference changes didn't help, they're not as big of a deal in the B1G
  • They struggled with a lot of bad coach hires

IU issues:

  • We suck at hiring coaches.  Probably mostly because it has historically been a very political process that's included a formal committee, the President, the Chairman of Board, big donors, and even sometimes the athletic director.  We've missed on plenty of good coaches I don't even want to list them all.  Though I have to admit this latest hire was Scott's call with almost no political meddling, and it's not going great so far.  
  • In the '00's and '10's we didn't play the under the table money game well.  We didn't pay guys like UK, KU, Duke, etc.  We didn't have agent relationships.  I thought the NIL era would fix this, but it hasn't.  

Frankly, at this point I can't explain why IUBB is so bad.  And perhaps whatever it is that is constantly holding back IUBB, it's actually harder to overcome than I thought.  We just need a good coach and seven good players.  Why is this so hard?

Agree. Nebraska had a unique setup that led to their success in terms of talent pool and style of play that both no longer exist. Both programs are walking through purgatory for decades with the only hope being delusional, over-compensating fan bases. But to your point, we just need to bring in a better coach and a few better players and we’re right back in it. We also can get them from our backyard, unlike Nebraska. Nebraska’s luck may change some now with NIL and the transfer portal, but until they can execute with it that program is finished as a blue blood.

More P4 schools are committed a to football than basketball, which is why it’s been frustrating with us actually trying in basketball and having nothing to show for it in 25 years. This isn’t complicated. 

Posted
46 minutes ago, LamarCheeks said:

Kind of an interesting crossover irony ... 

Nebraska now has one of the nation's better basketball teams. 

We have THE nation's best football team. 

 

Personally I would have had no issue throwing the sink at Hoiberg this offseason. 

Posted

Very similar yet different as many have mentioned.  

Nebraska leaving for the B1G really hurt them IMO.  They aren't doing themselves any favors in the B1G and it doesn't look like they will get better any time soon. And their location sucks so there's that also.  As we know...its very hard to bring back a blue blood that hasn't seen success since the stone ages LOL

I think this hire Scott did go after others but really could not get anyone to come.  No need to leave your program to come here to clean up/revive an old, struggling blue blood.  Similar to reasons Cig won't leave IU to revive the Alabamas of the world in football.  If you have a good thing going, why move into a pressure cooker unnecessarily when you can win where you are at?

We have made so many horrible coaching hires since Coach Knight.  You wouldn't think it would be this hard to get it right, but we are past the point of no return in getting an established big-time coach.  I really have no idea what the answer is.  We've had old IU players, Crean who was splashy-ish at the time, up and comers like Archie that failed miserably...seems we've tried many different paths all leading to the same results.  Disheartening to say the least.  

 

Posted
1 minute ago, Stuhoo said:

No it's not. The basketball program is depressing. But being an IU sports fan and IU alum is the best it has ever been, and that includes compared to when RMK was in his prime.

image.jpeg

I've said since we won...nothing hurts me we are football national champions.  This basketball team hasn't affected me in years but even less so these last couple of seasons due to football.  Love being a football school!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...