2026-27 Roster/Portal/how to fix the roster?

[Uspshoosier]

If you have a 18 year old son or daughter they have only seen IU with a winning conference record in 4 of those years.   Instead of worrying about fielding a roster that is competing for the top of the B1G focus on building a roster that can actually produce a winning conference record in back to back years.  When you can do that then worry about taking over the B1G.  

[skhoosier2]

5 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

If you have a 18 year old son or daughter they have only seen IU with a winning conference record in 4 of those years.   Instead of worrying about fielding a roster that is competing for the top of the B1G focus on building a roster that can actually produce a winning conference record in back to back years.  When you can do that then worry about taking over the B1G.  

These are my thoughts and honestly a starting point for this program.  Just be respectable in the conference to start and get to the tournament yearly.  The recruiting then will start working itself out, and you can slowly build this thing to get to top 3 in the conference.  I have given up hoping I'll see another banner in this lifetime.  I've seen 2 I guess that's my quota.  I just want to see my team called on selection sunday on an annual basis again.  With a respectable NIL budget, I just can't understand how that cannot happen.

[Home Jersey]

[Stuhoo]

57 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

A 17-20 win team is exactly what expectations should have been?

Yessireeeeeeeee.

[WayneFleekHoosier]

34 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

A 17-20 win team is exactly what expectations should have been?

Yessireeeeeeeee.

Are we cheering that?  That was my point all offseason.  You fire a coach and give top 20 NIL to build a bubble team.  it could be worse, so I’ll credit that I guess.  We were 1 probably 2 real pieces away from being competitive.   Someone should have known that and make moves to build it.  But they didn’t know, and thought they were better than what they were.  That’s a concern in itself. 

[Stuhoo]

3 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Are we cheering that?  That was my point all offseason.  You fire a coach and give top 20 NIL to build a bubble team.  it could be worse, so I’ll credit that I guess.  We were 1 probably 2 real pieces away from being competitive.   Someone should have known that and make moves to build it.  But they didn’t know, and thought they were better than what they were.  That’s a concern in itself. 

1. Not cheering that. Not jeering that. It's about what was expected.
2. "They thought they were better than what  they were?" All I've ever seen and heard from staff is that they were trying to win the next game on the calendar; not how the entire season would be.
3. Top 20 NIL? Maybe - sure. NIL is a bell curve. If we're top 20 we were a lot closer to 20th than 1st. Heck; maybe we're 15th!
4. The message board or RMK era fan expectations are very, very different than the expectations of people in the business and media that regularly covers the sport. Those folks more or less had us as a 17-20 win team. They aren't always right, but in this case, that's how it's shook out. 

[str8baller]

14 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Are we cheering that?  That was my point all offseason.  You fire a coach and give top 20 NIL to build a bubble team.  it could be worse, so I’ll credit that I guess.  We were 1 probably 2 real pieces away from being competitive.   Someone should have known that and make moves to build it.  But they didn’t know, and thought they were better than what they were.  That’s a concern in itself. 

If you pit those metrics against a 3rd one—money spent—then IU would look bad. Maybe one of the worst in the country. 
 

We’re basically getting average results, both in roster construction and coaching, for a premium price.  That’s not good.  It’s why UK fans aren’t happy—they reportedly had an ultra premium budget and neither their roster or results are better than “pretty good.” 
 

The question is: can we leverage more time, more money, and more staff so that we get premium results for a premium budget?

[Uspshoosier]

29 minutes ago, str8baller said:

If you pit those metrics against a 3rd one—money spent—then IU would look bad. Maybe one of the worst in the country. 

Add Louisville to the list.   They spent a ton of money and were meant to compete for a top spot in college basketball.   0-8 against their hardest 8 games.   No wins against top of the bracket teams.   They are definitely going to make the tourney however for fan expectations and what they spent you could argue they have underperformed.   I’ve seen a couple most disappointing teams in college basketball list this year and IU hasn’t been mentioned in any of them.  To me not many besides their fans expected them much out of them  this year 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

11 minutes ago, str8baller said:

If you pit those metrics against a 3rd one—money spent—then IU would look bad. Maybe one of the worst in the country. 
 

We’re basically getting average results, both in roster construction and coaching, for a premium price.  That’s not good.  It’s why UK fans aren’t happy—they reportedly had an ultra premium budget and neither their roster or results are better than “pretty good.” 
 

The question is: can we leverage more time, more money, and more staff so that we get premium results for a premium budget?

This is the point. We have mid results with a mid roster with a top 10-20 resource.  You have to include resources when comparing against expectations.  It’s the only reason coaches move up to programs like Indiana.  
 

Sure football is raking it in and I’m glad they are.  But we are top 20-25 at worst in basketball. Many think top 10.  I think we are closer to 15-20.  Anyway,  if you build a mid roster with those resources you need to exceed roster expectations. We didn’t.  

[Home Jersey]

The past can't be changed and we are where we are. The question for me right now is, can DDV take constructive feedback on board and grow as a coach because of what he has learned from year 1 here? We have ample resources and didn't spend well this season. We also have a relatively clean slate going into year 2 to build something better. 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

3 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Add Louisville to the list.   They spent a ton of money and were meant to compete for a top spot in college basketball.   0-8 against their hardest 8 games.   No wins against top of the bracket teams.   They are definitely going to make the tourney however for fan expectations and what they spent you could argue they have underperformed.   I’ve seen a couple most disappointing teams in college basketball this year and IU hasn’t been mentioned in any of them.  To me not many besides their fans expected them much out of them  this year 

Because we went anti-splash in the portal and tried the Cignetti approach. Talking heads are going to take a wait and see approach with that strategy and a coach that doesn’t garner automatic respect.  The wait and see approach was fitting because we were never anything to fear or be excited about. It all seemed predictable. 
 

The Louisville point is solid, same with Kentucky, and Kansas and lots of others.  Several of the big spenders aren’t doing super great.  We fall just a below these teams. 

[Golfman25]

3 hours ago, skhoosier2 said:

These are my thoughts and honestly a starting point for this program.  Just be respectable in the conference to start and get to the tournament yearly.  The recruiting then will start working itself out, and you can slowly build this thing to get to top 3 in the conference.  I have given up hoping I'll see another banner in this lifetime.  I've seen 2 I guess that's my quota.  I just want to see my team called on selection sunday on an annual basis again.  With a respectable NIL budget, I just can't understand how that cannot happen.

Because it about more than money.  Coaching matters.  The reason Cig did what he did is because he can flat out coach.  

[Uspshoosier]

How many in the “10 mil club” this year  was in their first year with their program?  I think that is the difference for me. Most the big spenders already had a year under their belt and didn’t have to spend money on 11-13 roster spots.  Did IU have some yeah but I would guess since DeVries is in his first year was why you don’t see IU showing up in most disappointing teams of the college basketball season articles.    National media acknowledged they had the funds and then acknowledged that with that roster they would be a bubble team as the ceiling or not make it as the floor.  

[Stuhoo]

5 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Because we went anti-splash in the portal and tried the Cignetti approach. Talking heads are going to take a wait and see approach with that strategy and a coach that doesn’t garner automatic respect.  The wait and see approach was fitting because we were never anything to fear or be excited about. It all seemed predictable. 
 

The Louisville point is solid, same with Kentucky, and Kansas and lots of others.  Several of the big spenders aren’t doing super great.  We fall just a below these teams. 

In other words, we are right at performance expectations.

And I agree - we are below average on return for monetary investment. Because the size of a team's budget is only one of so many factors that can contribute to success or failure. And that can be at least partially explained by having to pay 'transfer in' price for everyone except for Sisley and the two Eastern Euro kids. 

[Uspshoosier]

Maybe next years roster will produce IU a winning conference record for only the 5th time in 19 years.  We all can hope 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

How many in the “10 mil club” this year  was in their first year with their program?  I think that is the difference.  Most the big spenders already had a year under their belt and didn’t have to spend money on 11-13 roster spots.  Did IU have some yeah but I would guess since DeVries is in his first year was why you don’t see IU showing up in most disappointing teams of the college basketball season.   National media acknowledged they had the funds and then acknowledged that with that roster they would be a bubble team as the ceiling or not make it as the floor.  

But the 11-13 excuse doesn’t really work.  These contracts are annual. And they should be cheap.  Whoever we choose to retain will need paid again.  You pay who you roster year in and year out.  I’m not sure what we’ve done to earn a home team discount.  Most that played are gone.  Market value is market value.  It’ll be the same again this year.  

[WayneFleekHoosier]

3 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

In other words, we are right at performance expectations. And I agree - we are below average for return on monetary investment.

Performance standards were set by the coach with those funds by picking the roster he picked.  
 

anyway, hopefully this offseason he’ll demonstrate the desire to field a strong team that covers the basics that winning teams need.  That I, from my couch projected right along the way. 

[Home Jersey]

2 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

 I’m not sure what we’ve done to earn a home team discount.  Most that played are gone.  Market value is market value. 

I doubt the market value for potential returners is any better than their current deal at IU, but maybe. Big offseason ahead.

[Stuhoo]

8 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Because it about more than money.  Coaching matters.  The reason Cig did what he did is because he can flat out coach.  

Cig is also a player evaluation savant.

He is special because he is so incredibly rare.

[Uspshoosier]

7 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

But the 11-13 excuse doesn’t really work.  These contracts are annual. And they should be cheap.  Whoever we choose to retain will need paid again.  You pay who you roster year in and year out.  I’m not sure what we’ve done to earn a home team discount.  Most that played are gone.  Market value is market value.  It’ll be the same again this year.  

I disagree.   Which is fine.  Most those teams had pieces that came back in year 2 from their previous year that they probably didn’t pay   over market to keep.  I’m not talking the JT Toppins on a team they are going to get paid market value and then some but the other players that contribute to a winning team like the Atwells the probably didn’t cost Tech more to keep him around.   Tech didn’t have to replace 13 kids.  IU did.   Agree to disagree on this one