tdhoosier

Holy crap.

That's rich. Per Time: “Mom, I’m in Ukraine,” Sergiy Kyslytsya read out in Russian, from printed text messages that he said were the last conversation between a Russian soldier and his mother before he was killed. “There is a real war raging here. I am afraid. We are bombing all of the cities, even targeting civilians. We were told that they would welcome us… They call us fascists. Mama, this is so hard.” ..... There was also a Canadian girl who moved to Ukraine that was being interviewed on the news. She said she was posting videos of the war on TikTok and Russian kids were commenting that the videos were fake.

I hope you’re right but that post seems like deja vu to me. Some were calling Bates a ‘pro’ in September and writing him to the starting line up (sheepishly raises hand). Lander was going to solve all our problems at point guard. Romeo was going to carry us on his back. Hope springs eternal. IMO, recruits come second to creating a culture and a system the players buy into. I’m not paying attention to recruits until we get a foundation laid. …actually recruiting may come third these days: after the transfer portal.

I also should've added that in zone situations his ability to crash the offensive board is valuable. Get into the middle, break it down, jump high and crash the boards.

I do think JG has come a long way since the Syracuse game. Sure he has some bad games, or even bad moments in good games. Once or twice last night I saw him switch on a screen that XJ went over on. BUT he is getting better and he has proven that he can cut into the middle of the zone and make the right play. Last night he made a nice jumper in the middle of the zone that ended a scoring drought. I'm not advocating that he plays the 3 (yet), but I do think he earned more minutes than were given last night. Again, as long as one of TJD or Race (who slides over to the 5) are on the floor.

Especially when the game gets tight. When the game gets tight, our shooters get tight.

You can make your point, but you can without twisting this around and put words in other people's mouths. First, you accused me of not wanting any substitutions, When i clearly said we need to substitute, but should rotate through the substitution in a meaningful way. And now you're trying to get fancy with the term 'mass substitution' when the point Scott made is that you shouldn't have your worst starter and 4 bench players on the floor at the same time. I'm sorry, but this should not be a controversial criticism. You're acting like everybody is crazy. Woody is wasting crucial minutes of the game with an effective line-up on the floor. If you want to put it on the players then fine; it doesn't make them anymore effective as a group. And it won't mean they'll be effective the next game. But heck, let's continue to go with the plan and ignore the elephant. in the room. This group of players have never played well on the floor together - except maybe once in early January. 1 out of 10 times is not a recipe for success. The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and expect different results. Anyway, I respect your opinion. It's not my job to change your mind and vice versa. I'm beating a dead horse again. Something I tend to do on the board.

Where did I say that? I said other teams don’t run a lineup with no starters on the floor if they don’t have the depth to justify doing so. I don’t recall a second of game play this season when our opponents did not have one of their 3 best players on the floor unless they were in foul trouble or were awarding garbage minutes to their bench.

That’s the point. They aren’t put in the position to play better. For example, TJD or Race aren’t on the floor to draw doubles or produce an inside threat and give them space on the perimeter. These guys are limited. In order for them to produce they need to be paired with better players. He makes it too easy on our opponents by taking the foot off the gas. Other teams don’t do this. And they don’t do it for a reason.

There’s never one reason for a loss; there are many. And I will continue to disagree with you on this subject. The bad substitutions continue to be a factor in our losses. Example: In the first half when we were rolling, in comes the line up of Rob, Geronimo, Durr, Bates and P Stew. In that stretch we were -2. Sure, you may say they held the lead while the starters got some rest. But we lost momentum. We lost an opportunity to expanded our lead in what turned out to be a one possession game. A line up is not good when the only thing you’re asking of them is to try and hold the lead. In our case: one of TJD or Race have to be on the floor. And when Gallo is healthy, Stew and Kopp should not be on the floor at the same time. Yes, starters need rest and I’m all for getting them rest, but we can rotate through the substitutions just like EVERY other team in college basketball. Woody also needs to be quicker to act when the combination of players on the floor isn’t working. Geronimo is a guy who seems comfortable cutting to the middle of a zone, but wasn’t put in until we lost all momentum. Yes, we don’t have killers. We freeze up at the end of the game. Our opponents make adjustments. Our opponents want to win too. Blah, blah, blah, excuse, excuse, excuse. These realities are even more reason why we need to take advantage of every second in the first 30 minutes. Killing bursts of momentum come back to bite us. It has in just about every one of our losses.

I ALSO WANT TO BREAK STUFF.

INDIANA HOOSIERS: THE TOP 15 TEAM IN THE NATION IN PLAYING THE FIRST 30 MINUTES ….sorry just finished on DVR. That loss hurt bad.

This is the best possibility path we can have, IMO. MSU is sliding. And although we are 1-0 against PU - I don’t want any part of them. We need to avoid the dominant bigs.

I think you’re both right if it’s any consolation.

Wearing them now. Haha

Speaking of sad songs and exposing my music obscure 'dorkism', Pitchfork asked on social media the other week: what are your favorite sad songs. These 4 immediately came to mind. Sure, they are off the beaten path but with pre-text may be worth the listen if you're on the hunt for new music to listen to. I also like to reiterate my point to people who say 'music is not good anymore': there's outstanding and innovative music out there you just need to be open to it and look for it. If you give the songs a shot, I hope you enjoy them..... 1 Jason Isbell - Elephant: The elephant in the room is that she is dying of cancer. Death is uncomfortable to talk about and sometimes we think that be comforting to the dying is not talking about it at all. "surrounded by her family, I saw that she was dying alone." 2. Sufjan Stevens - Casimir Pulaski Day: From the first verse you'll know the song is about losing someone to cancer. But what gets you is the imagery and his struggle with God for taking ones we love. 3. Bright Eyes - Poison Oak: This song is about the song writer (Conner Oberst) losing his cousin, who struggled from depression and drugs, from suicide. He sings: "I'm glad you got away, but I'm still stuck out here. My shirt is soaking wet, from your brother's tears." 4. Typhoon - Empiricist: This song is off of a concept album called Offerings. Just listening to the song is like plucking a scene out of a movie. The whole album is an emotional trip that tells a story about a man who's losing his memory. The album takes you all the way up to his death and into the after life. The imagery on this particular song of a man waking up in the middle of the night in the dark not knowing where he is and then being at his birthday party and not knowing anyone is crushing. "So blow out your past lives like they're candles on the cake"

Wow. I would’ve been satisfied if Davidsons missed free throw would’ve lost the game.

Good article. Very thorough….and a bit disturbing.

I think this is true, but i'm with @Seeking6: I still don't get it. haha. He had to know there'd be horrible economic consequences. Even if he got what he wanted out of Ukraine would he still really coming out ahead? Did he think the rest of the world was going to lay down and let him invade a sovereign state and not impose crippling economic consequences? I know the easy answer is that he's crazy, unstable, irrational, etc., but it still seems very dumb. And I can't shake that.

There's still the hundred of quotes and clips calling NATO weak, a bunch of suckers, made up of poor leadership, etc. He left the 2019 summit early after getting in fights with Trudeau and Macron. Now I'm not debating whether these actions were warranted, or is it necessarily a criticism of Trump. Putin is a leader who loves to control the narrative. This narrative was benefitting him because it gave validation to his criticisms toward NATO. Trump fought with NATO and its leaders until the end. I'm only pushing back against the assumption that Putin didn't wait to invade because he was afraid of Trump. There's a whole lot more to it. And by the way Trump withdrew from Syria because he didn't want to be the 'world's police'. Nobody really knows if Trump would've lifted a finger to help Ukraine when push comes to shove (he's said a lot of conflicting things when it comes to foreign policy). That said, contrary to what some may think, I agree with Trump that NATO needed to pay more of their fair share. I also think that we get into the middle of way too many conflicts. But that's not the point I was debating. I'm also not going back to assign blame to past administrations. Putin is to blame for this, period. The good thing is that, as of right now, we ultimately seem to be on the same page. I've felt as a country we've need this for a while. Ironically, Putin is the one bringing us together....against him.

I was just coming here to recommend Free Guy. I really got into the movie. We also took the kids to see Uncharted this weekend. It was entertaining but one of those movies that you just have to laugh about the leaps in the plot, physics and logic. haha. The kids loved it though.

Who knows what is in Putin’s mind, but i don’t agree with this theory at all. As you point out, Putin hates NATO - it’s one of the main reasons he’s invading Ukraine. Why would he interrupt Trump undermining and speaking badly about NATO at every turn. We’re talking about the guy who openly talked about pulling the US out of NATO. Trump was more successful at driving a wedge in NATO than Putin would ever be. I’m not saying Trump was doing Putin’s bidding, but their interests did align (albeit for different reasons) and Putin sure was cheerleading him from the sidelines. You really think Putin would even put Trump in the position to convene NATO by invading Ukraine while he was in office? It just doesn’t seem plausible.

YES, they hit a couple of crazy shots. BUT there is no excuse for the 6 or so turnovers in a row. Focus and close games!

WTH?