IowaHoosierFan

5-7 is about where i expect us to be with how much was lost across the conference.  

On 10/4/2021 at 11:45 AM, dgambill said:

Be exciting to see. Gotta think Horizon or more likely the OVC would be top choices. I've been out of Evansville for almost 20 years now....do you think they would ever start a football program?? The school has continued to grow and has been fairly successful....seems a worthwhile investment. I mean UE doesn't have one, not sure why they couldn't compete for attention and bring in players in Southern Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Kentucky to support it. Would definitely bring revenue and could help in joining a D1 conference. 

I was on the Evansville team (as a freshman) the last year they had a football program.  I made it to the first game before leaving the program.  Only time in my whole I life I didn't finish a season.  The coach was a giant d-bag and I was struggling in school.  Wish I had finished though

20 hours ago, dgambill said:

Play IU and get a top 10 ranking lol!! Funny though...imagine if we had won those games.....would we be sitting in the driver seat for a CFP birth?? We'd have to be ranked in the top 5 right?

Imagine if we had made them close games and actually scored more than 6 points.  College football actually looks at how big the win/loss is.

22 hours ago, dgambill said:

I'm surprised Archie didn't....those stripes would have given the optical illusion that his legs were longer than they were. (I know I know...making fun of Archie's height is taboo)

Its not taboo, its just, i am not sure of the word.  But a person can't do anything about their height.  Being a bad coach, yeah he could do something about that, but not how tall he is.

Don't care.  Move along

7 hours ago, rogue3542 said:

https://youtu.be/Cm2uyCsaJXc

Finally saw the replay. I don't know how you call this. Helmets contacted, but it doesn't meet any of the other criteria.

How does McFadden even avoid it? Ridder moved right into his path, and McFadden was moved into Ridder's path. Would have totally missed him otherwise.

 

objectively to me, it looks like he leans his helmet down toward the QB.  Not saying he didn't get pushed into him and he could avoid it, but maybe its the tipping of the crown to the facemask that got it called?

I don't know.  I hate targeting calls like this.  I would have given the penalty, no ejection and moved on.

17 hours ago, tdhoosier said:

In Alex's (ITH) defense, his pessimism towards our he has been more or less accurate these last few years. If I recall correctly, he didn't have anybody from last year's team other than Trayce in the Top 25....and the end of the season proved him right. I believe he also predicted us to finish 8th last year and we finished 10th. 

That said, eventually water will find it's level and the Hoosiers will eventually outperform their expectations. Hopefully that season is not too far off in the future. 

I agree completely and my post was aimed at no one at all.  I just believe its a valid assessment of where were are this year.  New Coach, new player and some returning player from a less than successful team the last couple years.  

7th is right about where i expect us to be.  I would love to be a top 4 team this year but i won't be surprised to be more around the 6-8 spot.

18 hours ago, IU Scott said:

On Bozich podcast he had picked IU 7th on the conference.

i mean, until we prove we're not a mid pack team, its a pretty easy pick to pick us top middle.  Every year we look and say there is no reason we're not a top 4 and we just don't do it.  I truly we are a top 4 team this year and prove it to everyone.

5 hours ago, ColtsIUDomer said:

Random Butt memory..When I was a wee lad in north central Indiana, Grampa and I would drive by a mailbox with the name Butt on is which I remember thinking was hilarious every time. He told me (every time) that the Dad named his 3 sons Harry, Fuzzy, and Curly.  We would laugh and laugh..

I can't remember what I ate yesterday, but funny how well I remember that. 

Went to school with a kids named Butts.  Didn't have a funny first name.  He was an ass.  probably still is.

50 minutes ago, olsontex said:

This video is from a few months ago, hadn't seen it before.  My biggest take-away was that he plays under control and with purpose.  He also seems physically tougher than a lot of his peers in this game.

* I would be remiss not to mention I was a LOT more impressed with Leland Walker (247 #170) than I thought I'd be.  He certainly passes the eye test against D1 talent.  Unranked 3* Pete Suder also showed out well.  Given the number of fairly high rated recruits in this game it's a good reminder of how little separates players in the 80-100 range from many guys outside of the Top 150.  I'm not suggesting we target them but impressed none the less.

 

I like the mid range shots I saw taken here

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

It would be incredibly generous to say a terrible shooter like Rob shoot poorly because of the venue. 
 

And I know he has good form, I know he’s hit big shots years ago for us, but the point stands that at this point the guy is an atrocious shooter. 

The only venues rob has an issue shooting in, are the ones that have basketball hoops in them.  I don't understand how this kid completely lost his ability/confidence or whatever to shoot the basketball.

done

2 hours ago, IUALUM03 said:

You could look at college athletics as a career path in the same way being a doctor is.  They could build classes, training, etc. around this, like is already happening and exists.  It just take a change in the way people look at athletics associated with college.  They really are far more in line, if you really look deep, and they don't have to be the separated arm of a uni.  Universities exist to train and make people better prepared for their chosen profession.  I never understood why athletic programs were not looked at in the same manner as med school.  They really aren't that different.

This is interesting.  You could add a whole curriculum easily around this.  Marketing classes, Speech/Communication classes, Finance/Budgeting, Health and Sports Medicine.  There are so many things that could help prepare these kids for the next level.

The rest of the world has and continues to tread Covid-19 as Pandemic.  We in the US declared it safe and have moved on with our lives.  Whether that was a good or bad idea is up to each person and they own individual beliefs, political or otherwise.  And we should not be surprised or otherwise outraged by another countries decision that doesn't meet with those of the United States and its occupants.  We might police the world and heed the call to defend those we deem allies, but it doesn't mean we get to dictate their rules when they differ from out own.

Plus, Covid-19 is a US government hoax that has tricked the whole world into believing we're all going to die from it so they can harvest our organs when they plug us into the matrix.  Greatest global conspiracy since the Moon Landing.

30 minutes ago, GaloisGroupe said:

Probably insane "phans" at the phog... but the rumor is Kansas to the the B1G: 
 

https://247sports.com/college/kansas/board/103723/Contents/realignment-mega-thread-fka-texas-oklahoma-reach-out-to-sec-168057492/?page=296

 

This i could get behind.  A team to kick the shit out of in football and boost the conference in basketball

19 hours ago, Blazin Hazin said:

People always attribute Archie's failure to basically being unlikeable.  I don't necessarily disagree with this- but I think it's important to consider the following...

-The transfer rate during Archie's time wasn't that high.  Every player that left looked like they might either see a reduction in minutes or weren't going to play the next season either.

- He recruited pretty well.  And hell- how well could he have recruited we didn't suck so bad?  If we don't fall apart in 2019- do we get Brooks?  

- There wasn't that much drama from his players.  See Wisconsin.

Again- I'm not completely disagreeing with this.  However, for a losing coach, Archie's teams didn't have the obvious indicators of a program in pure meltdown mode because they disliked Archie.

But please- do not misinterpret this as a defense of the Archie era.  It needed to end and Im' glad it did.

 

It really is hard to tell if they liked him or not with all the losing.  Lack of effort on the court.  Back talking and general distain for any coaching he did during the game and throughout his time as the head coach.

The more we lost; the more we struggled to score; the more our offense was exposed as basic and pedestrian; the more announcers, other teams and players called us out for being soft and easy, Each time this happened, players, coaches, and fan lost more and more respect and trust of CAM.  To the point players would blatantly ignore or clap back at coach when coming off the court.  Fans were booing on in the stands and calling for his job.

But did they like him, i don't know.  Maybe.  They sure didn't act like they respected him at all.

I am not dogging on CAM.  He took the job.  I assume he tried his absolute best to win games.  He just failed.  It happens to allot of people, including high paid coaches.

17 hours ago, olsontex said:

This is an interesting conversation (historical relative strength of different conferences, national championships) but how much do you think it matters in the context of conference realignment? 

I'm assuming this prestige would translate into the SEC dominating the other conferences in terms of current recruiting classes, and the Big 10 would be behind several other conferences as well.  After all, OSU is the only legitimate title contender we've had for quite a while.  Right?

From my perspective, the distribution of the 2022 recruiting classes doesn't reflect this assumption.  Sure the SEC is in a class by themselves on the field and the top dog in recruiting, but it falls a little short of dominance over the Big 10 in the recruiting landscape.  The gap does widen though when you look at the SEC top-to-bottom. 

Something interesting is revealed when you remove the Top 20 recruiting classes and then compare conferences.  Here are the average recruit ratings for the Power 5:  86.22, 86.23, 86.06, 87.51, and 87.59.  The first 3 conferences are virtually identical (attractiveness to recruits is identical for 2nd and 3rd tier Power 5 schools in these conferences.).   The second 2 conferences are a step ahead and also virtually identical.  Do you know which conferences are in each of these two buckets?

Bucket 1:  ACC, Big 10, Big 12 (if you prefer the average total points as a gauge they are:  141.13, 140.58, and 140.30)

Bucket 2:  PAC 12 and SEC

I don't want to repeat it over and over again but prestige/appeal/marketability doesn't necessarily correlate to actual football success.  Consider Notre Dame's 33 year championship drought.  How about their W-L record over the 22 year period of recruiting rankings? That would be an average of W 8.0 - L 4.5 and includes 6 seasons failing to post a winning record.  It also includes 11 seasons failing to even finish in the Top 25 and a mere 4 Top 10 seasons.  If I hadn't mentioned "Notre Dame" would you look at these results and think "now there's an elite program!"?  There's no standard formula for looking at a range of 20+ years and pinpointing a combined ranking but this looks to be around the #15-18 ranking range to me.  So how has this decent but not great track record impact Notre Dame's athletic program annual revenue or their ability to recruit at a high level?  Their $170M revenue and $19M profit both ranked 6th in college sports last year, as it is year-in-year-out.  With 20 Top 15 and 12 Top 10 recruiting classes over this period they are clearly recruiting at an elite level.  If I used Texas as my example you'd see something fairly similar.

This isn't a tail wagging the dog situation, it's not because "They're Notre Dame".  They're "Notre Dame" because they have a large and influential national fan base who have achieved wealth and power, resulting in ND being one of the highest endowment receivers in the country.  Hmm... maybe education does play a role in all this after all.  Hint:  if the AAU sticking point seems like a dumb rule, consider that research and education endowments absolutely dwarf athletic revenue streams.  The leaders of Big Ten institutes aren't being nerdy, they're actually being just as greedy as the SEC, just along a different pathway to a much bigger pie.  That's why Stanford and Cal Berkeley are particularly appealing... and why Oklahoma State's excellent Wraslin' program, 187th ranked academic profile, and lack of AAU affiliation is not.

OK, so prestige and national exposure drive recruiting, and schools gain prestige and exposure largely as a result of their affiliation with a conference that's secured a national TV footprint (this is a large reason the PAC 12 led by USC is quite open to Big 10 proposals - they're current appeal is viewed as only regional).  Yes, winning matters too but it devolves into a chicken and egg circular argument in a hurry.  So if the Notre Dame example is true for most schools, then there must be a high correlation between annual athletic department revenue, recruiting success, and the level of a school's attractiveness to conferences in this realignment age.   Key to all of this is a large fan base with disposable income, and that trumps even the relative success on the field.  Advertiser dollars reach their target whether your team wins or loses... as long as you keep watching your lovable loser's games.  

So, about that correlation.  Don't let your eyes trick you into seeing a bunch of miss-matched colors resulting from the thinly sliced tiers.  Keep in mind the full population of this report is over 230 schools with close to 200 of them falling into the white shaded "Outside 45".  With that in mind, simply have both a revenue and recruiting rank shaded inside the Top 45 indicates correlation, and the closer the shades the higher correlation.  There are only two schools outside the Top 45 2022 recruiting classes with revenue inside the the Top 45, and vice-versa.  

 Given how much I've written, and the fact that the conclusion from all this should be pretty apparent, I don't think anyone wants/needs me to tie a bow around a summary highlighting the implications for realignment.  If you need me to, let me know and I will.

Doesn't matter our non-con or conference schedule.  Win 25+ games and we're probably a 5 seed.

Winning Cures All as they say.

Hell if Gonzaga can get 20 wins in that shitty conference they are in and hang everything on 8 non conference games, we should be able to do it the other way around.

Not reading the whole thread.

Has serious does it sound that Texas and Oklahoma might be headed to the SEC?  I saw an article today stating they had reached out.  Goo god that conference would be even more prestigious if they added those 2.

Just now, BGleas said:

I think for Steph it has largely been timing. In 2012 he was still ascending and had only played 26 games that season because of ankle issues. 

In 2016 he had just come off two Finals appearances in a row and that tough Game 7 loss to Cleveland right before the Olympics. 

I know other guys (LeBron specifically) have played even after long playoff runs, but some guys prioritize rest, especially when banged up. 

Not sure why he isn't playing this time, especially given that he had off from March through Nov in 2020. 

Who knows why he has turned it down.

On 6/24/2021 at 5:26 PM, Zlinedavid said:

There's something I never realized: Steph Curry has never played in the Olympics. 

Guys like LeBron, Harden, CP3, etc....OK. They've won medals and are getting up there in miles. Give someone else a shot to live a dream. But you'd think that for someone on Steph's level (the true elite), you'd want that Olympic medal in your trophy case.

Alot of players just turn down the invitation and i think Steph has been asked twice now.

2 hours ago, IU Scott said:

The thing is that the money the kids are getting is not from the game but from outside companies.

and most pro athletes make more money from sponsors than they do contracts so its really no different.

30 minutes ago, kyhoosier29 said:

I’m all for capitalism, but these same kids clamoring for these opportunities will be complaining that they didn’t get the right guidance when it doesn’t work out in the long term for them. Hope they have the right people in their lives. 

Just to much money anymore in sports and they can get it younger and younger.

On 7/8/2021 at 10:40 AM, 5fouls said:

Makes him very dangerous.  If he does a better job of balancing proven veteran transfers with incoming 5 star talent, he fixes the problem he's had the last few years.

Exactly what i was thinking.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Kentucky win a title in the next 3 years.