HoosierDom

to be fair, TJD and Geronimo weren't playing. Seems okay to dance when you're not a part of the game.

I haven't heard anything about Geronimo - why didn't he play?

The careless turnovers on passes that wouldn't have mattered even if they went through. We had a lot of those under Archie, and Crean too - prior to today, I don't remember very many of them, but today they have killed us. We're going to need a guard to step up with X out. We probably have a few options with higher ceilings, so it will be interesting to see what happens.

I don't see X on the bench. Is he there?

His passion certainly outweighs his negatives to me, but he falls in love with players/teams/coaches (coach K comes to mind), and spends a LOT of time talking about how great they are.

You in fact said you wanted "one shooter" - we do have that. We probably have two. But, I agree, team shooting we do not have.

I know, right, Kopp can't even hit 50% of his 3's!

X wasn't fouled there?

How could a 6th year senior make such a poor decision. His pg was right there, he had no advantage that would cause him to want to keep the ball, and he not only gave the ball away but gave them 3 points. Unreal.

I concede there are select sports at select schools that go beyond just football and men's basketball.

I absolutely agree. The thing I don't get about sports, is why spend so much money on them? Why recruit for them, why have student spend so much time doing something that isn't academic? My roommate in school was just stupid good at an online video game. Should schools recruit him for that? Should they pay his coach 500k a year so our team in that game wins? I certainly think they should not. If he wants to play, that's great. If he wanted to form some sort of a school club, that's okay, too. But we shouldn't send him all over the country to play. We shouldn't essentially force him to spend huge amounts of time playing. Video games have nothing to do with the purpose of a university, and neither do sports.

College basketball and football are money making endeavors, not charities, the fact that they aren't taxed accordingly is insane. I don't understand why competitive sports are something that schools are engaged in. Basketball and football at least bring in money and exposure (mostly positive), so I get why a school would want those things. I see no reason for other sports to exist at the college level. I don't think many here will agree.

You're right, I'm not going to watch TJD if he goes to some other school, but how long are fans going to keep going to Vegas if we are always losing? I've watched every game this year. I couldn't say that about Crean's first year. Even then, I felt the program was on the upswing, so I was willing to suffer with them. But it wasn't can't miss tv. Imagine if we had that kind of year with no hope in sight. Are you going to watch every game? I'm not. Revenue depends on success and success depends on players.

How are those related issues? You would tax them if they pay the players, but not if they're unpaid? What if someone else pays the players under NIL? If you want to tax college athletics, great, I definitely agree. But where that money goes shouldn't influence that decision.

I think my comment makes clear that it's all hearsay.

Everyone I have ever spoken to who was at IU at the time, and I have read multiple anecdotes of the same here, talk about the obvious gifts and money IU players were receiving back then. How much of that is Knight himself versus others in and near the program, I don't know, but at best it's wilful ignorance.

I don't know about any of that. If a woman is the victim, and it sounds like that's the case, he better have one hell of a story if he wants to keep his job. He probably won't go to jail, I wouldn't be surprised if he's never even charged, but he will lose his job if a woman called the police because he was choking her.

I don't think it takes anywhere near that much. If the victim was anything other than a grown man who was the first to act violently (against Beard or others), then Beard is gone.

According to referee.com that technical foul rule was changed a few years ago and no long applies.

I can't find get mine to play at .25x, but my interpretation of the rule makes things a lot less clear than people seem to be saying. The phrase "first player to touch" does not mean the next player after the passer, it means if it is still in the passer's hands when the out of bounds player steps in then the passer is the first player to touch it and then it's fine. Without slow-mo, I can't tell if the passes still has the ball when the guy comes back in - it's very close.

Seems like some not great opponents have been scoring a fair number of points on them. If Rutgers like teams prove to be our kryptonite, then these guys seem like the opposite.

TJD gets called when I think there might have been literally zero contact. Malik gets called for a garbage shooting foul, we get a non-sense charging call. Someday we will get home-cooking, but it isn't today.

NW is 70 points better than themselves.

We need someone that can get his own shot. While I think his overall game probably doesn't warrant time in this one, I can guarantee if Gunn comes in, he is going to get shots off.

To be fair, he might be able to fight through the double team, it's the triple team that is eating him up.