HoosierDom

1 hour ago, mrflynn03 said:

Well there is XI which will lead to lawsuits because womens sports will be eradicated.

What about IU baseball, swimming, golf?

 

Certainly Title IX will complicate things, but, assuming it stands in its current form, I can see a world where only basketball, football and the requisite balancing number of women's sports exist. I don't have a problem with that. I have nothing against baseball, swimming or golf, but I don't see why other people should pay for those sports. I (who have been a tax-payer, student and alum) am happy to pay to help some kid get his degree and I'm happy to pay to help the basketball program (because it entertains me), but I don't want to pay for some kid to golf, no matter how good he or she is at it. Some sports, maybe those you mentioned, will likely be able to survive in some paired back form. I'm okay with them having to severely pinch pennies.

1 hour ago, IUCrazy2 said:

This is somewhat interesting.  With Title IX, the cost of sports is going to go up even more.  Let's be real, only 2 sports (Football and Men's basketball) would be able to maintain themselves as businesses if you stripped away the colleges from them.  

This is going to sound cruel, but at a certain point the cost to maintain things like women's gymnastics or men's wrestling will not be worth it.  

I'm not sure why it's worth it now, but I agree, it will become increasingly less so as more and more basketball and football money stays with the people who earn it.

5 hours ago, mrflynn03 said:

Some of the language in that article geez, better working conditions, unpaid labor?  It's a sport they choose to play.  If they dont like the conditions they dont have to do it. 

Why does everybody want to screw the universities when its the NCAA that rakes in a billion a year. 

Why does your argument apply to players but not to schools? As the rules stand now, players chose to play. Do you have any doubt that schools and the NCAA will still choose to have basketball teams regardless of what comes of this law? Why not say " if they (schools/NCAA) don't like the conditions they done have to do it"?

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

That the legislative branch should have other priorities than to trying to " fix" something that isn't really broken. 

There's plenty of suffering and need in the US that should be addressed over 18-22 year olds who are already getting a free college education for playing a sport that they (supposedly) love...

Again, you're saying exactly what I said you said. No one claims this is the most pressing issue in the country, but Congress can do multiple things at once. This in no way impacts their ability to address the suffering and need.

3 hours ago, IUFLA said:

It's not about "doing more than one thing at a time."

I  don't think the legislative branch of our government should be involved in this at all...

"They have bigger fish to fry." Not sure how else to interpret that.

3 hours ago, IUFLA said:

Link

If one of my representatives was involved, I'd be trying to round up the recall votes...they have bigger fish to fry...

I don't think anyone claims this is the most pressing issue facing the country, but Congress can do more than one thing at a time. They have staffs. And really, this doesn't take all that long.

Seems like these schools are already just professional, minor league teams that just don't pay. So they view a new minor league that does pay as a real threat to their bottom line.

Also seems like a hollow move - I don't think lack of exposure is a problem for the kids at any of these schools.

40 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I feel sorry for kids today because they are not allowed to be kids any longer. At the age of 10 it is all about travel sports and not letting kids just play for the fun of it.  I go by basketball courts in parks or schools and don't see many pickup games like you use to.

I really don't understand travel leagues. If you live anywhere near Indy, there are going to be hundreds if not thousands of good players within a half hour of your house. Why would you go farther than that to play some other kid? And for that rare kid who really is that good, just play kids a couple years older than you.

45 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Yep, very favorable schedule.  Double plays against Minnesota, Nebraska, and Penn State, only playing Michigan and Illinois once at home, and only playing MSU and Iowa once on the road is nice.

I don't know. My guess is that Illinois and Iowa will be garbage and MSU not a real conference contender.

1 minute ago, rico said:

Most of this discussion, while entertaining, is moot.  We got a new sheriff in town.  He will have the final say.

Does that not apply to every discussing here?

1 minute ago, ledies22 said:

That's fair. I mean i guess im a little eh on this. Kinda like you were with the coaching hire. Thought we could get someone better maybe? Im willing to eat crow on this.

Im fairly confident he reclassified and came a year early to redshirt. I could be wrong. 

Race did that, not Hunter.

55 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

I think we'll find out all the answers (as others have suggested) if he enrolls in law school. Plus CH and him have long term relationship dating back to Butler days. Could just be the biggest school within 3 hours of home that will let him go to law school....if that plays out. 

I doubt very much that he will be going to law school. The ABA has rules about attendance and I don't see how you could possibly go to road games and make it to class. It's conceivable that covid has changed the rules and/or they have remote classes that qualify and he could attend on the road, but under normal circumstances, it wouldn't be allowed.

If it is allowed, I do think it's possible to do - if you add up the time I spent playing basketball and drinking beer my first year of law school, it would allow for enough hours to be a varsity basketball player.

18 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

If this was the #1 or #2 choice, then Dolson isn’t very smart.  “Good coaches can coach” just really isn’t true when it comes to NBA guys going to college.  I don’t expect him to light the world on fire next year even if TJD does come back, but he can surely do better than Archie.

And that’s basically where IU is at.  It’s not about getting the program back to blue blood status, it’s about getting the program back to not being a joke.

Who can you point to to back that up? I can't think if too many NBA guys that failed in college. Whom am I forgetting?

I would put this on par with any of my choices that aren't Brad Stevens. I think his NBA experience is going to be huge on the recruiting trail. Kids might not know who he is, but once someone tells them, they will be impressed. He has a reputation as a great developer of talent and lots of NBA guys will attest to that. I don't have an opinion as to his ability with x's and o's, but if he is lacking (and he may not be), then Matta is more than capable of filling that gap. I like it.

55 minutes ago, cybergates said:

Definitely a goal tend.

3 hours ago, NCHoosier32 said:

Thanks!  This is what I have been curious about.  So by whatever measures used for this system, they predict us to go 7-11.  This year home/road doesn't matter nearly as much and we have definitely seen that anything can happen.  Match-ups mean a lot for sure.  

I don't think that's the best way to look at those numbers. If they gave us a 49% chance of winning each game, I don't think we can say that we should go 0-9. If we average those percentages up, we get 49.5 by my math, so they are predicting we will win 4.458 more games. 

27 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Miller doesn't even use them all for full time basketball players. Why do you think he would use one for a baseball player?

He doesn't use them all because he doesn't want unhappy guys who never get any PT. If this kid is basically a walkon that is required to use one of our scholarship spots because of baseball, that doesn't seem to create the same problem. 

6 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Also, I don't see Miller using a scholarship on him and I don't see him going without any scholarship. As stated earlier in this thread, those are the choices if he plays basketball - basketball scholarship or no scholarship.

When was the last time we used all of our scholarships, though?

I don't remember how the rules work exactly, but I believe we're allowed even more next year.

I didn't get the pleasure of watching it, but Kentucky just lost to Georgia. Good stuff right there.

1 hour ago, go_iu_bb said:

I don't know about D2 at all but I thought they were on the same timeline as D1.

It appears D1 has the rules purposed now and, unsurprisingly, some people think they fall short of what's needed.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2020/11/13/ncaa-nil-name-image-likeness-proposal/6281507002/

It appears the vote was supposed to happen soon, which is much sooner than I thought. NCAA wants to delay this vote, of course.

https://syndication.bleacherreport.com/amp/2925947-report-ncaa-d-i-council-could-table-landmark-vote-on-nil-legislation.amp.html

There is also at least 1 bill in Congress purposed regarding NIL that may force the NCAA to make changes they don't want to if it passes, which had a greater chance more than it had last week.

D2 NIL:

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/dii-presidents-council-advances-name-image-and-likeness-proposals

It appears Michigan had also been looking at passing a law but the target date is Dec '21.

So everything I've seen seems to point to it shouldn't be allowed yet even at D2.

I reread my article, she's at an NAIA school, I don't think I fully realized what that meant before.

Still, it remains very possible that next year, or at least sometime soon, it will be more profitable to be at IU than anything short of a first rounder. 

I will welcome that, both ideologically and as an IU fan.

1 hour ago, go_iu_bb said:

I believe they were supposed to have the proposed rules ready by the end of 2020 to be voted on in the spring and then take effect at the beginning of the '21-'22 school year. We know they're supposed to be allowed to earn NIL money at that time, just not what the exact rules will be yet.

Edit: I think the law passed in Florida went in to effect at the beginning of this year. I don't know if that was delayed to allow the NCAA to catch up.

That more or less gels with what I thought was happening, but this volleyball player is doing it now, in Michigan. I believe she is D2, so I don't know if that changes things at all.

3 hours ago, BGleas said:

We have a scholarship he could take right now, right? He couldn't play, but he could begin practicing. Not a bad replacement for TJD. 

This is a kid like Lander that reclassed from 2021 to 2020. 

Does anyone know what's going on with college players being able to have sponsorships? I just read an article about some small school volleyball player that has sponsors for her youtube channel and she has not lost her eligibility. That article then linked to an ESPN analysis that said top players could make between 500k and 1 million dollars. I wonder if staying in college next year could be the more profitable move for TJD?

At some point, I might have to admit that OSU isn't over-rated, but I'm not there yet. 

8 hours ago, Bob said:

Purdue is tough, the Big Ten is going to be very tough! 

It's still the best conference, but minnesota has dropped down with NW and Nebraska in the awful category, and Maryland has dropped south of the bubble, so that's a lot easier than last year. I think Ohio St is a lot worse than last year, too.

10 minutes ago, ledies22 said:

I didn’t know where else to put this thought.

i know it’s a weird year, but does no one else thinks it’s kinda bull crap that Florida canceled several games because their star player is out?

I guess the only counter I can think of is that the kid had covid earlier and if there are fears that it caused this, then being overly careful makes sense. But, if doctors are not telling them that, then I agree.