Texas Postgame Thread

[BGleas]

Just now, IU Scott said:

We did that 3 times at home Arkansas,UW and Maryland. Win those 3 games it goes from a descent season to a pretty good season

Yup, but that's been the recurring theme of the most of the last 20 years outside of a couple seasons. 

[IU Scott]

Man this KU and UK is pretty brutal to watch with UK up 38-33 at the under 16 timeout.  UK is 1-11 from 3 and KU is 2-10

[Sea Turtle]

32 minutes ago, IU878176 said:

I could not agree more and that has been, by far, my biggest disappointment of Archie’s tenure.

Losses are acceptable by outmatched players when it is obvious they gave their all. Off the court Sampson wrecked us, and I don’t approve of him or who he was recruiting, but on the court he imposed his expectations and toughness upon the players. I thought Archie would , to use your term, impose a pit bull attitude on his teams. Rather than that happening I have been posting about “who gives a sh%t” performances for 3+ years.

They did not show up today (we won 10% of 50/50 balls), at the Knight reunion game, at the BT tourney game that was basically a play-in to make the NCAA’s etc etc. All teams have games in which they are flat/tired but it happens way too often with Archie’s IU teams. 

I really hope today was an anomaly, in regards to this years team, but the three year pattern makes me think that might not be the case. 

This is what I'm talking about. It happens far too often.

It's a culture problem. Not culture as in off court stuff. Culture on the court, preparation, pride, accountability, expectations and standards.

[mrflynn03]

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

The vast majority had us clearly in the tournament but I get it that you are supporting your agenda.  You have no idea how we would have performed in the tournament so we have no idea how year 3 would have ended.  Who thought 2002 would have gotten to the championship game.  I thought they would lose in the second round that year but once you are in the tournament anything can happen.

Here is where I am. That 2002 team made that beautiful run to to the FF4. Love every minute of it. But, back then being in the tournament was an expectation.  Seed be damned IU was in it. 

WTF! happened. We now worry about being on the bubble?

Its ridiculous.  I'm at a loss for words right now. Going to bed. 

 

[go_iu_bb]

20 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

No, that’s just plain false. We were clearly in the tourney and according to almost everyone. It’s one thing to go off in the coach after a terrible game, it’s another to set up patently false straw men. Leave that stuff somewhere else. 

You're construing the situation to make it seem like IU was more securely in the NCAAT than they actually were. Almost everyone had them as likely in the tournament but with a very low seed, like 10 or 11. Not many (any?) were saying they were definitely in with no doubt in their mind.

You're also neglecting to take into account the selection committee which almost every year leaves out 1 or 2 teams that everyone thought was in. IU was in the proton that it could've been one of those teams. 

Those are the facts of the situation.

So if you want to look at it like IU was in the tournament good for you but don't act like anyone that doesn't believe they were securely in is lying.

Another fact is they weren't in and neither was anyone else since the selection committee never met. To claim anything else is just trying to pass your opinion off as fact.

[Proud2BAHoosier]

This is what it's come down to for IU fans. Just make the tourney is good enough, SMH

[IU Scott]

1 minute ago, Proud2BAHoosier said:

This is what it's come down to for IU fans. Just make the tourney is good enough, SMH

Who is saying that but we would have made it and you can't win it without getting in.

[Hoosierhoopster]

45 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

You're construing the situation to make it seem like IU was more securely in the NCAAT than they actually were. Almost everyone had them as likely in the tournament but with a very low seed, like 10 or 11. Not many (any?) were saying they were definitely in with no doubt in their mind.

You're also neglecting to take into account the selection committee which almost every year leaves out 1 or 2 teams that everyone thought was in. IU was in the proton that it could've been one of those teams. 

Those are the facts of the situation.

So if you want to look at it like IU was in the tournament good for you but don't act like anyone that doesn't believe they were securely in is lying.

Another fact is they weren't in and neither was anyone else since the selection committee never met. To claim anything else is just trying to pass your opinion off as fact.

No you’re just wrong bro, there was no question IU was in, we weren’t on the bubble at all, but hey, enjoy the negativity 

[PritchardPutBack]

Know everyone's angry enough already, but felt like this was a necessary link for those not on twitter before the thread is abandoned for the Stanford pre/post game discussions. Still can't believe we couldn't finish 1 of these 15 shots at the rim

 

[Sea Turtle]

4 minutes ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Know everyone's angry enough already, but felt like this was a necessary link for those not on twitter before the thread is abandoned for the Stanford pre/post game discussions. Still can't believe we couldn't finish 1 of these 15 shots at the rim

 

Good grief. It's like the three stooges playing basketball. 

I wonder if opposing coaches will tweet this to guys CAM is recruiting.

[Let]

Here's what I see. IU has GREAT athletes, BUT THEY CAN'T SHOOT. he needs to recruit good athletes that CAN shoot!!!! The best athletes will get their butts handed to them by just pretty good athletes that can shoot!!!

[KoB2011]

2 hours ago, IU878176 said:

I could not agree more and that has been, by far, my biggest disappointment of Archie’s tenure.

Losses are acceptable by outmatched players when it is obvious they gave their all. Off the court Sampson wrecked us, and I don’t approve of him or who he was recruiting, but on the court he imposed his expectations and toughness upon the players. I thought Archie would , to use your term, impose a pit bull attitude on his teams. Rather than that happening I have been posting about “who gives a sh%t” performances for 3+ years.

They did not show up today (we won 10% of 50/50 balls), at the Knight reunion game, at the BT tourney game that was basically a play-in to make the NCAA’s etc etc. All teams have games in which they are flat/tired but it happens way too often with Archie’s IU teams. 

I really hope today was an anomaly, in regards to this years team, but the three year pattern makes me think that might not be the case. 

I'm just going to throw out that I have problem with Sampson or who he recruited. 

I also am still on the Archie bandwagon, but think we need to move past the qualifiers of Sampson. The grades did suck, but the fact that he made phone calls or the players smoked pot is smaller than small potatoes. 

[KoB2011]

2 hours ago, BGleas said:

I just looked at the box score and it is shocking that if you combine the shooting of the players with a "G" next to their name, they shot 4-for-25 overall and 1-for-7 from 3. 

It's also shocking that we held a team to 38.6% shooting overall and 20.0% from 3 and lost by over 20 points. 

Dude we are really good on defense! 

[KoB2011]

1 hour ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Know everyone's angry enough already, but felt like this was a necessary link for those not on twitter before the thread is abandoned for the Stanford pre/post game discussions. Still can't believe we couldn't finish 1 of these 15 shots at the rim

 

When I see that and reflect on the game...

 

I see a game we played good defense (maybe really good) and we got the ball to where we wanted on the floor and didn't convert. I'm not sure who to put not converting on, but it seems like the defense was good and the offensive scheme got the looks we wanted, we must didn't finish against a superior team in terms of size, athleticism, and talent. 

I'm not saying I can live with a 20 point loss, I can't, but I also don't see that as the sky is falling. 

[5fouls]

2 hours ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

No, that’s just plain false. We were clearly in the tourney and according to almost everyone. It’s one thing to go off in the coach after a terrible game, it’s another to set up patently false straw men. Leave that stuff somewhere else. 

3 years from now will 'making the tournament' after being an 11 seed in the BTT still be satisfactory to you.  I ask because we may just be headed down that path again this year.  I suppose then we can use COVID as a crutch.

[NCHoosier32]

11 hours ago, IU Scott said:

To me when watching our team compared to some others is that we don't seem as confident when shooting like some other teams.

i wouldn't be very confident if i shot a horrible % from 3 to keep shooting 3s.  i know it's old school thinking, but one of the keys to RMKs offense was he put guys in positions to shoot shots they could make/told them where they better not be shooting from and where they should shoot from.  i really don't see what's wrong with that as not everyone is a great 3 point shooter, but i know that's not today's game.  i would argue that if players would buy in, that philosophy would still work thoug.  

[NCHoosier32]

8 hours ago, BGleas said:

That was a pathetic performance, and it started with Archie and TJD. Was Archie even there? TJD was sleep walking through the first half and most of the second half. That's two uninspiring performances in a row from TJD. 

It was just one game and it's a long season, but it is very concerning to see many of the same things we've seen for 3 years. I'm an Archie supporter and I still support him, but if there's one overarching thing I've been disappointed in and have said a few times is his inability to create an identity with this program. 

Maybe I misread who he was, but I thought with Archie we were finally getting one of those coaches who's teams play with the personality of the coach. One of those pit-bull, Izzo types where you can just see his ornery personality oozing out of the team. Where is the guy who is nicknamed "Archie" because of his personality. 

For three years IU has largely been passive, lacked emotion and energy, etc. I saw more of that again tonight. 

It's just one game and it's a long season. But, that was just a terrible, terrible performance. I'm also just tired of not having a shot-maker, a bucket getter. We have a lot of average, inconsistent perimeter players. Sometimes they look like they're arriving and other times they look like they're going through the motions. 

nearly always on the same page with you.  agreed again, but not sure what we do at this point.  i do think our talent level is very average though.  so if we want to be a top 25 team, in theory he will have to do a really good job to make us over achieve.  do you agree?

[NCHoosier32]

i am often the negative guy, but now on to game day... i really think Texas is clearly better than Stanford and for that matter UNC.  i don't think UNC is all that good this year.  at least i hope i'm right about that!  i don't have a lot of faith that this season will be any better than last season, but i am anxious to see how they respond today.  i always want to see us win.  i'm thinking give Jerome a chance to start in Al's place, but probably Galloway instead?  i'm okay with that too, but think he's getting a little overhyped until he'll at least take a layup when he makes a great drive or cut.  i sure wish it were Lander who could step in today, but i really don't think it is.  thoughts?

[5fouls]

45 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

i am often the negative guy, but now on to game day... i really think Texas is clearly better than Stanford and for that matter UNC.  i don't think UNC is all that good this year.  at least i hope i'm right about that!  i don't have a lot of faith that this season will be any better than last season, but i am anxious to see how they respond today.  i always want to see us win.  i'm thinking give Jerome a chance to start in Al's place, but probably Galloway instead?  i'm okay with that too, but think he's getting a little overhyped until he'll at least take a layup when he makes a great drive or cut.  i sure wish it were Lander who could step in today, but i really don't think it is.  thoughts?

Jerome is who should start in Al's place.  We have to get his confidence built as a shooter.  He may be the key to the season.  Galloway is not a shooter.  Does a lot of things well and I enjoy his confidence and attitude, but he is not a pure shooter.

[Andy06]

8 hours ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

No, that’s just plain false. We were clearly in the tourney and according to almost everyone. It’s one thing to go off in the coach after a terrible game, it’s another to set up patently false straw men. Leave that stuff somewhere else. 

You can disagree with me,  everyone is entitled to their own opinion.   Nothing I said is false.

From an Indy Star article:

"Lunardi had the Hoosiers in the field, as an 11th seed and the final at-large team before the "play-in" games. "

"Lunardi's bracket breakdown a week or so ago had the Hoosiers as one of his "last four in."

[NCHoosier32]

so here's an interesting thought... go with my argument that talent matters for a minute... let me also say that i am NOT for this, but this would be our starting 5 based on how they were ranked coming into college:

Lander 27

TJD 30

Hunter 59

Geronimo 97

Thompson 134

*This is based solely on 247.  I realize that might change things a little.  Also realize that some classes are loaded and others are not.  Also realize age, maturity, and experience matters, but just food for thought.  One could also argue that our higher ranked recruits aren't panning out I guess.  

[Billingsley99]

7 hours ago, Sea Turtle said:

Good grief. It's like the three stooges playing basketball. 

I wonder if opposing coaches will tweet this to guys CAM is recruiting.

Only after they tweet all our terrible fans comments. After the recruits stop crying from how bad our fans are they  hit them with how bad our offense is. 

[NotIThatLives]

16 minutes ago, Andy06 said:

You can disagree with me,  everyone is entitled to their own opinion.   Nothing I said is false.

From an Indy Star article:

"Lunardi had the Hoosiers in the field, as an 11th seed and the final at-large team before the "play-in" games. "

"Lunardi's bracket breakdown a week or so ago had the Hoosiers as one of his "last four in."

Iirc Lunardi is rated around 75th in the nation for bracket accuracy.  

Edit.  55th over the last 5 years.  http://www.bracketmatrix.com/rankings.html

Maybe it's time we make Bracketville a household name since they rank #1.  They had IU as a 9 seed.  

https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/

[IUFLA]

7 hours ago, Sea Turtle said:

Good grief. It's like the three stooges playing basketball. 

I wonder if opposing coaches will tweet this to guys CAM is recruiting.

[IUFLA]

10 hours ago, BGleas said:

That was a pathetic performance, and it started with Archie and TJD. Was Archie even there? TJD was sleep walking through the first half and most of the second half. That's two uninspiring performances in a row from TJD. 

It was just one game and it's a long season, but it is very concerning to see many of the same things we've seen for 3 years. I'm an Archie supporter and I still support him, but if there's one overarching thing I've been disappointed in and have said a few times is his inability to create an identity with this program. 

Maybe I misread who he was, but I thought with Archie we were finally getting one of those coaches who's teams play with the personality of the coach. One of those pit-bull, Izzo types where you can just see his ornery personality oozing out of the team. Where is the guy who is nicknamed "Archie" because of his personality. 

For three years IU has largely been passive, lacked emotion and energy, etc. I saw more of that again tonight. 

It's just one game and it's a long season. But, that was just a terrible, terrible performance. I'm also just tired of not having a shot-maker, a bucket getter. We have a lot of average, inconsistent perimeter players. Sometimes they look like they're arriving and other times they look like they're going through the motions. 

I think if you only consider one end of the floor, this may be true...But I was pretty happy with the defensive intensity for the most part. Turnovers and the inability to make both tough and easy shots on the offensive end, somewhat dictated by Texas and THEIR intensity on defense, was the problem as I saw it.

As you well know, defense is the part a player has full control over, and it takes tenacity and toughness. I see that in the early games and think it will only get better.  Even in the "it's over" time I saw kids playing hard.

On offense, you can have nights where the ball just isn't falling. I saw us with some good looks that just didn't go. I was glad to see Archie put Leal and Hunter in at about the 8 minute mark, but I wish he would have ran plays for both. We were still going down to TJD and he seemed fixated on trying to show the Texas bigs that he was a good player. There were at least 2 times he could have kicked it out to a shooter and didn't. I hope that comes up in the film sessions.

I've said this in other threads, but I'm as frustrated as anybody. I want Jerome to have confidence and shoot the ball. I want TJD to be a dominant player (but until he gets that "mean streak" his father had, I'm afraid he'll simply be pretty good), but let's get a few more games under our belt before we pass any judgements. 

As for Archie, he addressed a lot of the things we kvetch about in the post game presser, now it's on him to correct.

As for today, I can only think about this Churchill quote: "Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts."