5fouls

6 minutes ago, Artesian_86 said:

This is what IMHO, most of the down trodden, fun sucker, knee jerk reaction, "Woodson isn't getting the job done in YEAR ONE" posters aren't taking into consideration. Woodson and Co. have a pretty impressive class of 3 players coming in next year. Quit frankly, IMO, guard (5*)Jalen Hood-Schifino and (3*) C.J. Gunn, and(4*) forward Kaleb Banks are most likely going to compete for someone's playing time next year, if not starting in some compacity. 

I repeat.  I support Coach Woodson fully.  Last night, it is my opinion we could have won the game if he did a few things differently.

That's why we come to message boards.  To discuss and share our opinion.

8 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Well DD is totally going off on the players today.  He said this is the dumbest team he had seen at IU and only one guy on the team knows how to play the game.  He said he hopes most of the players leave because you can't win with this group.

Wonder who Dan thinks that player is 

You know what sucks.  Being on a team Zoom call at work that, after business is taken care of, evolves into a discussion on sports streaming options.  At that point, the Rutgers fan on your team brings up last nights game.  His comment is then followed by someone else (not a Rutgers fan) mentioning that's five in a row for Rutgers over Indiana.  Not to be outdone, someone else has to bring up what the game does to the tournament hopes of both teams.

Yep.  That sucks, and I just lived it 15 minutes ago.

11 minutes ago, NY hoosier said:

Rumor of Pitino to coach Maryland

Whatever it takes.  Dont want him at IU, but he would have Maryland near the top of the conference in 2 years.

Trayce and XJ need to be on the floor for 35+ minutes.  Its March.  The game should be played differently than how it was in November or December.

3 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Who is supposed to be a zone busting 3pt shooter?

We dont have one, but we didnt have that anyway last night.

Find a different way to beat the zone.  It couldn't have hurt.  We lost not trying it. How does doing something different hurt worse th than that.   Might as well have tried it.  The committee is going to look at the Final score, not the fact that we executed to get open shots but we were just unlucky that our two 'shooters' didnt shoot well.

13 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Right! TJD, Race and Geronimo play the same two positions. 

No coach in the world is going to put Geronimo, a kid who is already still trying to develop consistency and is inexperienced, in at a position he's never played before. 

Why hasn't he played there before?  He's 6'6".  We couldn't find him minutes at the 3  in the pre-conference slate to get him comfortable there?

If both XJ and Rob are on the floor, do you need a 3rd ball handler?  Stewart doesn't handle the ball on the perimeter.  He shoots or passes if he touches it.  Kopp rarely drives and when he does, it's even more rare he succeeds.  Have Race play the Kopp role and slide Geronimo into Race's slot in the high post.

Think outside the box and try something different if what you're doing is not working.  Last night, there is no way Geronimo is as ineffective at the 3 than Stewart and Kopp were.  And, he gives us solid defense and rebounding as a bonus.

8 minutes ago, btownqb said:

I don't agree with you. I don't know how more plainly I can say it. I didn't put any words in Scott's mouth. He said we subbed in mass, which... we don't. We don't sub 4 dudes in at once, literally what he said. 

and "everybody" no... I only think the ones with subbing complaints are crazy. I just don't understand why the conversation isn't more about those specific players and their lack of execution, rather then worry about subbing patterns on a team that's missing an important piece and isn't anywhere perfect to begin with. 

Yes, that is nuts to me. I'm sorry, it is. 

If two players who are primarily playing for one reason,  are BOTH consistently not executing, then why are both in the game? I'm not talking about the last possession when we had to have a 3.  I'm talking about the 19 minutes of the 2nd half up until that point.  

Look.  I believe in coach Woodson.  I think he will get things going in due time.  That does not mean he cant be criticized. 

He played the type of game the opponent wanted last night. 

He kept Geronimo on the bench even though he was impacting the game when on the floor.

He played our 3 best players a total of 14 minutes less than Rutgers played theirs.

We can sit there and shrug our shoulders and blame it on missing shots.  But, at some point, before you have to shoot the one at the end, you have to realize your shooters are not having good games and TRY something different.

10 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Yup, and I've addressed that as well. We consistently got great looks all night. Kopp and Stewart weren't take poor, contested shots. 

We got them phenomenal looks all night, they need to make them and they didn't. 

It's as simple as that. 

Rutgers went to zone and gave us those threes to take away our inside play and XJ's dribble penetration.  Us shooting 3's is what they wanted.  If we hit some, great.  But, we didnt until the very end.

We let Rutgers dictate how the game was played.  That should not happen in Assembly Hall.  Find a different way to beat the zone when shots arent falling.  We didnt do that.

Harper, Baker and Omoruyi played a total of 14 minutes more than TJD, XJ, and Race.  And, none of our guys were in foul trouble.

Play our guys 14 more minutes and I think we could find 4 more points.  Any disagree?

29 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Let's assume you and I are coaching against each other in a must win game.  Your team's best offensive threats are two guys that can operate down low in space and a lightning quick point guard that has been playing at a high level lately.

I correctly deduce that the best chance I have to win is to go to a zone.  Take away the inside game and limit penetration by the PG.  I'm willing to give up open 3's until you start making some.  Fortunately for me, you never do. At this point, I am dictating how the game is being played.  That's my advantage and it's what I want. I've already won half the battle by making you adapt to my gameplan.

My plan works better and better as the game goes on.  And then, you throw me another little life saver.  You have 2 of your 3 main guys on the bench for a critical 4 minute stretch of the second half.  Maybe they needed a rest.  Firtunately, my main guys didnt.

Oh wait, the percentages finally work in your favor and you hit one of those 3's to tie the game.  But, you have no timeouts, so you cant set up the defensive assignments you want.  I choose not to call my last timeout to let you do that.

That's okay, my main guy, who has already played 38 minutes, and didnt require a 'rest' in the 2nd half, has just enough energy to get his final 3 pointer into the bottom of the net.

I win.  You don't.  But you can take solace in knowing those 3's were wide open.  Meanwhile, I'll have to settle for winning the game.

 

8 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Honestly you know what would make me blame Woodson for this loss....

Going out of his way to put a guy that is 5" shorter and 60 lbs smaller on Harper on the last possession. 

Or.....

16 minutes ago, btownqb said:

No he doesn't. This is a crazy complaint, man. 

So, which is it. Are you saying Rob cant hit big shots or tgat Race did an outstanding job guarding Harper on the last play? 

13 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

The shot went through the hoop with over 2 seconds left; there was way too much time to just get into him, he'd have gone right past him for either a layup or a dumpoff for an easy dunk. 

I'd have liked a little tighter coverage, but out of the options on that play a Harper pull-up was what I was most okay with. 

I'll take my chances that TJD could have had something for him should he have chosen to drive the lane.

27 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Or we just need to hit more wide open 3s

Let's assume you and I are coaching against each other in a must win game.  Your team's best offensive threats are two guys that can operate down low in space and a lightning quick point guard that has been playing at a high level lately.

I correctly deduce that the best chance I have to win is to go to a zone.  Take away the inside game and limit penetration by the PG.  I'm willing to give up open 3's until you start making some.  Fortunately for me, you never do. At this point, I am dictating how the game is being played.  That's my advantage and it's what I want. I've already won half the battle by making you adapt to my gameplan.

My plan works better and better as the game goes on.  And then, you throw me another little life saver.  You have 2 of your 3 main guys on the bench for a critical 4 minute stretch of the second half.  Maybe they needed a rest.  Firtunately, my main guys didnt.

Oh wait, the percentages finally work in your favor and you hit one of those 3's to tie the game.  But, you have no timeouts, so you cant set up the defensive assignments you want.  I choose not to call my last timeout to let you do that.

That's okay, my main guy, who has already played 38 minutes, and didnt require a 'rest' in the 2nd half, has just enough energy to get his final 3 pointer into the bottom of the net.

I win.  You don't.  But you can take solace in knowing those 3's were wide open.  Meanwhile, I'll have to settle for winning the game.

20 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Because we couldn’t sub…

EDIT: Rob would not have been guarding Harper on that play in any scenario. Seriously?

Rob should have bee on the game for the game-tying fg attempt.  Sure, PS finally hit it, but who on our roster has proven to be someone that can hit big shots?  Hint:  Rhymes with 'Mob Hennesey'.

And, yes, Rob guards Harper better than Race does on that last shot.

6 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Substitutions had absolutely zero bearing on that game. Race Thompson not understanding how to play defense with his hands up hurt though!

Which brings a point I made last night.  Why wasn't Rob in on that last defensive play?  He would have done a much better job guarding Harper.  

After a night of reflection, I keep going back to this.

• Ron Harper - 38 minutes
• Geo Baker - 36 minutes
• Omoruyi - 36 minutes
• TJD - 32 minutes
• XJ - 33 minutes
• Race - 31 minutes

They got 14 more minutes of court time out of their 3 most critical players than we did.   Is 14 minutes of your best players worth 3 points?  I say so.

XJ and TJD did NOT need to be sitting on the bench for that critical stretch in the 2nd half.  Someone convince me otherwise. 

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Well if the team is winning I doubt the fans has as much to complain about and all of those teams had won consistently.  So why do you think we have trouble generating a lot of interest in our coaching vacancies.

We should have doubled our offer to Brad Stevens.   

Just now, FKIM01 said:

Better?

Perfect.  

Just now, dgambill said:

With that 10pt lead we surely would have ran the clock out and won.

My point exactly.  The damn rules committee from the 1980's cost us this game.  😠

Just now, IU Scott said:

 

 

1 minute ago, BGleas said:

Coaches are rarely going to bench good shooters for missing open shots. It just doesn't really happen that often. 

Then mentality is rarely, 'well, sit him he just doesn't have it tonight.' The vast majority of coaches are happy with the open looks and know a good shooter is going to start knocking them down if we keep getting them open looks.

IU just had an unfortunate night at the worst time where Stewart just kept missing. But, it's rare to bench a good 3pt shooter for missing great looks. 

 

Ex-Wife #8 used to accuse me of not sticking with things long term.  Not sure what I've done to get that reputation.  

2 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

I can only pump so much sunshine.  With everything that was on the line tonight, that was a disappointing failure.  No excuse losing to a bubble team at home on senior night when your tournament life hangs in the balance.

I'll get past it and get back to my more positive self, but it's pretty hard to look at the egg laid tonight by a team I THOUGHT was hungry to go dancing and find much to be happy with.  Better days ahead, I guess...

Actually, I am campaigning for you to change the avatar.  I don't want sunshine right now, because it's fake.  You can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.  

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

I know no one agrees with me but things like this hurts recruiting and the quality of coaching candidates we get when there are openings at IU.

I'm with you 100% that it should not get personal.  But, Parker is going to hear those same things in the same situation if he's playing at UK, Kansas, UNC, Duke, UL, etc.  He accepts some of that by coming to a major program.  

At the same time, this loss is not on him.  I don't care if he went 0-10.  After it was obvious his shot was not on tonight, someone else should have been in the game.  He doesn't really help with defense, ball-handling, or rebounding.  When he's not shooting well, half of his 31 minutes should have gone elsewhere.