Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

    it's funny and you know it


    Comment


    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

      Originally posted by Mad-Mad-Mario View Post
      If we hadn't shot ourselves in the foot against OSU we maybe survive this loss without losing our ranking. But sadly back to being unranked. Lets hope this doesn't turn into a losing streak though if so it could be bad.
      Or good, if a late season collapse turns the heat up on Crean's seat.

      I kid, kinda. This is just my way of coping with IU losses this season.

      Comment


      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

        I'm afraid the team will overachieve in spite of Tom Crean, not because if him, and end up with him getting an extra year before his inevitable firing. Whether that means he gets 3 more years instead of 2 or 2 years instead of 1 I don't know. What I do know is he's a poor coach for a team trying to be a consistent national player like a UK or UofL....

        IU can get hot and beat anyone... but they'll never get hot enough to beat everyone they need to beat.

        It's just better they lose and make his firing sooner rather than later... THEN maybe the team has a chance to return to prominence.
        Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

        ------

        "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

        -John Wooden

        Comment


        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

          http://grantland.com/the-triangle/ri...lenn-robinson/

          I grew up in the west suburbs of Indianapolis, an hour south of Purdue University and an hour north of Indiana University. My mother was a two-time basketball MVP at Purdue and my father was college roommates with Indiana basketball star Butch Carter.1 My brother graduated from Indiana and my sister graduated from IUPUI, a university in Indianapolis that was created by combining resources from Indiana and Purdue. It’s fair to say the rivalry between the Hoosiers and Boilermakers has played a significant role in my life.

          And yet, despite being a basketball junkie who was raised on this rivalry, I had never seen an Indiana vs. Purdue basketball game in person. So the pitch to Grantland was simple: Send me to West Lafayette for my first game between the Boilers and Hoosiers, and let’s start a series about overlooked college basketball rivalries. It was admittedly just a ploy to take in my first IU-Purdue game, but it worked.

          With that, here’s your crash course in the Indiana-Purdue rivalry.

          Why Is This a Rivalry?

          knight-bob-chairAP

          Indiana and Purdue are the biggest public universities in the state. Beyond that, the rivalry represents blue-collar (Purdue) vs. white-collar (IU). It’s engineering and agriculture (Purdue) vs. medicine and business (IU). It’s conservative (Purdue) vs. liberal (IU). Purdue is in northern Indiana, where cornfields, meth labs, and dying Rust Belt towns weave together to create the place rednecks call home. IU is in southern Indiana, where cornfields, meth labs, and rolling forests weave together to create the place hillbillies call home. Purdue fans pride themselves on being lunch-pail types who earn what they get and basically embody Aaron Tippin songs. IU fans will tell you they’re more sophisticated — right before they bong a sixer of beer in their underwear at 8 a.m. on a Tuesday because “it’s Little 5 week.”

          Oh, and let’s not forget the basketball. Basketball in Indiana, as you may have heard, is pretty important. To this day, high school games between small farm towns draw thousands of spectators. Even the people in the state who don’t like basketball still like basketball. They have to. The history of the sport in Indiana gets romanticized so much that basketball has become more than just a game — it’s part of the culture. If you live in Indiana and don’t know the names Knight, Keady, Bird, Wooden, Robertson, Plump, and Hinkle, you may as well be from Mars.

          Thanks to this obsession with the game, nowhere on earth produces as much basketball talent per capita as the state of Indiana. And when all of these players finish beating the hell out of each other in high school, they pick between IU and Purdue and beat the hell out of each other in college. As a result, IU and Purdue are basically all-star teams made up of the best players in the best basketball state in America, all of whom know each other well thanks to years of playing against one another in high school. Plenty of guys go out of state (or to Notre Dame, Butler, etc.) and both schools certainly recruit all over the country, so it doesn’t exactly work this way. But this is how the seeds of the rivalry were planted.

          All-time Series: Purdue 114, Indiana 88

          Indiana fans want everyone to know that the only reason Purdue has the series lead is because the Boilers were so dominant in the early days of the rivalry. Purdue fans want everyone to know that Purdue won the lone NCAA tournament game between the two in 1980. They would also like you to know how hilarious Indiana fans’ lack of self-awareness has to be to insult Purdue fans for living in the past.

          National Titles: Indiana 5, Purdue 1(-ish)

          Indiana fans want everyone to know that Purdue’s national title comes with an asterisk because it was won in 1932, seven years before the start of the NCAA tournament. Purdue fans would like to defend themselves, but every time they try, Indiana fans cut them off by yelling, “BANNERS!”

          Five Videos That Encapsulate the Rivalry

          There’s the “IU sucks” chant that Purdue fans do every game, regardless of opponent. Here’s what it sounds like when Indiana is playing in Mackey Arena.



          There’s the time in 1981 when Bob Knight invited Purdue athletic director George King to appear on Knight’s TV show after Indiana played at Purdue and Knight’s wife was verbally attacked by Purdue fans. King declined, so Knight brought a donkey wearing a Purdue hat onto his set, referred to it as a jackass, and claimed it was a representative of Purdue.



          There was the time in 1997 when Chad Austin hit a game winner with 0.6 seconds left in overtime to beat Indiana in Bloomington in what remains the best Indiana-Purdue game I’ve ever seen.



          There was the time in 1991 when Knight yelled at his players during a practice before the Purdue game. Someone — supposedly former Nets coach Lawrence Frank, who was a manager for the team — recorded it. (If the words “Knight” and “yelled” didn’t already make it obvious, this has super-NSFW language.)



          And, of course, there was the time in 1985 when Knight provided the most famous moment in the rivalry’s history, as well as possibly the most famous coaching outburst in the history of sports.



          Vital Statistics and Characters

          robinson-glenn-keady-geneSTEPHAN SAVOIA/AP

          Top five Indiana legends: Bob Knight, Scott May, Calbert Cheaney, Kent Benson, Steve Alford

          Top five Purdue legends: John Wooden, Gene Keady, Glenn Robinson, Rick Mount, Terry Dischinger

          Indiana golden boys: Steve Alford, Damon Bailey

          Purdue golden boys: Brian Cardinal, Robbie Hummel

          Indiana’s best NBA player: Isiah Thomas

          Purdue’s best NBA player: Glenn Robinson

          Best Indiana player who everyone forgets: George McGinnis

          Best Purdue player who everyone forgets: Brad Miller

          Best Indiana player to transfer from the program: Larry Bird

          Best Purdue player to transfer from the program: Kyle Macy

          Famous Indiana non-sports alumni: James Watson, Mark Cuban, Jared from Subway, Jamie Hyneman from Mythbusters, Mike from Breaking Bad, Jim Cornelison, Jim Jones (the Jonestown one), and the guy responsible for Glee.

          Famous Purdue non-sports alumni: Neil Armstrong, Gus Grissom, Orville Redenbacher, Jim Gaffigan, Herman Cain, Sully Sullenberger, the lame-duck CEO of McDonald’s, and a guy involved in the biggest LSD bust in history.

          Embarrassing Student-Made Rap Videos





          Indiana’s is better, but what does that really mean? Isn’t “better” in this case really worse?

          On a Scale From 1 to 10, How Relevant Is the Rivalry on the National Stage?

          Probably a 4. Games in which both teams are ranked have been rare in the last decade, making the rivalry not exactly must-see TV. Each fan base is split on the job their head coach is doing, thanks in large part to last season being the first since 1970 that both Indiana and Purdue missed out on the NCAA tournament and the NIT in the same year. It’s been 13 years since either team advanced past the Sweet 16. The last nine games between these teams have had an average margin of victory of 19 points. This season, Indiana lost at home to Eastern Washington while Purdue lost at home to North Florida and Gardner-Webb.

          That said, both teams have won a Big Ten title in the past five years and both programs are perennial NCAA tournament participants. Maybe the outcome of this game doesn’t shake up the top-10 rankings, but it’s disingenuous to call both programs awful and the rivalry meaningless.

          How Relevant Is It Historically?

          bailey-damon-knight-bobCHUCK BURTON/AP
          I give it an 8 out of 10. Take away Duke–North Carolina and this stacks up with any rivalry in America. The three best coaches in the history of the sport have participated in the rivalry.2 More than 200 games have been played over 114 years. Purdue has the most Big Ten regular-season conference titles with 22. Indiana is second with 21. There have been 40 consensus All-Americans between them, including four national players of the year. I could throw numbers at you all day. Instead, I’ll just leave it at this: The Big Ten has historically been one of the best basketball conferences in America, and Indiana and Purdue are the two best programs in Big Ten history.

          And it goes without saying that the hatred between the fan bases is real. Indiana fans think of Purdue more as a little brother than a true rival, since Purdue doesn’t have a great history of NCAA tournament success.3This lack of respect drives Purdue fans crazy, which is why they’ve made it their sworn duty in life to see Indiana burn to the ground. And the vitriol from Purdue fans annoys Indiana fans so much that they want Purdue to burn to the ground just to shut up the Boilermakers fans.

          The Rivalry’s High Point

          January 31, 1981 – February 29, 2000. This was the duration of Bob Knight vs. Gene Keady, which turned the rivalry from a couple of good programs playing each other into must-see TV. The two coached against each other 41 times, with Keady winning 21 and Knight winning 20. Indiana won two national titles in that span (1981 and 1987) and made another Final Four (1992). Purdue won three consecutive outright Big Ten titles from 1994 to 1996, something that has been done only one other time in Big Ten history.4 Indiana and Purdue combined for 12 Big Ten titles (six apiece) and six Big Ten players of the year during this span. It was during this era that Knight threw the chair, put the donkey on TV, and unleashed his infamous tirade. And it was during this era that Keady spent $600 a week on his comb-over. Knight was eventually fired in 2000 for violating a zero-tolerance policy established after he tried to massage the neck of one of his players in practice. (Or maybe he was choking him. You decide for yourself.) The rivalry hasn’t been the same since.

          crean-tom-knight-bobJOE ROBBINS/GETTY IMAGES

          The Rivalry’s Low Point

          Kayfabe is a term used in professional wrestling to describe the suspension of disbelief and acceptance that what is playing out in front of the audience is 100 percent genuine. In other words, to stay true to kayfabe is to believe that Stone Cold could really kick his boss in the nuts on national TV every week and still keep his job. Well, in kayfabe, Purdue fans hate Tom Crean because he’s Indiana’s coach and hating everything Indiana is what it means to be a Purdue fan. Indiana fans hate Matt Painter for the same reason. In truth, Purdue fans hope Indiana never fires Crean and Indiana fans hope Painter signs a 50-year contract extension this summer. That’s all you really need to know about the current state of the rivalry.

          Stereotypical Purdue Fan’s Thoughts on the Rivalry

          “Bob Knight was an ******* who choked in the NCAA tournament at the end of his Indiana tenure almost as much as he choked in practice. Our famous alum went to the moon, and their famous alum went to Subway. Indiana University: Where you storm the court when you win and cut down nets when you lose.”

          Stereotypical Indiana Fan’s Thoughts on the Rivalry

          “What rivalry? Banners, chump. BANNERS.”

          Current Bragging Rights

          The Boilermakers beat the Hoosiers 83-67 on Wednesday night, as Purdue’s strategy of playing great defense and having tall players proved better than IU’s strategy of playing ****** defense and having short players. Purdue owns the bragging rights. For now.
          Entertaining and depressing all at the same time.

          Comment


          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

            Purdue is probably the worst BIG match-up for IU due to their bigs.

            That said, we already know that IU can lose to anyone when they shoot poorly, and that's exactly what happened. I expect a much better showing at AH.

            Comment


            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

              Oh, and does anyone else think that "Boiler Up" is one of the stupidest things they've ever heard? Seriously, WTF is that crap?

              Comment


              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                Originally posted by Shade View Post
                Oh, and does anyone else think that "Boiler Up" is one of the stupidest things they've ever heard? Seriously, WTF is that crap?
                *yawn* scoreboard.

                Comment


                • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                  Originally posted by Foul on Smits View Post
                  *yawn* scoreboard.
                  Can't see; banners are in the way.

                  Comment


                  • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                    Originally posted by cdash View Post
                    Can't see; banners are in the way.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                      That Purdue game really showed why Hanner is such a crucial piece to our team, he brings legit size. Luckily he should be back by the time Purdue comes to AH.

                      Comment


                      • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                        Originally posted by cdash View Post
                        Can't see; banners are in the way.
                        Good one sir

                        Comment


                        • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                          Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                          That Purdue game really showed why Hanner is such a crucial piece to our team, he brings legit size. Luckily he should be back by the time Purdue comes to AH.
                          If this sentence is written about your team, you are in deep ****.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            If this sentence is written about your team, you are in deep ****.
                            He isn't that bad. He was averaging 7.4 PPG and 5.0 RPG while shooting 62% from the floor. Big men is obviously the weakness of our team, and I would love to add Thomas Bryant and have him come start next season, but I don't see Perea as some horrible big man.

                            Comment


                            • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                              Originally posted by BlueCollarColts View Post
                              He isn't that bad. He was averaging 7.4 PPG and 5.0 RPG while shooting 62% from the floor. Big men is obviously the weakness of our team, and I would love to add Thomas Bryant and have him come start next season, but I don't see Perea as some horrible big man.
                              I'm not saying he's horrible; I'm saying you are in deep **** if he is a crucial part of your team.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2014-15

                                Originally posted by cdash View Post
                                I'm not saying he's horrible; I'm saying you are in deep **** if he is a crucial part of your team.
                                Any team is in deep shyte if Tom Crean is the coach...
                                Nuntius was right for a while. I was wrong for a while. But ultimately I was right and Frank Vogel has been let go.

                                ------

                                "A player who makes a team great is more valuable than a great player. Losing yourself in the group, for the good of the group, that’s teamwork."

                                -John Wooden

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X