They can probably compete against anyone at Assembly Hall, but tonight showed why this team is going absolutely nowhere and will be a quick tournament out if they even make it (I.e about what you’d expect from your standard IU team of the last 30 years).
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.
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](https://www.pacersdigest.com/core/images/smilies/laugh.gif)
"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good?
![laugh](https://www.pacersdigest.com/core/images/smilies/laugh.gif)
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
IU Basketball 2023
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Sollozzo View PostThey can probably compete against anyone at Assembly Hall, but tonight showed why this team is going absolutely nowhere and will be a quick tournament out if they even make it (I.e about what you’d expect from your standard IU team of the last 30 years).
Woodson isn't far removed from that same problem. He's not a top level college coach and he doesn't seem to be making strides in that direction. IU, more times than not, looks like a poorly coached team. Eventually, that becomes a coach problem, not a player problem.
There better be a turnaround quickly because it could get ugly. Especially since IU's record has been a bit deceiving considering who they've beaten, who they've lost to, and how they've lost. Purdue losing shouldn't buy Woodson any breathing room.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
- 1 like
Comment
-
Huge red flag about this season early on was that they weren’t blowing out the cupcakes like a good team should. Hell they almost lost to Morehead State.
Usually February is when the wheels come off of an IU season, but this season could be toast by the end of January when you look at the vicious schedule coming up.
TJD won a lot of games for us….
- 1 like
Comment
-
Never seen a team lose a game by just being so thorougly weak mentally and effort wise. Who would you even reward with more minutes after that game? Almost no one was good enough. Bad on the boards, bad taking care of the ball, and bad from the free throw stripe. Absolutely pathetic.
Then your 24 year old should have a job by now point guard, shoves his hand so far up a dude's crotch for no reason and gets caught doing it and ejected. I can't wait for X to move on TBH.
One thing I will say as criticism towards Woody, he's gonna have to learn he can't treat these kids like NBA players, they aren't pros and if you give them the leeway of it, you'll get games like that rutgers game. Just absolute **** shows that they had no business losing but found a way by being pathetic.
TJD made leadership at the college level seem easy, but you won't always have a guy like TJD to lead in college. There's a huge void of accountability and leadership on this roster and you can tell. Xavier Johnson is a joke from that stand point clearly.
- 2 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bball View Post
I think the lack of a clear path forward is going to lead to a clear path backward. We saw this with Crean... An injection of enthusiasm up front. A 'new' era starting and some apparent growth (though troubling trends were there in both cases (though Crean had a built in excuse for things taking a bit that no longer exists)), and then the 'exposure' of the flaws. When it became clear Crean couldn't actually manage a game even if his life depended on it, nor would he ever put IU at an advantage in the coaching dept in a game, the 'vaunted' recruiting prowess turned into smoke and mirrors. Without a balanced roster and recruits, Crean couldn't out-talent anyone and things spiraled quickly down from there.
Woodson isn't far removed from that same problem. He's not a top level college coach and he doesn't seem to be making strides in that direction. IU, more times than not, looks like a poorly coached team. Eventually, that becomes a coach problem, not a player problem.
There better be a turnaround quickly because it could get ugly. Especially since IU's record has been a bit deceiving considering who they've beaten, who they've lost to, and how they've lost. Purdue losing shouldn't buy Woodson any breathing room.
As far as "Woodson and breathing room", I really don't know what you're expecting, but if you think there is any chance in hell that IU is firing that guy before his initial 5 year contract is up, you're gonna be disappointed. It's just not gonna happen at all. We have to hope that Woodson's recruiting prowess continues to pan out, he is bringing recruits to campus at a rate no other IU coach has ever sniffed. Not saying that is gonna win us titles alone, but it will keep the ship a float hopefully.
This team has major guard issues which Woodson has to hold some blame for, personally I think I would have told X to leave and looked for guard help in the portal, the guy just is not a high level guard and at this point even his positives are completely off set by the repeated boneheaded moments he's had in his career here. The reality is he's been mostly a bad basketball player for us other than a short period of time the end of year 1 when he played well to get us into the tourney. X's presence and probably guaranteed starting gig scared away a lot of the top level guard transfers IU went after, this isn't speculation btw, it's fact. And X has not played well enough to justify that. IU could have, maybe would have had Dalton Knecht (Tenessee guy) if X wasn't here.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Crean always should've been fired... The hiring of Archie Miller was the mistake. Never the firing of Crean.
I have little hope Woodson will be fired anytime soon. But I also have little doubt he'll either be fired or 'resign' sooner rather than later. He's not a good coach. He's old and not improving. Recruiting will reflect those first two problem soon enough.
I didn't like the hire when it was announced and nothing, overall, has made me change my mind. Hoping against hope I was wrong.
He's not the second coming of RMK. In fact, he's more the second coming of Tom Crean. Just with even less energy and college coaching experience and has some NBA connections that will lose their luster if he cannot match that to wins.
Michael Penix was Tom Allen's Dwade. TJD was Mike Woodson's Dwade.
When the fans start getting restless at Assembly Hall, that is when the trouble will snowball because that energy is all the team has to feed on.
IU can't win on the road because Woodson is a poor coach. Period.
Worse, he's not getting any better.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
- 1 like
Comment
-
I love when I say something and then you repeat it with different words, like your first sentence in that post about Archie and Crean lol. I've said 100 times I was ready to move on from Crean, but they totally mishandled that firing and then the replacement was a complete joke from an investment standpoint.
I'd bet you $100 to your charity of choice right now that Woodson won't be fired before his 5 years and even then he'll never actually be fired. He'll retire.
TJD was a good player and a great leader, but nobody's DWade.
Penix wasn't Allen's DWade either, Penix and that IU team were product of him, a decent defense and two of the best coordinators you'll ever see at the college level at the same place and the same time. If anything Allen probably held that team back.Last edited by Trader Joe; 01-10-2024, 01:11 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Trader Joe View PostI love when I say something and then you repeat it with different words, like your first sentence in that post about Archie and Crean lol. I've said 100 times I was ready to move on from Crean, but they totally mishandled that firing and then the replacement was a complete joke from an investment standpoint.
I'd bet you $100 to your charity of choice right now that Woodson won't be fired before his 5 years and even then he'll never actually be fired. He'll retire.
TJD was a good player and a great leader, but nobody's DWade.
Penix wasn't Allen's DWade either, Penix and that IU team were product of him, a decent defense and two of the best coordinators you'll ever see at the college level at the same place and the same time. If anything Allen probably held that team back.
Yes, Allen likely did hold back that team but my point in both cases were people making the head coach seem better than he was. Maybe even making the head coach THINK he's better than he actually was too.
I don't think Woodson is getting fired this season or year. But I DO think his seat is starting to warm up.
I seriously doubt he's the type to feel a little heat and retire to avoid what is now mostly and eventually inevitable... That would be ideal IMO, but won't happen.
So he's back next year.
Whether he makes it to year 5 or not is not something I'm as confident in. He's going to start feeling more and more pressure. And the administration is going to be feeling it too. If they miss the NCAAT this year, that is likely to accelerate the process.
I'd expect firing a Knight guy like Woodson would be really hard... BUT... anyone can see it's going to have to happen sooner rather than later unless something changes. I don't know when they'll decide to rip the Bandaid off, but it's coming barring a MASSIVE change in Woodson's effort and ability.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
-
Originally posted by Trader Joe View Post
One thing I will say as criticism towards Woody, he's gonna have to learn he can't treat these kids like NBA players, they aren't pros and if you give them the leeway of it, you'll get games like that rutgers game. Just absolute **** shows that they had no business losing but found a way by being pathetic.
TJD made leadership at the college level seem easy, but you won't always have a guy like TJD to lead in college. There's a huge void of accountability and leadership on this roster and you can tell. Xavier Johnson is a joke from that stand point clearly.
That’s where Woody is failing right now. When it happens time and time again, the coach deserves a legitimate chunk of the blame.
The Fife thing still bothers me about Woody. If we were winning, then it would be totally irrelevant. But a guy who lasted 10 years with Izzo couldn’t last more than one season with Woody? Given that this team seems to be lacking in coaching right now, I think it’s fair to point it out.
As to Crean…I agree with you. His faults have been well documented, but the guys who followed him haven’t even come close to sniffing what he did accomplish. This program feels light years away from winning 2 Big 10 titles in a 4 year span. That was a great accomplishment and Crean deserves credit for it.
Moving on from Crean? Fine. Moving on from Crean for worse results? Well…
I think you’ve said it before - the fanbase never got over the 2013 Syracuse loss and he was always on borrowed time after that….
- 2 likes
Comment
-
I think the ultimate problem is Woodson's low energy. I seriously doubt he's putting the time into preparing HIMSELF for upcoming games, let alone the players. And I doubt he's properly utilizing his assistant coaches either.
I have my doubts he's a 'student of the game' nor has been one for quite some time. Yet, he's in only his 3rd year of coaching college ball.
Sure, he can talk about the NBA and his NBA connections, but that stuff isn't going to just magically manifest itself on the court and form a cohesive and well prepared team.
And selling recruits on NBA connections loses its luster when he's losing games.
Expecting the kids to have better fundamentals when they get to school? Well, it would be nice I'm sure... But it's the same for every school. Figure out what they are doing... Either balance that in recruiting OR make that part of the coaching/schooling process.
Trying to out-talent people, under-preparing yourself and players, and then not having a fundamentally sound basketball team in the first place is going to lead to problems. And a leadership void is sure to develop.
The Fife thing really stands out to me as well. If Fife was bringing politics into the lockerroom and creating issues, as has been suggested, I kind of get his firing... But you have to replace the positives on the coaching side. It's not addition via subtraction. Especially when your head coach isn't exactly pulling his own weight.
And that Fife could hang at MSU under a far better coach than Woodson, and be an always 'hard out' in the NCAAT, yet couldn't last at IU (his own school even) does make you go "hmmmmmm??".
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
- 1 like
Comment
-
One thing I think is telling is when Purdue rolls around on the schedule. That is a game I believe Woodson does goes the extra mile for. And it shows. Although, will it show without TJD in the lineup?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
-
can't say i'm terribly surprised with the result of the 1st half. it is still possible iu manages to make a game of it in the 2nd half but, winning is almost impossible now. coming back from 22 down when your guards can't hit anything, is close to impossible as this team has struggled hitting from 3 for over 7 years now.
edit: oh and xavier johnson getting another flagrant is also not a shocker. the dude is just a punk. i can't wait til he's finally gone!Last edited by clownskull; 01-16-2024, 07:54 PM.
- 1 like
Comment
-
I'm going back to what I said in the Purdue thread...
Woodson is a known commodity now, and Painter surely can make certain his team takes IU seriously after these last couple of years. The wildcard then being would Woodson put the effort into preparing for this game as it needs or would he rest on his laurels from what IU has done in the past?
There's no chance Woodson pulls the right levers in-game. ...I don't know if he can light a fire under anyone in the lockerroom or not. But other than IU coming out re-motivated to defend, and finding their shots outside. This game could get ugly.
Wait... it's already ugly.
The Woodson era is crumbling quickly. This could be make or break right here... At least as far as the fanbase goes. They're already turning... it wouldn't take much to get them to see the low-energy Woodson for the poor coach he actually is. And worse, that he's not getting better.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
-
Tonight was the night that the decision makers realized Woodson is going to have to be fired and realized they're going to have to start saying it aloud. Gonna be hard to do it without giving him that 4th year, but it's treading water and wasting time. And surely they can't give him that 5th year.
Of course they'll be hoping SOMETHING will change and they can quit talking about it and wondering about how they're going to do it (and just when in the coming 2 years).
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
-
So tonight... does the Wisconsin curse finally end or does it continue?
Somewhere I read Ware is out tonight. I haven't confirmed it.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
Comment