Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

[Trader Joe]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

I mean we did play 10 true freshman so that is a lot, we will jus thave to see.

[Dab]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

Factoid: The Hoosiers have sold 21,058 season tickets for football, more than any year since 2000.

[Trader Joe]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

They are also selling basketball season tix much faster than the past 2 years.

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

White helmets!

[D-BONE]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

Like the white helmets a lot!

Unfortunately, it can't cover up the fact the Wright-Baker just doesn't throw the ball well - inaccurate, lacking touch.

I guess I'm no asking for Kiel, but the offense just looks terrible.

Defense...well I feel sorry for them.

[D-BONE]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

IU got hosed on the non-safety call.

EWB has missed at least three open guys on deep throws.

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

The play-calling is ultra conservative. Now I know why. Wright-Baker can't throw for ****.

[IUfan4life]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

Where would this rank on the all time wins? Obviously not the biggest win by any stretch, but with IU being IU, and coming back and punching a real school in the mouth that's still pretty big to me.

[IUfan4life]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

Where would this rank on the all time wins? Obviously not the biggest win by any stretch, but with IU being IU, and coming back and punching a real school in the mouth that's still pretty big to me.

hypothetically speaking of course. God. Me and my mouth.

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

***damnit you stupid mother****er. Wright-Baker, what the ****ing **** you ****ing *******.

[D-BONE]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

I will give credit for the enthusiasm, tenacity, and at least some signs of life from the D.

Perez looked decent. EWB is not without some potential, but he will have to overcome and or improve his limitation as a passer somehow. Yes, he can make some throws, but he's inconsistent, can't throw the deep ball well, and demonstrates no ability to make the touch throw.

It's really a game you shouldn't lose. Otherwise, it's still the same old IU cycle - finding ways to lose even games that you seem to be in control of.

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

If the Irish blow this game against Michigan, I am going to commit a homicide.

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

...

[cdash]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

Mother. ****er. This day could not have possibly been any worse. Can't wait to watch the Colts get pounded in the *** tomorrow!!!!

[D-BONE]

Re: Indiana University Athletics Thread 2011-2012

I would say - and this is no excuse for IU's choking this away in the last 2 minutes - they really should have had five more points on the scoreboard in this one.

The failed fake on the FG - second time in two weeks Wilson elects to eschew an almost given 3 - is on IU...coaching. The sack that was called a safety, then revised and spotted at the one, was on the officials.

True...Rocco's on the one when the first contact is made by the defender. But, the replay clearly shows the hit immediately jars the ball loose. The QB is bobbling it as he falls back into the endzone, where he finally secures it at the defender finishes the tackle.

Isn't that contact, loss of possession, resecuring possession in the end zone? By that same logic, the nightmare EWB sack at the end of the game shouldn't have been change of possesion. QB is down at very first contact.

EWB was obviously a strip and change of possession simultaneous with the tackle. The zebras just jagged us on the non-safety. Apparently there was also a lot of confusion on their part as to whether that play was reviewable. I'm unclear whether it was ever reviewed at all, but the original call on the field was a safety, so I don't know how or why it get's changed.