Exile on Waveland

You'll feel better about this after destroying us in Bloomington tomorrow. Ha . . . probably/I hope, but it won't come close to thirty-seven points.

Hoo Hoo Hoo Hoosiers. I can't believe we only got one after how awesome the big ten has been this year. Agreed. I would imagine Zak Irvin was close (I find it hard to distinguish between him and Jackson as far as who is the best senior in Indiana). There's still a lot of top-100 talent entering the league next year though; not too worried about the conference recruiting. Though next year's Big Ten does figure to be relatively down compared to the last couple.

Hoo Hoo Hoo Hoosiers.

Swallowing hard because coming to Smack's defense is about the last thing I want to do; but Gene Keady is a great dude so here goes. First, looking at records is one way to do this, sure, but I think NCAA seeding tells you a lot more. Second, even if you're going to remove the Glenn Robinson years, you removed three years when he only played two (and thus removed a No. 1 seed -- though one of the worst No. 1 seeds of all-time, I might add -- and a No. 3 seed) and kept his first year of eligibility. Third, I'm not really sure why you started at 1989 (is that an earlier part of the conversation I missed?). So here goes by seeding, starting with the first year Keady made the tournament with Purdue: 1983: 5 1984: 3 1985: 6 1986: 6 1987: 3 1988: 1 1989: n/a 1990: 2 1991: 7 1992: n/a 1993: 9 (with Robinson) 1994: 1 (with Robinson) 1995: 3 1996: 1 1997: 8 1998: 2 1999: 10 (but made Elite Eight) 2000: 6 2001: n/a 2002: n/a 2003: 9 2004: n/a 2005: n/a Obviously things started to slip at the turn of the century, but before that Keady made sixteen of eighteen tournaments and only four times with a seed lower than No. 6 (an arbitrary point that I used for "bubble," where the cutoff is probably even worse). Keady was more often a top-two seed (five times) than a seed lower than sixth (four times). I think Keady's career at Purdue was much better than mere bubble-land.

It's tough to watch your team go from a national title contender to a perennial bubble squad at best. You'll get over it. I also read we're a real contender for Lyle, so the inevitable question is who are plan B and C at this point, because that's who we'll end up with. Maybe, if it comes down to us and Louisville I really think we might get him. Louisville has three other point guards that will be there when he gets to campus. Wherever he goes, I hope his coach can fill the father-figure role he has been missing (he lives with his grandmother). Good kid, but needs to grow up (even more than most teenagers). Missed a big rivalry the other game and is currently suspended (though perhaps/evidently only for missing the team bus) (http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/feb/12/harrison-routs-bosse-clinches-tie-siac-title-clinc/). I keep hearing he got into a fight at school. But yeah, he needs a coach to help him grow up. I've heard that too. It's one or the other evidently. Trying to give him the benefit of the doubt.

It's tough to watch your team go from a national title contender to a perennial bubble squad at best. You'll get over it. I also read we're a real contender for Lyle, so the inevitable question is who are plan B and C at this point, because that's who we'll end up with. Maybe, if it comes down to us and Louisville I really think we might get him. Louisville has three other point guards that will be there when he gets to campus. Wherever he goes, I hope his coach can fill the father-figure role he has been missing (he lives with his grandmother). Good kid, but needs to grow up (even more than most teenagers). Missed a big rivalry the other game and is currently suspended (though perhaps/evidently only for missing the team bus) (http://www.courierpress.com/news/2013/feb/12/harrison-routs-bosse-clinches-tie-siac-title-clinc/).

The fact that Groce kept this team together when they were 2-7 in the league bodes very well; better than anything else that has happened even.

He's going to crean some people this off season and then I won't be able to make fun of Crean for doing it anymore... :( Hasn't stopped you before.

Michigan is still really good. They're still a Final Four caliber team. They still have a very good chance of sharing the Big Ten title (outright has probably passed). They still have really good talent (including the best point guard in the nation) and a really good coach. The Michigan State game was a Murphy's Law game and I suspect Michigan was worn down from their brutal at Indiana-Ohio State-at Wisconsin (heartbreaker)-at Michigan State stretch. It happens. However, if the standard is "will win the Big Ten by three games" (Shane Ryan) or "way better than Indiana" (this board), then, uh, yeah those need to be reassessed (they should have been assessed before ever being written). They're a perimeter-oriented/jump-shooting team without much scoring inside (McGary keeps playing better and better, yes), a relatively subpar defense (forty-first most efficient defense, second worst among Pomeroy's top-15), that is also quite young (three freshmen in the top-six and nary a senior that plays). They're in a group of teams that could legitimately win the title without it being a big surprise, but they are not a juggernaut.

There's no "kinda" about it.

The guy is a maroon. I mean, we all hate the "doesn't watch games/lives in mom's basement" meme . . . but listen to him and you really must wonder if he watches games -- or, if so, comprehends what he is watching.

I think 8-10 would make Illinois a lock and 7-11 pretty much should. I defy someone to have a better bubble team resume.

Not sure if IU should be No. 1 -- Miami (FL)? -- but really don't think Duke should be. Not that it matters, of course.

That was his sister. But no he doesn't.

Your own player just dropped in two straight momentum shifting 3s. Seems more pertinent.

Illinois is playing a basketball game now. They're currently on an 8-0 run. And their fans are on here posting about IU. Volumes, it speaks.

Michael Jordan is pretty good, dude.

What did u tell me? That I thought IU would win today. Ohio State's lack of offensive weapons makes IU a really tough matchup.

I know I hate IU raw, but I told ya about this game.

Dekker should play/feature more. He's a future first team Big Ten-er, maybe even player of the year.

Man this new set up sucks. I hate not playing everyone twice. Agreed. And it's about to become less fair with the new additions. Though Michigan has a slightly easier conference schedule than IU.

IU doesn't play at Wisconsin.

Its college basketball. A game of runs. Im looking at it as IU has shown the ability to beat everyone theyve played so far. They are 2 last second layups by players who were 4th options on the other team and a well defended jumper by Evans away from being undefeated. In a season where top 5 teams are losing to TCU and Arkansas and blown out by Miami.... that's quite a feat. The Butler game was the opposite situation where IU made the comeback. And I think the fact that it has happened twice and come close to happening a few times that it won't happen again. Last second shots and 10 point comebacks in 2-3 minutes are not common occurences. I'd hope they can better prevent them at this point. Butler was similar not exact; agreed. IU collapsed earlier than normal, then made the comeback at the end. However, the overtime was exceedingly similar--IU ahead, all the advantages with players being fouled out, but gagged. And as much as you want to believe that comebacks in the last 2-3 minutes are not common occurences, it seems to me they are against this IU team/teams coached by Crean/however you want to put it. It's happened more than once already this season and it happened last year too. Edit: you had previously asked why I thought the Minnesota game "felt like a loss." This is why. Because that game foreboded this game and this game forebodes the next blown game. I had hoped the Georgetown game was an anomaly. It's not. I agree that IU can beat any team in the nation. They can beat the best teams . . . it just won't matter when they lose in the (what used to be) second or third round to Creighton. Maybe it's fear of the Illinois fans, but it seems like all year you've been looking for reasons not to get excited about this team. This is a damn good team. They brought everyone back from a 27-win team last year and added a potential star at PG, while Olapido, Zeller, and Sheehey all predictably improved (though some much more than could've been expected). Just chill out and stay along for the ride. If they lose in the 2nd or 3rd round, you'll be right. But this team has shown nothing this year to suggest that they will lose that early. They are clearly one of the top 5 teams in the nation. The Georgetown game was sent to OT because of missed FTs....yet they lead the B1G in FT% as a team. The Minnesota game was a win and was only remotely in doubt for 1 or 2 possessions of the last 30 minutes. Felt like a loss or not, it wasn't. The Illinois game wasn't lost on the FT line. It wasn't a bunch of late 3s. The offense had a couple solid possessions in the final 3 minutes. Watford had a wide open shot. Hulls should have taken the 3, but Zeller got the rebound, they got another good shot and missed. Oladipo broke down the D and got it to Watford who was stripped under the basket (he really needs to get stronger with the ball). So, it's not like they completely fell off on the offensive side. Defensively was another story, but they weren't that good defensively all night. You mistake me. I'm excited about this team. It's the best IU team since 1993. It's one of the best teams in the nation. It is a team capable of going to the Final Four and winning the title. I was more confident than you about the Michigan game; and I actually think IU wins tomorrow. But this team has struggled closing teams out and has been very poor in late game situations. Those things are death in the NCAA Tournament. As for your rationalizations about the games I mention, all you've done is convince me that IU is capable of manufacturing new and different ways to collapse. So next time it may be a different problem. Yay?

IU lead from 9:26 in the first half until 1:21 left in the second half. That lead was comfortable and double digit-ish for the most part, with the biggest lead being fourteen points. IU was ahead by ten with just over four minutes left and by eight with just over three minutes left. IU then lost on a mistake the vast majority of biddy basketball teams would not make. There is not a single fan base in America that, in such circumstances, wouldn't feel their team blew that game.

Its college basketball. A game of runs. Im looking at it as IU has shown the ability to beat everyone theyve played so far. They are 2 last second layups by players who were 4th options on the other team and a well defended jumper by Evans away from being undefeated. In a season where top 5 teams are losing to TCU and Arkansas and blown out by Miami.... that's quite a feat. The Butler game was the opposite situation where IU made the comeback. And I think the fact that it has happened twice and come close to happening a few times that it won't happen again. Last second shots and 10 point comebacks in 2-3 minutes are not common occurences. I'd hope they can better prevent them at this point. Butler was similar not exact; agreed. IU collapsed earlier than normal, then made the comeback at the end. However, the overtime was exceedingly similar--IU ahead, all the advantages with players being fouled out, but gagged. And as much as you want to believe that comebacks in the last 2-3 minutes are not common occurences, it seems to me they are against this IU team/teams coached by Crean/however you want to put it. It's happened more than once already this season and it happened last year too. Edit: you had previously asked why I thought the Minnesota game "felt like a loss." This is why. Because that game foreboded this game and this game forebodes the next blown game. I had hoped the Georgetown game was an anomaly. It's not. I agree that IU can beat any team in the nation. They can beat the best teams . . . it just won't matter when they lose in the (what used to be) second or third round to Creighton.