Exile on Waveland

Under Crean, Indiana has improved from Pomeroy No. 212 to No. 183 to No. 75 to No. 10. Last year, when IU evidently so thoroughly underachieved, they had a roster with all of two (healthy) RSCI top-100 players: sophomores Christian Watford (No. 45) and Jordan Hulls (No. 74). Their second leading scorer was a player that you just claimed couldn't transfer to any better school than FIU. Their scholarship upper-classmen were Jeremiah Rivers (haha), the FIU player, Tom Pritchard (ha), and Matt Roth -- leading to a No. 285 ranking in experience. With that lack of talent and experience, IU played the twenty-sixth toughest schedule in the nation and in what was easily the toughest conference in the nation (.0332 ahead of second-place Big East). But, I know, I know, IU smells like poop.

I think VCU was going to make it anyway. Without saying so, the committee has proven what it wants to do: take teams like VCU (VCU) instead of teams like Northwestern (Colorado). Now insert "Drexel" for "VCU."

At this point, I just don't see how. I think they need to beat Iowa and win their first Big Ten Tournament game to have a legitimate chance. I think Lunardi is incorrect and the tournament committee would/will "reward" a mid-major team with guady record over Northwestern (without the Wildcats making a Big Ten Tournament run). It would be hard for me to blame them either -- this isn't exactly how it works, I understand, but Northwestern has been presented with multiple opportunities recently to "earn" a bid and has failed. And I've been rooting for them (short of the game in Bloomington, of course).

Again: secure the court. This should be standard operating procedure No. 1 in any incident. They didn't have to be prepared for players running into the stands and attacking fans (I agree, they really couldn't have been prepared for that then). They just had to be prepared for something to happen and know that, if something/anything happened, they should secure the court. Even at Colts games in bland, boring, Indiana there are security guards on field-level approximately ten feet apart watching the stands. No, those security guards aren't likely to prevent professional athletes the size/strength of Artest or Jackson going into the stands; but they would absolutely prevent Turtle from running onto the court. Secure the court?? Make sure to protect the 40 guys on the court and let chaos reign among the 3,000 in the courtside section? You're speaking with hindsight that nobody else was going to follow Jackson into the stands to protect their teammate. That Ben Wallace wasn't going to get him some of Artest with some fan backup. I know it's crazy to believe enough security should have been present to both secure the court and chase after Artest/Jackson. Securing the court should/would prevent fans from running onto the court and at least act as a disincentive for more players to rush into the stands. The presence of law enforcement/security officials surrounding the court would, at minimum, act as deterrent (I mean, even cardboard cut-outs of police cruisers cause drivers to slow down). As far as hindsight goes, I have no idea why you believe security was prepared to stop other Pacers going into the stands or Wallace going into the stands. If anything, security proved that they were unable to prevent anything at all from happening. They were basically nonentities; that was the problem. They did nothing. The least they could have done was stop short fat dudes from trying to fight 6-foot-11 professional athletes.

I'd probably still vote for Mike Brey. After seeing Notre Dame in person in December, I never would have imagined they'd come this far.

Again: secure the court. This should be standard operating procedure No. 1 in any incident. They didn't have to be prepared for players running into the stands and attacking fans (I agree, they really couldn't have been prepared for that then). They just had to be prepared for something to happen and know that, if something/anything happened, they should secure the court. Even at Colts games in bland, boring, Indiana there are security guards on field-level approximately ten feet apart watching the stands. No, those security guards aren't likely to prevent professional athletes the size/strength of Artest or Jackson going into the stands; but they would absolutely prevent Turtle from running onto the court.

That's undeniably true. The incident doesn't occur if the Pacers didn't have insane players on their team. The Pacers deserved their punishment (honestly, I always thought Jackson should have been suspended for the year, too, but I have a very low opinion of him in general.) But the escalation should never occur -- security exists to prevent that. Similarly, law enforcement exists to prevent crimes; and, if the first crime can't be prevented, catch the criminal before the second crime can be committed. I always thought Jackson should have gotten at least the same punishment and maybe even more than Artest. Artest was at least provoked and didn't go in throwing punches (I'm not sure if Artest even threw one). Jackson charged into the stands and almost immediately threw a punch. I understand somewhat his defense of Artest, but it certainly seemed like he was looking for a fight. Of course, that's partly because he managed to get himself in the fight on the floor to begin with even though he wasn't involved in that either. Agreed. I still think Jackson's behavior was worse. Artest was provoked and did not wildly, violently attack anyone in the stands (to be clear, I'm not standing up for Artest here, just in comparison). Jackson went into the stands and started throwing punches for no other reason than he was out-of-control and was looking for a fight. Then, if memory serves, he went back on the court and popped his jersey like he had done something cool. The "protecting my teammate" argument is a deception -- if he wanted to protect his teammate, he would have grabbed Artest and tried to pull him back onto the court and out of the arena. That's not what Jackson was doing. Illiniguy is correct that personnel decisions by the Pacers led to the incident. I remember being at my parent's home for whatever reason when they traded for Jackson. I was disappointed and a bit shocked -- I remember telling my dad that Artest was difficult enough and I wasn't sure how the Pacers could handle having Jackson too (and this is before we knew Tinsley's true character, if memory serves). The Pacers already employed a fused stick of dynamite, their trade for a lighter was deplorable. But I still think the Pistons franchise failed their fans, their team, the Pacers, and the NBA that day.

If a zoo has a visiting tiger exhibit and the tigers break out and eat visitors, the tigers have to be put down (or at least removed). But the culpability doesn't end there. The people responsible for securing the tigers also have to answer for their negligence. (If you don't like the animals example, make it a prison break that leads to rape and murder -- the rapists and murderers are the main culprits, but the wardens and officials that allowed the escape to occur must also answer.) The Pacers' nut cases were the main culprits. But the reason stadiums and professional teams have security is to prevent these situations (or at least prevent the full-scale snow-balling escalation that occured). The Pistons failed here. They're culpable for that failure. I dont know if you can blame the Pistons for not anticipating that 2 players would jump into the stands and start punching everyone in their way. Causing a frenzy. It's not just not a very likely scenario to occur. They provide enough security as they are legally required to, and they can probably train their security for what to do if players go into the stands, but it just doesn't come up often. It's like spending money for a bear patrol where there is rarely ever bears that come into the neighborhood. You can have regular policemen handle any bear related situations that come up but do you need to raise taxes to have a specialized bear patrol? I think CCP and I have been clear that the Pistons couldn't have expected or prevented Artest or Jackson from entering the stands. However, I think they could have prevented that fan from being in the arena (or at least kept an eye on him). Most importantly, I am certain that they could have, and should have, been able to secure the court area, prevent fans from going onto the court, and escorted the remaining players into the lockerrooms. Security exists as much for the stuff that happens after an incident as it does to prevent the actual incident.

Those two players are not equivalent as shooters, let's be real. As a Bull, Kerr shot .491, .524 (!), .515 (!), .464, and .438 percent from 3-point range (on at least 124 attempts each season). I love Steve Kerr but I have to point out 2 things: 1) That first year as a Bull he shot .419, not .491 2) the 2nd-4th years as a Bull (.524, .515, .464) the 3 point line was moved in, and multiple players shot over 50% from 3. His career percentage during those 3 years was exactly .500%. Outside of those 3 years, his career percentage was .424 1) That was a typo; thanks for catching it. 2) Kerr did lead the NBA in 1994-95 with the .524 percent; but your point stands. I had forgotten that. Regardless, Kerr is one of the best pure shooters of all time. He holds the record for NCAA single season 3-point field goal percentage at .573 (his only year playing with the 3-point shot in college). Gibson shot .398 and .380 percent from 3-point range in college.

That's undeniably true. The incident doesn't occur if the Pacers didn't have insane players on their team. The Pacers deserved their punishment (honestly, I always thought Jackson should have been suspended for the year, too, but I have a very low opinion of him in general.) But the escalation should never occur -- security exists to prevent that. Similarly, law enforcement exists to prevent crimes; and, if the first crime can't be prevented, catch the criminal before the second crime can be committed.

A decent comparison would be the Chad Kreuter incident at Wrigley. I could not find a video of it, but my memory is that security responded rather promptly. Multiple fans were escorted out. The game was only delayed ten minutes. The Pacer-Piston melee lasted quite a long time and the game was called without finishing it. The melee deteriorated into what was basically mass hysteria. The entire purpose of security is to prevent that. (CCP responded before I did, so I'll incorporate his post, in case you think I was ducking the question.)

You honestly believe that couldn't have been handled better? Seriously? If so, there's really no point in debating this further.

If a zoo has a visiting tiger exhibit and the tigers break out and eat visitors, the tigers have to be put down (or at least removed). But the culpability doesn't end there. The people responsible for securing the tigers also have to answer for their negligence. (If you don't like the animals example, make it a prison break that leads to rape and murder -- the rapists and murderers are the main culprits, but the wardens and officials that allowed the escape to occur must also answer.) The Pacers' nut cases were the main culprits. But the reason stadiums and professional teams have security is to prevent these situations (or at least prevent the full-scale snow-balling escalation that occured). The Pistons failed here. They're culpable for that failure.

the fact that they were the ones that inititated the brawl with the fans? you can blame whoever you want for what led up to it, but the bottom line is that artest was the one who went into the stands and started it and if artest and jackson don't go into the stands to begin with, it never happens at all. the pacers had some scumbags on their team that lost it and went berserk. thats the pacers fault. I agree with both of those points, and Artest and Jackson should have both had lengthy suspensions for that. But they weren't the only ones at fault, nor did they do anything that hadn't been done before. But it was treated that way. I have/had no problem with the Pacers suspensions; their actions were indefensible. And, at least for Artest and Jackson (if not O'Neal), their personalities/character indicated that such an incident was not necessarily a one-time deal. It was Maxwell's suspension that should be viewed as an anamoly and too light; not vice versa. If you enter the stands and fight fans, the punishment should be severe. However, what was not fair, is how light the Pistons were treated. Not necessarily the players, but the franchise. They should have been forced to play some games without fans a la soccer matches, or something. The reason security exists is to prevent idiots like Artest and Jackson from going into the stands and idiots like Turtle-as-Piston-fan coming onto the court. They completely failed and that failure led to one of the darkest moments in NBA history.

Those two players are not equivalent as shooters, let's be real. As a Bull, Kerr shot .419, .524 (!), .515 (!), .464, and .438 percent from 3-point range (on at least 124 attempts each season). Gibson has shot .419, .440, .382, .477, .403, and .404 percent so far in his career. Also, your rounding makes both look better -- Kerr is a career .454 3-point shooter (despite two sub-.400 years at the end of his career when he was 36 and 37 years old) and Gibson is at .417. Further, Kerr was at/near his 3-point peak when Jordan passed to him; Gibson was (what?) in his second year. Not that I really care that James passed, basketball is a team sport.

Facebook video of that: http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=3303853591148 (for the record, not my page as I'm not even on facebook). Those were the top two ranked teams in Indiana's biggest class (4A). That wasn't the only great game either. Lawrence Central led by Jeremy Hollowell (Class of 2012, IU signee) scored a game-winner as time expired to beat Indianapolis Tech, led by Trey Lyles (Class of 2014, IU verbal, best player in the state), by two points. Video:

This would be the 7th straight game that Indiana has outshot their opponents from the FT line, and 3 of those were road games. Basically ever since Jones went out with his injury and Oladipo was given the ball in his hands much more the free throws have been consistently high. What kind of a jump shooter is Oladipo? From what I've seen it's no surprise the FT's have been high given he takes the ball to the hoop so often. He's not a good jump shooter. However, he has good form and release. It is certainly within the realm of possibilities that he becomes a solid to good jump shooter in the future. I have a suspicion he knocks them down in practice already.

Understudy to CCP for the Colts? We'll have a very difficult job with the first pick . . .

I wouldn't put money on them beating Michigan St. Even in Bloomington. Wuss. That's pretty much what a good portion of IU's players are compared to Michigan State (this isn't an overreaction to the Iowa loss; those things happen and Iowa played great). It's going to be very difficult to beat Michigan State; I'd say IU has a better chance to win at Minnesota (Pomeroy agrees -- 60% to 41%).

Barlow started it and Byrd was backing up a teammate. Byrd might be a 'bro', but Barlow is the problem. I think it's all but official now that Barlow is kicked off the team. Multiple people saying it, just nothing official from Painter. Byrd has no history of behavior problems. If Barlow is gone, at least one can give Painter credit for having the integrity to kick Barlow off the team for causing problems. A lot of schools would've looked the other way. Especially because Barlow wasn't even arrested. Eh... if it is indeed true and Barlow is dismissed, I don't think Painter should be getting brownie points for it. You think he should get another chance? He knew where he stood with the program and went out and got trashed on his birthday. I know he's a 21 year old kid but it's a pattern of behavior. Byrd on the other hand had a clean record. You can't be too rough on a kid when his first offense is a PI. It's not a DUI or battery or drugs, etc. I'm not going to get into what else may or may not have happened since we don't know; but, I agree, public intoxication isn't really that big of a deal. A one-game suspension surely matches the crime.

This isn't meant as an insult, I believe Illinois will hire a very good, well sought after coach. But Brad Stevens is exceedingly unlikely to happen.

They have a win against the coolest team in the nation.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you're saying (perhaps making this a pointless argument!). I would just be concerned that moving on from Carmody is a grass-is-greener proposition than may not pay dividends. I say that as someone that is rooting for you guys (even though you have been kicking IU's butt the past three seasons -- though that hasn't exactly been an exclusive club). Maybe I'm just being contrary because I'm rather concerned about tonight's game.

It's difficult to make a straight comparison. Pat Fitzgerald inherited a program that went 4-4, 5-3, and 5-3 in the Big Ten the three previous seasons. Bill Carmody inherited a program that went 3-13, 6-10, 0-16 in the Big Ten the three previous seasons. During the Fitzgerald era, their conference records look like this (this isn't exactly fair, either, considering Carmody had six years to build to this point): Fitzgerald 2-6 3-5 5-3 5-3 3-5 3-5 Carmody 2-14 1-17 8-10 7-11 7-11 5-6 Carmody's record is certainly worse, but the last four years have been pretty close. And it's going to be hard to hire someone equivalent to Fitzgerald for basketball, in my opinion.

It has always confounded me how an excellent academic institution with high standards was incapable of fielding a competitive five/thirteen man basketball team . . . yet could field a competitive twenty-two/eighty-five man football team. In a vacuum, I believe you're correct, there is no reason Northwestern couldn't be equally good in basketball. Big Ten basketball is currently a good deal more difficult than Big Ten football, for what that's worth, though; and Carmody's performance isn't that much worse than Pat Fitzgerald's performance in football (it is certainly worse, of course). Yeah, Penn State is just not really in the discussion. They pop up and have decent seasons every once in awhile; but no one really seems to care either way. Nor do they have any built-in excuses like Northwestern -- other than lack of support, which is self-inflicted.