bsmitty08 said:

Not sure a contender….4/19 from 3 and no bench scoring. Cupps, Hatton, Goode gave nothing

Click to expand...

And Tennessee shot very poorly from deep too. It kills me how fans see one game, an exhibition game no less, and they project out the entire year one facet of play from that one performance. Tennessee and IU will both have much better shooting performances going forward. Guaranteed. Or does that not fit into your agenda?

Tammany Hall said:

Interesting game. Offense was a bit better, but I get the concerns, I have them. Defense was pretty good. Despite some of our struggles, we beat a good team on the road, and we have obvious upside with two key players getting back in the line-up, and Carlyle can do a lot more once he gets comfortable.

Overall... pretty encouraging for an early scrimmage. Rice was better than I expected and I had some high expectations. Wow.

Click to expand...

Agree on all. One minor quibble with Rice were the few times I thought he over dribbled. But overall he was great.

Reneau going to be solid this year. I wish he'd move the ball a little quicker at times. Sometimes it sticks too long.

Bowlmania said:

Forget the AP poll. Two-thirds of the way through the season, here's where IU ranks nationally in some key categories:

• Scoring Offense: #2
• Total Offense: #6
• 3rd down conversion pct: #3
• Red zone offense: #14
• Rushing Defense: #4
• Total Defense: #5
• Scoring Defense: #7

This is an exceptionally good team, on both sides of the ball.

MSU is a huge game! We need to beat them and then we can look forward to the first CFP rankings on November 5.

Go Hoosiers!

Click to expand...

College football is so easy. Why didn’t we do this in earlier seasons?

CO. Hoosier said:

You are speculating along Liberal talking points— demographics and skin color. That so late 20th Century. I’ve read and listened to a fair amount of commentary about Trump inroads with minorities, not one mention of skin color or demographics.

Click to expand...

Listen to yourself. Liberal talking points? Trump's potential success with black males and Hispanics, that's not liberal talk. It's what you guys have been bragging about.

I have no idea what Fetterman was like as a politician prior to his stroke. He certainly won the devotion of Pennsylvania Democrats -- because they were super-pumped about his election. He is, obviously, a very unconventional politician. He looks more like a WWE heel than a US Senator.

And I have to say that he has probably been the single most vocal elected politician in federal office about Israel. There is absolutely no equivocation in anything he says about what's going on there. He doesn't feel even the slightest bit of pressure to cater to those standing with Hamas in opposing Israel.

But I wonder if one of the effects of his stroke was to lose his filters. He kind of reminds me of Jim Carrey's character in "Liar, Liar."

A lot of people in this thread who have never met an actual Puerto Rican.

The only PR upset by that joke is AOC

stollcpa said:

This is so damn stupid. Just fcking vote for Harris. Quit the damn games and fcking vote for Harris.

Click to expand...

The issue about crossover votes is noise. It gets magnified in the media -- because, naturally, they're hoping to find as many votes as they can that go in Harris' column, come off of Trump's column, or (ideally) both.

But we have actual data from two prior national elections where Trump was a candidate. In those elections, there was the same noise about prominent Republicans voting for the Democrat. So what did the data show? Did this convince lots of self-identified Republicans to vote Democrat?

No. In 2020, Biden got 6% of the Republican vote. That was merely 1% higher than the 5% of the Democratic vote that Trump got.

Learn to spot the noise and tune it out.

Aloha Hoosier said:

MAGA has some policies, some OK and some not OK (isolationism, anti-NATO, etc.), but it's also a culture. The culture is toxic and unsustainable.

Click to expand...

I'll give you one thought on a way that OG Republicans could've started to address this, but didn't:

The Lankford bill in the Senate.

Now, a lot of people were angry at Lankford for simply sitting down with Democrats to hammer out a bipartisan bill. I didn't have any issue with it at all. At the end of the day, border policy is probably going to need to get bipartisan support if they're ever going to get their arms around it.

But here's the thing: the Democrats are on their heels on this issue right now. And they know it. Anybody who follows the issue knows it. When that's the broader political context of something and they're looking for a way out of it, you don't need to make many compromises to get them on board. Maybe a few little things, just so they can sell it to their base. But, on the big things, you've got them.

So why did Lankford agree to the thresholds? Either he's weak and stupid...or else he generally agrees with them. Either way, it was a big missed opportunity to start getting the Republican establishment back in the good graces of its voters.

I'll give you a hypothetical analogy. Let's say Republican lawmakers wanted to craft a bipartisan abortion bill with Democrats. We all know that, in most places, abortion is a strength of Democrats and a vulnerability for Republicans. Do you think Democrats would be open to making some big concession to Republicans on the issue, in order to help them politically with an issue that is giving them problems in elections?

I don't. If I was the Democrats, I'd say....here's the bill, if you want to sign on, this is what you sign on to. We can give you a couple little things to help you save face, but you're not getting anything big.

If Sen. Lankford had taken a similar approach with border security, it would've done wonders for the Republican establishment and their MAGA problem. Maybe the Democrats would've refused to take part. But, if so, that's on them -- because they'd be choosing to stay mired in a terrible place with the electorate on a top issue facing the country.

abraxis said:

Rationalize the pain of defeat any way you wish, but if it had been IU losing to Creighton, the loss would piss us off.

Click to expand...

I'm sure they'll be fine. Smith went off. Loyer and TKR were solid. That is an early answer to some of their question marks.

Its just a strange thing to mail it in, however they want to explain it... in such a unique and potentially beneficial environment.

crazed_hoosier2 said:

This would've been a better had you said...

"Oh, and Dude, Oompa-Loompa is not the preferred nomenclature. Orange-American, please."

Click to expand...

100% accurate in your assessment.

BoilerN said:

Maybe he didn’t pass on it, but instead threw some unknowns at it to see if he has different options when that situation arrives. Because you know what you will get from TKR late. See what you get with Jacobson late. Why not?

I think the first half the season is going to be trial and error tbh. If Purdue loses the big ten, it’s probably going to be due to some early losses, though the last 6 are a gauntlet, so could be wrong. But come tournament time, I suspect this team will be clicking. Harris and Cox will also be better than vs now. Loved their defense. Will be a welcomed addition.

Click to expand...

They actually don't know what they'll get from any of them, without Edey...espectially TKR I would think. Obviously he knows the juniors very well, knows their game very well, but none of them have had to execute in close games against good teams, without Edey.

Its early...plenty of opportunities to learn and grow ahead...just seems strange to have such a relaxed approach with something that could have been their best "road" experience before B10 play. I suspect if they had pulled it out and won, the narrative would have been a lot different. 70 points from our returning core, key contributions from the frosh big, defensive contributions from other newcomers that led to the win, on the road, over a top 25 level team... Instead they lost...so the narrative is "we didn't approach it like a real game"... Kind of like, we backed off on Sisley, and Mullins, and Haralson, and, and, and, and...

TheOriginalHappyGoat said:

Nonsense. Trump has been eating into key non-white demos this cycle, and if he wins, that will be a big part of it. It's not about affirmation. It's about not turning off potential new supporters. That's why it's a huge unforced error.

Click to expand...

Anyone have a read on the "secret" DJT was alluding to during his speech? i.e. He seemed to imply that he's got a plan for if/when he loses the election because Pubs control the house. Messing with/invalidating electors??

CO. Hoosier said:

You are reading too much into it. Nobody gives a crap about that comedian who most people never heard of.

The story of MSG is not his jokes, except if you are a Kamala voter because otherwise you got nuthin’.

Click to expand...

There are Puerto Ricans all over Twitter talking about how they and their families were planning to vote for Trump but not now. Not sure if any of that is true however I do know there is 500,000 Puerto Ricans in Pennsylvania. Really dumb move by Trump's team.

If it was a noon kickoff I would've made the drive. Of course we can't get a home kickoff at 3:30, but away to Sparty gets it. I really hope the UM game is 3:30 or even 7PM.

CO. Hoosier said:

How many ways can the media show the country they are full of shit? The “coverage” provides affirmation to never Trumpers—that’s it.

Click to expand...

Nonsense. Trump has been eating into key non-white demos this cycle, and if he wins, that will be a big part of it. It's not about affirmation. It's about not turning off potential new supporters. That's why it's a huge unforced error.

CO. Hoosier said:

Nor should it. MAGA is policy, not personality. It’s personality for never Trumpers because they have no convincing policy argument.

Click to expand...

MAGA has some policies, some OK and some not OK (isolationism, anti-NATO, etc.), but it's also a culture. The culture is toxic and unsustainable.

mcmurtry66 said:

What they sell people aren’t buying

Click to expand...

It's because what they sell, they weren't delivering.

That's the problem. That's why MAGA exists. People were buying it -- they just weren't getting what they bought. And I think that Trump noticed this and capitalized on it. There was a huge disconnect between Republican voters and Republican politicians.

Again, this is not just my opinion. Some of the most notable Never Trumpers (like Stuart Stevens) have bluntly said that they would make empty promises to voters just to win elections. Here's Mac Stipanovich (former Florida GOP operative, and stalwart Never Trumper) saying it:



Until and unless OG Republicans come to grips with this and clean up the mess they created, MAGA will continue dominating the Republican Party. But, to date, they have steadfastly refused to do that. Maybe they will once Trump himself is in the rearview mirror.

BoilerN said:

Purdue ran their stuff and worked on different stuff. Lineups, etc. lineups they ran vs Creighton that we probably won’t see vs the season. They can run through game prep vs ivy tech in a couple weeks. Purdue has to figure their stuff out before Creighton. What did Purdue play? 12 players? And had TKR on the bench with 4 minutes to go in a close game. That won’t happen in the season. All about trying stuff and continuing to learn your players.

Click to expand...

Rationalize the pain of defeat any way you wish, but if it had been IU losing to Creighton, the loss would piss us off.

Interesting game. Offense was a bit better, but I get the concerns, I have them. Defense was pretty good. Despite some of our struggles, we beat a good team on the road, and we have obvious upside with two key players getting back in the line-up, and Carlyle can do a lot more once he gets comfortable.

Overall... pretty encouraging for an early scrimmage. Rice was better than I expected and I had some high expectations. Wow.

CO. Hoosier said:

You are reading too much into it. Nobody gives a crap about that comedian who most people never heard of.

The story of MSG is not his jokes, except if you are a Kamala voter because otherwise you got nuthin’.

Click to expand...

Well, the bulk of the coverage -- aside from the bizarre and desperate claim that it was a "Nazi rally" -- seems focused on this. Granted, if it hadn't have been what this comedian said, they'd have found something else to drive home the same point. The mainstream media is, pretty much exclusively, bitterly opposed to Donald Trump and they're going to push whatever they can to impede his candidacy. That's a given.

But, still, it was a helluva gift to Trump's adversaries. And I say that as somebody who wasn't, personally, all that put off by it. By comedic standards, it was quite mild. By political rally standards -- especially one that is being painted as a Nazi rally by its opponents -- is was a big unforced error, playing right into their hands.

sparkeyreturns said:

Who were the biggest cancers?

Click to expand...

I mean I think you can take a pretty good guess. There were a bunch. No doubt they would have loved to keep Bedford and Louis Moore. Minor and Blidi would have been welcome keeps until they played games-then it was good riddance. Anyone want to trade Zack West for Blidi? Or even Carpenter? How about Ponds for Minor?

Marvin the Martian said:

They don't? If you were dependent on Medicare for your healthcare, massive cuts might make a huge difference to you? If you depended on TANF?

Click to expand...

I would argue that this is not a strength of those programs. It's a weakness. People are directed to arrange their lives and/or future lives around the promised benefit structure -- of programs that are fiscally unsustainable. That's not really the case with TANF. But it very clearly is the case with Medicare -- and Social Security.

And a big part of their selling point is that they're guaranteed. People can count on them being there. And, yet, here we are about 10 or so years away from the exhaustion of the Social Security Trust Fund and lawmakers haven't done a single thing to ensure the funding of benefits after that happens.

To the best of their ability, nobody should plan their lives/futures around any public entitlement programs. The people who run them are wholly irresponsible. If these were private programs, the fiduciaries would likely be in prison.

Courtsensetwo said:

Fans don't suck as bad as you thought. As i said, Ws fill stands. Everywhere.

Click to expand...

Fair, but it's easy to get on the bandwagon when you're 8-0 and experiencing unprecedented success. I've got news for everyone, we're not going to go 8-0 (and beyond) every year, so the test will be whether the newbies are still as supportive for teams that might go 8-4.

I hope we have Rourke back for this Saturday's game. At this point, we need to obviously win but in style, too!!