OV-er RA-ted?

[SouthBendJim]

Down go the Buckeyes!

Down go the Spartans!

Down go the Badgers!

Pretty poor conference performance. Now hanging our hats on Michigan and Purdoo.

Maybe the B1G should study/examine why our teams don't do better in the NCAA tournament. Officiating? Scheduling? Better recruiting? Bend the rules like Cal and Self?

Getting to be an annual frustration. B1G hasn't shown any prowess in years, let alone win a championship.

 

[ulrey]

every damn year

 

[twenty02]

Get rid of the sumo-wrestling. The guard talent sucks in this conference.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Down go the Buckeyes!

Down go the Spartans!

Down go the Badgers!

Pretty poor conference performance. Now hanging our hats on Michigan and Purdoo.

Maybe the B1G should study/examine why our teams don't do better in the NCAA tournament. Officiating? Scheduling? Better recruiting? Bend the rules like Cal and Self?

Getting to be an annual frustration. B1G hasn't shown any prowess in years, let alone win a championship.

I thought MSU played a great game......Duke looked like the best team so far in the tourney. Their talent was such that MSU lost the game when their guards decided to play hero ball and drove all the way to the basket without a clear shot. Duke blocked both shots. Duke hits like 5 shots in a row. Ballgame.

 

[SIhoosier26]

It's almost as if allowing moving screens and guards to get tackled heading to the rim is going to hurt the kind of talent a conference can accumulate. Also, allowing the road teams to get hosed by the refs during the regular season creates a situation where you're conference champion has to play a team like Houston in the second round.

This conference has a long way to go but all you have to do is watch the other conference tournaments and compare them to the Big10. The BIG10 teams play games in the 60s, not because the teams are incredible defensively, but because they're allowed to play tackle football on the defensive end.

This may make the 60 and 70 year olds that watch the BIG10 blush, but I'm telling you right now, top guards and wings out of high school don't want to play in a conference where they're liable to get elbowed or hit in the face going to the rim with no call.

The BIG10 needs to get with the times or it's going to be disappointment after disappointment in March. There's a reason that no BIG team has seen a title since Michigan State back in the late 90s.

 

[YOTHN]

Defense. People talked up the great offenses in the B1G but athletic defenses are consistently winning.

 

[TR32]

This may make the 60 and 70 year olds that watch the BIG10 blush, but I'm telling you right now, top guards and wings out of high school don't want to play in a conference where they're liable to get elbowed or hit in the face going to the rim with no call.

Is that why 5 of the top 10 players in college basketball are in the Big Ten? And is this also why Hood-Schfino signed with IU?

Nothing has changed. UNC....Duke....Kansas....Kentucky....UCLA.....they get a lot of top talent, always have. But I'll take the Johnny Davis, Keegan Murray, Jaden Ivey unheralded stars anytime.

 

[SouthBendJim]

Nothing has changed. UNC....Duke....Kansas....Kentucky....UCLA.....they get a lot of top talent, always have. But I'll take the Johnny Davis, Keegan Murray, Jaden Ivey unheralded stars anytime.

Why? Davis and Murray are gonna be watching the rest of the tournament in their dorms.

UNC, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky don't get just ONE top 10 guy, they get two or three year after year. That's why they're consistently at the top.

 

[TR32]

Why? Davis and Murray are gonna be watching the rest of the tournament in their dorms.

UNC, Duke, Kansas and Kentucky don't get just ONE top 10 guy, they get two or three year after year. That's why they're consistently at the top.

Kentucky has won zero NCAA tourney games since 2019. In that time they recruited an astounding 12 top 50 players.

Duke's days are numbered, that is for sure.

The irony of this thread is that Michigan probably has the most talent and they barely made the dance, yet are smoothly into the S16.

 

[TR32]

Get rid of the sumo-wrestling. The guard talent sucks in this conference.

I'm thinking you won't say that when Hood-Schifino arrives.

 

[HillzHoozier]

It's almost as if allowing moving screens and guards to get tackled heading to the rim is going to hurt the kind of talent a conference can accumulate. Also, allowing the road teams to get hosed by the refs during the regular season creates a situation where you're conference champion has to play a team like Houston in the second round.

This conference has a long way to go but all you have to do is watch the other conference tournaments and compare them to the Big10. The BIG10 teams play games in the 60s, not because the teams are incredible defensively, but because they're allowed to play tackle football on the defensive end.

This may make the 60 and 70 year olds that watch the BIG10 blush, but I'm telling you right now, top guards and wings out of high school don't want to play in a conference where they're liable to get elbowed or hit in the face going to the rim with no call.

The BIG10 needs to get with the times or it's going to be disappointment after disappointment in March. There's a reason that no BIG team has seen a title since Michigan State back in the late 90s.

I see B1G teams being manhandled and out-hustled in all their tourney losses.

 

[JIMSHAM]

Is that why 5 of the top 10 players in college basketball are in the Big Ten? And is this also why Hood-Schfino signed with IU?

Nothing has changed. UNC....Duke....Kansas....Kentucky....UCLA.....they get a lot of top talent, always have. But I'll take the Johnny Davis, Keegan Murray, Jaden Ivey unheralded stars anytime.

And you go 20 years without a championship

 

[SIhoosier26]

Is that why 5 of the top 10 players in college basketball are in the Big Ten? And is this also why Hood-Schfino signed with IU?

Nothing has changed. UNC....Duke....Kansas....Kentucky....UCLA.....they get a lot of top talent, always have. But I'll take the Johnny Davis, Keegan Murray, Jaden Ivey unheralded stars anytime.

5 of the top 10 players according to what? Also two of the three players you named are already out of the tournament one game in.

There's a reason no team from the conference has won a title in in like a quarter century. Pull your head out of the sand.

 

[SIhoosier26]

I see B1G teams being manhandled and out-hustled in all their tourney losses.

Really? Because I'm watching BIG10 teams get beat by better teams. There's a reason most of them were underdogs going into their round of 32 games. IU was an underdog in the round of 64 against St Mary's for crying out loud.

You can believe what you want but the results speak for themselves.

 

[SIhoosier26]

Lol Purdue getting every break in this game, 44 to 12 In free throws and it was clearly out on Purdue there.

 

[Rick Pigeons]

So your view on The SEC you blockhead?

 

[Columbus-Boiler]

The B1G is most definitely overrated. The proof is in March every year, and in league National Titles in recent times. Last one was in 2000, that's pretty awful.

 

[TR32]

And you go 20 years without a championship

Big 12 won last year....4th championship.....ever.
I'll take my chances with the Big Ten.

By the way, shake me from my nap when Jon Scheyer cuts those nets down.

 

[nafui1965]

Rutgers lost in a play in game. Iowa was upset in the first round as the better seed. Indiana lost to a better seed In the first round. Illinois won, Michigan won, ohio state won, Michigan state won, Purdue won, Wisconsin won.
second round Michigan State and Ohio State were supposed to lose, Purdue Wisconsin and Illinois were all supposed to win Michigan is supposed to be out. Contrast this with the SEC, where Alabama, LSU, Auburn, Uk and Tennessee, all lose to higher seeds. With two #2 and a 3# out already. Only Arkansas remains, yet the story is always the big ten.
The

 

[TR32]

The B1G is most definitely overrated. The proof is in March every year, and in league National Titles in recent times. Last one was in 2000, that's pretty awful.

How about the Pac12?

 

[Sir_Saucy]

It's almost as if allowing moving screens and guards to get tackled heading to the rim is going to hurt the kind of talent a conference can accumulate. Also, allowing the road teams to get hosed by the refs during the regular season creates a situation where you're conference champion has to play a team like Houston in the second round.

This conference has a long way to go but all you have to do is watch the other conference tournaments and compare them to the Big10. The BIG10 teams play games in the 60s, not because the teams are incredible defensively, but because they're allowed to play tackle football on the defensive end.

This may make the 60 and 70 year olds that watch the BIG10 blush, but I'm telling you right now, top guards and wings out of high school don't want to play in a conference where they're liable to get elbowed or hit in the face going to the rim with no call.

The BIG10 needs to get with the times or it's going to be disappointment after disappointment in March. There's a reason that no BIG team has seen a title since Michigan State back in the late 90s.

They don't, read some comments from top recruits. They don't want to come to the B1G and get the crap bear out of them for no reason. Just play anywhere else and play actual basketball

 

[SIhoosier26]

They don't, read some comments from top recruits. They don't want to come to the B1G and get the crap bear out of them for no reason. Just play anywhere else and play actual basketball

What's crazy is that a lot of recruits have come out and said it, yet people here and elsewhere still try to deny it despite tournament disappointments every year.

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

IU was about the only team in the tourney who had guards that couldn’t shoot from outside. Nearly every team advancing has good guard play from at least one main guard on the floor.

 

[go_iu]

I'm thinking you won't say that when Hood-Schifino arrives.

I don't either, he's going to be a bulldog immediately, sort of like that Carr guy from Texas, very strong combo guard from the get go. Closest thing we've seen to Eric Gordon or Michael Herman strength in since them

 

[Paterfamilias]

Really? Because I'm watching BIG10 teams get beat by better teams. There's a reason most of them were underdogs going into their round of 32 games. IU was an underdog in the round of 64 against St Mary's for crying out loud.

You can believe what you want but the results speak for themselves.

Based on the average amount of tournament wins by each seed, The Big 10 was expected to win 9.89 games (10.89 if you count a 50% chance of winning 2 Dayton games, where we broke even) and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams.

The Big 10 still has Purdue and Michigan going and has 8 tournament wins (9 if you count Dayton). If both Purdue and Michigan lose their Sweet 16 games, then the conference will come up short of expectations relative to seeding. With 1 or 2 more wins, it's a break even post season for the conference. With 3 wins or more, the conference is an over-achiever.

Lets look at the other conferences

SEC- 10.22 wins and 2.85 Sweet 16 teams (SEC has 4 wins with 1 Sweet 16 team)
ACC- 4.97 wins and 1.23 Sweet 16 teams (ACC has 7 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
PAC- 5.77 wins and 1.51 Sweet 16 teams (PAC has 4 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)
B12- 10.85 wins and 2.75 Sweet 16 teams (B12 has 9 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
BE- 7.01 wins and 1.68 Sweet 16 teams (BE has 5 wins with 2 sweet 16 teams)
B10- 9.89 wins and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams (B10 has 8 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)

With the exception of the ACC and the SEC (the 2 extremes) the rest of the power conferences are right about where they should be, with each needing a couple of more wins and teams still playing.

 

[SIhoosier26]

Based on the average amount of tournament wins by each seed, The Big 10 was expected to win 9.89 games (10.89 if you count a 50% chance of winning 2 Dayton games, where we broke even) and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams.

The Big 10 still has Purdue and Michigan going and has 8 tournament wins (9 if you count Dayton). If both Purdue and Michigan lose their Sweet 16 games, then the conference will come up short of expectations relative to seeding. With 1 or 2 more wins, it's a break even post season for the conference. With 3 wins or more, the conference is an over-achiever.

Lets look at the other conferences

SEC- 10.22 wins and 2.85 Sweet 16 teams (SEC has 4 wins with 1 Sweet 16 team)
ACC- 4.97 wins and 1.23 Sweet 16 teams (ACC has 7 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
PAC- 5.77 wins and 1.51 Sweet 16 teams (PAC has 4 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)
B12- 10.85 wins and 2.75 Sweet 16 teams (B12 has 9 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
BE- 7.01 wins and 1.68 Sweet 16 teams (BE has 5 wins with 2 sweet 16 teams)
B10- 9.89 wins and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams (B10 has 8 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)

With the exception of the ACC and the SEC (the 2 extremes) the rest of the power conferences are right about where they should be, with each needing a couple of more wins and teams still playing.

The amount of hoops some people will jump through to try and convince themselves the BIG10 is actually good blow my mind.

Michigan likely loses in the next round as they were benefited with a draw they didn't actually deserve.

Purdue is probably the best team in the conference but does anyone actually think they'll win it all? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no and that will be like 24 years without a national title for the conference.

That doesn't happen by accident.

 

[Crayfish57]

The amount of hoops some people will jump through to try and convince themselves the BIG10 is actually good blow my mind.

Michigan likely loses in the next round as they were benefited with a draw they didn't actually deserve.

Purdue is probably the best team in the conference but does anyone actually think they'll win it all? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no and that will be like 24 years without a national title for the conference.

That doesn't happen by accident.

RMK made the conference , Not that he was the force at OSU in the early 60's , he was there .The attention he drew in the 70s and 80s and early 90's the Big10 owes him a lot

 

[CriticArisen]

Big 12 won last year....4th championship.....ever.
I'll take my chances with the Big Ten.

By the way, shake me from my nap when Jon Scheyer cuts those nets down.

Nap? More like long term hibernation. Poor guy better prepare for a real shit storm.

 

[Paterfamilias]

The amount of hoops some people will jump through to try and convince themselves the BIG10 is actually good blow my mind.

Michigan likely loses in the next round as they were benefited with a draw they didn't actually deserve.

Purdue is probably the best team in the conference but does anyone actually think they'll win it all? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no and that will be like 24 years without a national title for the conference.

That doesn't happen by accident.

It's super fun to be living in an era during which data is almost always trumped by narrative and "beliefs". So, the Big 10 sucks because it is 1-7 in the National Title game since the dawn of the new millennium, and as you say that doesn't happen by accident.

I think that in my lifetime only IU, MSU and Michigan have cracked the code to winning the NCAA Tournament, and they've each only done it once since the field expanded to 64 back in 1985. So, that's just 3 Titles in 37 tournament. By your reckoning the Big 10 has always sucked, so why make such a big deal about it now?

The crazy thing is that if the Big 10 had snuck a couple more teams in the Sweet 16 this weekend, many would be saying "Wow, look at how good the Big Ten is".

The Big 10 wasn't great this year, but you didn't have to wait until today to know that. The conference didn't receive a #1 or #2 seed. The buzzsaw Hawkeyes, the hottest team in the land, only got a #5 seed after winning 12 of their last 14 and a BTT Championship.

It seems to me that the conference has done just fine in the 2022 tourney. Nothing great accomplished yet, but pretty much just as might be expected based on seeding. There are still games to be played, and thus far only the ACC has had a decidedly better performance. By late Friday night we'll know more.

Also, at the beginning of the season, only Purdue and Michigan were ranked in the Top 10 and here they are playing for the right to go to the Elite Eight. Illinois was ranked #11 and got bumped off by #15 Houston. OSU was #18 and lost to #4 Villanova. Iowa, MSU, Wisconsin, Rutgers and IU were all perceived to be outside the Top 25 before we ever tipped off the season. All in all the Big 10 just went according to Hoyle so far. Hard to spin it as an agitating underachievement for the conference imo.

 

[.Gerdis]

It's super fun to be living in an era during which data is almost always trumped by narrative and "beliefs". So, the Big 10 sucks because it is 1-7 in the National Title game since the dawn of the new millennium, and as you say that doesn't happen by accident.

I think that in my lifetime only IU, MSU and Michigan have cracked the code to winning the NCAA Tournament, and they've each only done it once since the field expanded to 64 back in 1985. So, that's just 3 Titles in 37 tournament. By your reckoning the Big 10 has always sucked, so why make such a big deal about it now?

The crazy thing is that if the Big 10 had snuck a couple more teams in the Sweet 16 this weekend, many would be saying "Wow, look at how good the Big Ten is".

The Big 10 wasn't great this year, but you didn't have to wait until today to know that. The conference didn't receive a #1 or #2 seed. The buzzsaw Hawkeyes, the hottest team in the land, only got a #5 seed after winning 12 of their last 14 and a BTT Championship.

It seems to me that the conference has done just fine in the 2022 tourney. Nothing great accomplished yet, but pretty much just as might be expected based on seeding. There are still games to be played, and thus far only the ACC has had a decidedly better performance. By late Friday night we'll know more.

Also, at the beginning of the season, only Purdue and Michigan were ranked in the Top 10 and here they are playing for the right to go to the Elite Eight. Illinois was ranked #11 and got bumped off by #15 Houston. OSU was #18 and lost to #4 Villanova. Iowa, MSU, Wisconsin, Rutgers and IU were all perceived to be outside the Top 25 before we ever tipped off the season. All in all the Big 10 just went according to Hoyle so far. Hard to spin it as an agitating underachievement for the conference imo.

The league has been light at the top of the polls (and rating services all year). PU was by far the most consistent. Even when struggling the computers seemed to love MI. I believe Iowa started 0-4 in conference play. I never was a huge believer in them, and generally like to fade teams that “get hot” in conference tourneys over teams that are consistent all year long.

as fans we fight recency bias, see Iowa and the folks jumping on them as hot picks in the tourney.

Has the tourney been poor for the B10? People are entitled to their opinion. The B10 got 9 bids, which is 25% of the at large bids. Is it reasonable to expect 4 make it to the sweet 16. Well, certainly that would be a lazy prediction, ignoring seeding and such. Either way, it’s a year of parity. Nationally and in our conference.

if I were from some other part of the country, rather than be surrounded by B10 grads, I’d probably think that fewer conference bids for our league would be more compelling TV, and make for a better tournament.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

Based on the average amount of tournament wins by each seed, The Big 10 was expected to win 9.89 games (10.89 if you count a 50% chance of winning 2 Dayton games, where we broke even) and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams.

The Big 10 still has Purdue and Michigan going and has 8 tournament wins (9 if you count Dayton). If both Purdue and Michigan lose their Sweet 16 games, then the conference will come up short of expectations relative to seeding. With 1 or 2 more wins, it's a break even post season for the conference. With 3 wins or more, the conference is an over-achiever.

Lets look at the other conferences

SEC- 10.22 wins and 2.85 Sweet 16 teams (SEC has 4 wins with 1 Sweet 16 team)
ACC- 4.97 wins and 1.23 Sweet 16 teams (ACC has 7 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
PAC- 5.77 wins and 1.51 Sweet 16 teams (PAC has 4 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)
B12- 10.85 wins and 2.75 Sweet 16 teams (B12 has 9 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
BE- 7.01 wins and 1.68 Sweet 16 teams (BE has 5 wins with 2 sweet 16 teams)
B10- 9.89 wins and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams (B10 has 8 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)

With the exception of the ACC and the SEC (the 2 extremes) the rest of the power conferences are right about where they should be, with each needing a couple of more wins and teams still playing.

Statistically, this is correct, but the missing piece here is the number of BIG teams that lost round one. That is the concern for me.

 

[Paterfamilias]

The league has been light at the top of the polls (and rating services all year). PU was by far the most consistent. Even when struggling the computers seemed to love MI. I believe Iowa started 0-4 in conference play. I never was a huge believer in them, and generally like to fade teams that “get hot” in conference tourneys over teams that are consistent all year long.

as fans we fight recency bias, see Iowa and the folks jumping on them as hot picks in the tourney.

Has the tourney been poor for the B10? People are entitled to their opinion. The B10 got 9 bids, which is 25% of the at large bids. Is it reasonable to expect 4 make it to the sweet 16. Well, certainly that would be a lazy prediction, ignoring seeding and such. Either way, it’s a year of parity. Nationally and in our conference.

if I were from some other part of the country, rather than be surrounded by B10 grads, I’d probably think that fewer conference bids for our league would be more compelling TV, and make for a better tournament.

If my table shows up below, I think it shows that the angst about the future of the conference is basically bleed over from last years terrible tournament performance. Last year sticks out like a sore thumb as the Big 10's worst tournament showing and to follow it up with just an average showing sucks. It would have been nice for the conference to go out and make amends for last season.

Act. Sw16's	Year	Exp. Sw16's
2	2011	2.306
4	2012	3.041
4	2013	3.173
3	2014	2.362
2	2015	2.083
3	2016	2.207
3	2017	1.541
2	2018	2.014
3	2019	2.925
1	2021	3.987
2	2022	2.69
Act. Wins	Year	Exp. Wins
7	2011	9.24
11	2012	10.88
14	2013	11.73
10	2014	8.6
12	2015	8.5
7	2016	8.17
8	2017	6.61
9	2018	7.15
13	2019	10.64
8	2021	15.44
8*	2022	9.89

Well, it appears that the bolded in color parts aren't going to come through. Anyway, I bolded the years where the Big 10 was +/- two wins from expected as well as +/- .75 Sweet 16 entrants. Based on Seeding 2022 looked to have the 5th best expectations in 11 tourneys, so pretty ho-hum. Look at 2021 though, total disaster.

 

[Paterfamilias]

Statistically, this is correct, but the missing piece here is the number of BIG teams that lost round one. That is the concern for me.

I'll have to look back because I had a ticket for $40 for a Big 10 sweep in the rd64. I excluded Rutgers because they were already out and I excluded IU because I had another ticket for $20 where I did include them. Anyway, I was thinking that If not for Iowa I would have cashed my 7-team sweep ticket.

It's been a long weekend though and I might be mixing up a result somewhere along the line. I think it's #12 seed IU, #11 seed Rutgers and #5 seed Iowa as the rd64 losers though.

Edit- My bad Rutgers didn't make rd64 action. So really, It was Iowa who dropped the first round ball, but it seems they do that pretty often. IU got smoked, but they were a #12 playing it's 5th game in 8 days.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

I'll have to look back because I had a ticket for $40 for a Big 10 sweep in the rd64. I excluded Rutgers because they were already out and I excluded IU because I had another ticket for $20 where I did include them. Anyway, I was thinking that If not for Iowa I would have cashed my 7-team sweep ticket.

It's been a long weekend though and I might be mixing up a result somewhere along the line. I think it's #12 seed IU, #11 seed Rutgers and #3 seed Iowa as the rd64 losers though.

That indicates we had three too many teams. 6-7 is about right.

 

[Henry_Rosenthal]

Based on the average amount of tournament wins by each seed, The Big 10 was expected to win 9.89 games (10.89 if you count a 50% chance of winning 2 Dayton games, where we broke even) and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams.

The Big 10 still has Purdue and Michigan going and has 8 tournament wins (9 if you count Dayton). If both Purdue and Michigan lose their Sweet 16 games, then the conference will come up short of expectations relative to seeding. With 1 or 2 more wins, it's a break even post season for the conference. With 3 wins or more, the conference is an over-achiever.

Lets look at the other conferences

SEC- 10.22 wins and 2.85 Sweet 16 teams (SEC has 4 wins with 1 Sweet 16 team)
ACC- 4.97 wins and 1.23 Sweet 16 teams (ACC has 7 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
PAC- 5.77 wins and 1.51 Sweet 16 teams (PAC has 4 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)
B12- 10.85 wins and 2.75 Sweet 16 teams (B12 has 9 wins with 3 Sweet 16 teams)
BE- 7.01 wins and 1.68 Sweet 16 teams (BE has 5 wins with 2 sweet 16 teams)
B10- 9.89 wins and 2.69 Sweet 16 teams (B10 has 8 wins with 2 Sweet 16 teams)

With the exception of the ACC and the SEC (the 2 extremes) the rest of the power conferences are right about where they should be, with each needing a couple of more wins and teams still playing.

Wow, that's a great analysis!

 

[birdforbogey]

I'm thinking you won't say that when Hood-Schifino arrives.

So, next year Hood-Schifino, is this years version of Tamar Bates?

 

[bailey777]

IU was about the only team in the tourney who had guards that couldn’t shoot from outside. Nearly every team advancing has good guard play from at least one main guard on the floor.

You even look at Luke Goode on Illinois who came in and cracked in several threes and think how in the world could we not even land one of these guys. Just simply one!

 

[Sir_Saucy]

I'm thinking you won't say that when Hood-Schifino arrives.

Is he going to make the guard play in the B1G better than Johnny Davis and Jaden Ivey?

 

[bailey777]

So, next year Hood-Schifino, is this years version of Tamar Bates?

People were saying the same thing about Bates before he stepped foot on campus. People really need to wait and see what these guys can do before hyping them up as the next sure thing. How many examples do we need. Bates, Hanner, Hollowell, Ron Patterson, Peter Jurkin, Lander, Logan, etc. Even Victor did not light it up his first year.

 

[birdforbogey]

So, all those teams are over-rated and IU placed 9th in the B1G. Ouch. It is beginning to look like IU will battle the bottom of the B1G next year unless the portal is good to them.