When was the last time IU was 4-2 with a chance to bowl???

[turney333]

I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that IU would have lost to those teams under Lynch. At the same time, IU has had multiple losses to MAC teams under Wilson, and several close calls with other very modest opponents on the schedule, which hasn't been significantly upgraded. The simple fact is that the results haven't improved in spite of the supposed elevation of talent.

What better wins did Lynch have outside of his first year?

Sure, some bad losses in year one under Wilson. While there have been some losses to MAC teams and Navy after year one, those teams were all 8 or 9 win bowl teams, and we lost those games by and an average of 3 points. The one time Lynch played a MAC team of that quality, we lost by 22.

Overall, while both Lynch and Wilson had inconsistent results, with a many bad performances, the best performances have been much, much better under Wilson - better wins and more frequent close calls against high caliber teams.

 

[TheSpa]

What better wins did Lynch have outside of his first year?

Sure, some bad losses in year one under Wilson. While there have been some losses to MAC teams and Navy after year one, those teams were all 8 or 9 win bowl teams, and we lost those games by and an average of 3 points. The one time Lynch played a MAC team of that quality, we lost by 22.

Overall, while both Lynch and Wilson had inconsistent results, with a many bad performances, the best performances have been much, much better under Wilson - better wins and more frequent close calls against high caliber teams.

What better win has Wilson had other than against a Mizzou team missing it's best player? Again, the results haven't tracked with the supposed upgrade in talent, nor have they been any greater than those achieved under Lynch. That's simply and undeniably a fact. Not pining for the Lynch days, but measurable progress requires a microscope and, even then, I'm not sure it really exists. At some point, doesn't that begin to matter?

 

[ezluke]

What better win has Wilson had other than against a Mizzou team missing it's best player? Again, the results haven't tracked with the supposed upgrade in talent, nor have they been any greater than those achieved under Lynch. That's simply and undeniably a fact. Not pining for the Lynch days, but measurable progress requires a microscope and, even then, I'm not sure it really exists. At some point, doesn't that begin to matter?

Were we playing OSU/MSU/UM/PSU every year with Lynch or were we still rotating the schedules back then?

 

[IU Scott]

Then please help me understand why it is universally acknowledged that the talent level has increased significantly yet the results are no better? I'm not waving the flag for Lynch since I think IU should have conducted a search and hired someone else following his interim season, but the on field results don't track with the supposedly upgraded roster. Curious how you or anyone else can explain this.

To me we just are more competitive in the games against the likes of OSU with Wilson than we were with Lynch and we have not seen any games losing 83-20 like we did against UW

 

[TheSpa]

Were we playing OSU/MSU/UM/PSU every year with Lynch or were we still rotating the schedules back then?

I believe it was still a rotating schedule then.

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

The UCONN, CMU and Southern Illinois games under Lynch were awful. Those are 3 that come to mind.

 

[TheSpa]

To me we just are more competitive in the games against the likes of OSU with Wilson than we were with Lynch and we have not seen any games losing 83-20 like we did against UW

I won't argue that there haven't been the outsized blowouts, but most of those came at the hands of Wisconsin, and IU won't play them much anymore. I think IU is "better" today than they were with Lynch, but that "progress" is far more subjective than objective (the won-loss record). I'm hopefull that they can get over the hump this year in terms of achieving both a winning record and a bowl berth, and I think Wilson should have at least another year unless they really fall apart in the back half of the season. But the objective column needs to start filling up or I think Glass will think about moving on from KW.

 

[turney333]

What better win has Wilson had other than against a Mizzou team missing it's best player? Again, the results haven't tracked with the supposed upgrade in talent, nor have they been any greater than those achieved under Lynch. That's simply and undeniably a fact. Not pining for the Lynch days, but measurable progress requires a microscope and, even then, I'm not sure it really exists. At some point, doesn't that begin to matter?

Wake and WKU this year, Mizzou last year, BG and PSU 2 years ago are better than any single win between 2008 and 2010. Plus Wilson has been frequently competitive against teams finishing the year in the top 15. Lynch's high water mark against "quality" teams were the 2009/2010 Mich teams later proved not to be worthy of their rankings.

 

[TheSpa]

Wake and WKU this year, Mizzou last year, BG and PSU 2 years ago are better than any single win between 2008 and 2010. Plus Wilson has been frequently competitive against teams finishing the year in the top 15. Lynch's high water mark against "quality" teams were the 2009/2010 Mich teams later proved not to be worthy of their rankings.

So, one win against the 6th to 8th best SEC team (Mizzou), a victory against a probation laden, bad PSU squad, as well as wins over one of the worst ACC teams, and victories over MAC and Sun Belt opponents. That's an incredibly low threshold for "success" for any Big Ten school, including IU, and demonstrates that progress has been minuscule, especially given what many consider to be the significant bump in talent. At best, they're spinning their wheels, and it's year 5.

 

[IU Scott]

I won't argue that there haven't been the outsized blowouts, but most of those came at the hands of Wisconsin, and IU won't play them much anymore. I think IU is "better" today than they were with Lynch, but that "progress" is far more subjective than objective (the won-loss record). I'm hopefull that they can get over the hump this year in terms of achieving both a winning record and a bowl berth, and I think Wilson should have at least another year unless they really fall apart in the back half of the season. But the objective column needs to start filling up or I think Glass will think about moving on from KW.

Totally agree with that and it has not really shown up with the won/loss record but if you just look at the caliber of player we have on the roster now compared to Lynch's days it is not close.

 

[TheSpa]

Totally agree with that and it has not really shown up with the won/loss record but if you just look at the caliber of player we have on the roster now compared to Lynch's days it is not close.

Maybe so, but what does it say when the on field result isn't any better? It can't be just a scheduling issue, as IU plays a modest group of opponents.

 

[turney333]

So, one win against the 6th to 8th best SEC team (Mizzou), a victory against a probation laden, bad PSU squad, as well as wins over one of the worst ACC teams, and victories over MAC and Sun Belt opponents. That's an incredibly low threshold for "success" for any Big Ten school, including IU, and demonstrates that progress has been minuscule, especially given what many consider to be the significant bump in talent. At best, they're spinning their wheels, and it's year 5.

Agree that its a pretty low threshold overall, and not saying we're in a great spot, but the improvement is far from minuscule, we were in a much bigger hole than you are willing to admit. Plus, we are just in game 6 of year 5, we still have 6 more games, 3 of which we'll be favored in if healthy.

 

[TheSpa]

Agree that its a pretty low threshold overall, and not saying we're in a great spot, but the improvement is far from minuscule, we were in a much bigger hole than you are willing to admit. Plus, we are just in game 6 of year 5, we still have 6 more games, 3 of which we'll be favored in if healthy.

Well, at that same point in year 5, Maryland fired a good coach with a better record. Not saying that's the right move, especially since Edsall is a very good coach, but it makes you wonder what IU's objectives for and standards of success are.

 

[turney333]

Well, at that same point in year 5, Maryland fired a good coach with a better record. Not saying that's the right move, especially since Edsall is a very good coach, but it makes you wonder what IU's objectives for and standards of success are.

Edsall has a slightly better record than Wilson, while inheriting a team that won 9 games the year prior and had been to 4 bowls in the previous 5 seasons. Then this year, he looked to have his worst team while at Maryland getting blown out by any team with a pulse. Basically, Edsall's tenure was a significant downgrade from the previous 5 years at Marlyand. Not saying it was the right move by Maryland, especially mid-season, but at least somewhat understandable

While not tremendous success, IU is off to its best start under Wilson and the best for any IU team in 25 years. That's certainly no reason to celebrate, but its enough progress to indicate continued improvement, which for me is perfectly acceptable objective for now. Only when an apparent upward trend (even a slow gradual one) stops should we evaluate this program against other big ten teams. Of course Wilson needs to capitalize in upcoming games to make this start mean something, but if we can get and stay healthy, Wilson has IU in a good spot.

 

[mattndallas]

Maybe so, but what does it say when the on field result isn't any better? It can't be just a scheduling issue, as IU plays a modest group of opponents.

Don't know about that...Mizzou, BGSU, and Navy w Reynolds at the helm were pretty salty.

 

[TheSpa]

Edsall has a slightly better record than Wilson, while inheriting a team that won 9 games the year prior and had been to 4 bowls in the previous 5 seasons. Then this year, he looked to have his worst team while at Maryland getting blown out by any team with a pulse. Basically, Edsall's tenure was a significant downgrade from the previous 5 years at Marlyand. Not saying it was the right move by Maryland, especially mid-season, but at least somewhat understandable

While not tremendous success, IU is off to its best start under Wilson and the best for any IU team in 25 years. That's certainly no reason to celebrate, but its enough progress to indicate continued improvement, which for me is perfectly acceptable objective for now. Only when an apparent upward trend (even a slow gradual one) stops should we evaluate this program against other big ten teams. Of course Wilson needs to capitalize in upcoming games to make this start mean something, but if we can get and stay healthy, Wilson has IU in a good spot.

Edsall's team played OSU about as tough as IU did, so I'm not sure the "with a pulse" comment is valid.

As for IU, the last six games represent a very small stretch in a 54 game tenure, so I don't see any meaningful trend as of yet. Perhaps if they win six or more games an argument could be made, but it's premature in my opinion.

 

[TheSpa]

Don't know about that...Mizzou, BGSU, and Navy w Reynolds at the helm were pretty salty.

Decent teams, but didn't IU go 2-4 against those three schools?

 

[ezluke]

Decent teams, but didn't IU go 2-4 against those three schools?

What is your point? No one is saying that we are great, we are saying we are better. In one post you agree then you argue the point in the next five posts

Me thinks you are just being contrarian

 

[mattndallas]

I wouldn't say QB recruiting has sucked....in theory, we should be sitting here with a double-barrelled attack of Nate and Tre, with Coff an experienced backup.

Tre's off-kilter transfer effed everthing up. When the signing period ended that year we had 3 "starting" QB's, with several years of eligibility remaining. No way anyone decent would sign with that stable. Then, because of transfers and injuries, we go from 3 to 0...not sure how you recruit around that situation. If King is a flop....we'd have one bad year or recruiting QB's....and that's too early to judge.

 

[ezluke]

Edsall's team played OSU about as tough as IU did, so I'm not sure the "with a pulse" comment is valid.

As for IU, the last six games represent a very small stretch in a 54 game tenure, so I don't see any meaningful trend as of yet. Perhaps if they win six or more games an argument could be made, but it's premature in my opinion.

Losing 49-28 is playing OSU about as tough as losing with a chance to tie on the last play? Umm okaaay

You would be mocking a posters intelligence if someone else posted that BS.

 

[turney333]

Edsall's team played OSU about as tough as IU did, so I'm not sure the "with a pulse" comment is valid.

As for IU, the last six games represent a very small stretch in a 54 game tenure, so I don't see any meaningful trend as of yet. Perhaps if they win six or more games an argument could be made, but it's premature in my opinion.

Maryland tied it up early in the 3rd, then OSU scored 28 unanswered points, and lost the game by 21 even with a garbage time TD. That was a blowout, maybe not start to finish blowout, but a blowout nonetheless. Similar things happened to them against BG and Mich - decent first half performance, but complete collapse in the 2nd

 

[TheSpa]

Maryland tied it up early in the 3rd, then OSU scored 28 unanswered points, and lost the game by 21 even with a garbage time TD. That was a blowout, maybe not start to finish blowout, but a blowout nonetheless. Similar things happened to them against BG and Mich - decent first half performance, but complete collapse in the 2nd

They were very competitive with OSU, however, they had to face Barrett, something IU did not. And if Maryland suffered a blowout this year, didn't IU lose in almost identical fashion last year? And head to head last year Maryland was clearly superior. As I said, Maryland may be making a mistake here, but they determined the modestly better results to be unacceptable.

 

[ezluke]

They were very competitive with OSU, however, and had to face Barrett, something IU did not. And head to head last year Maryland was clearly superior. As I said, Maryland may be making a mistake here, but they determined the modestly better results to be unacceptable.

Maryland does have higher standards than IU. Different programs with different starting points should be expecting different results.

 

[TheSpa]

What is your point? No one is saying that we are great, we are saying we are better. In one post you agree then you argue the point in the next five posts

Me thinks you are just being contrarian

Simply saying that, if the competition was supposedly better (that's debatable), IU still didn't fair particularly well against it. And while we may believe IU is better, the actual results haven't told us that . . . at least not yet. Only being contrarian by providing facts.

 

[TheSpa]

Maryland does have higher standards than IU. Different programs with different starting points should be expecting different results.

And that's where we part. I think IU should aspire to be better than Maryland in football. Hard to suggest a progression toward building a successful program if the bar is set that low.

 

[ezluke]

Simply saying that, if the competition was supposedly better (that's debatable), IU still didn't fair particularly well against it. And while we may believe IU is better, the actual results haven't told us that . . . at least not yet. Only being contrarian by providing facts.

Maryland playing OSU about as tough isn't a fact

Playing better against the good teams is an improvement. Having the same record while facing a tougher schedule is showing improvement

Your facts are mostly just your opinions

 

[TheSpa]

Losing 49-28 is playing OSU about as tough as losing with a chance to tie on the last play? Umm okaaay

You would be mocking a posters intelligence if someone else posted that BS.

Kind of like OSU v. IU last year when IU fans thought they did great. Almost identical results though, as you said, the standards are different.

 

[TheSpa]

T

Maryland playing OSU about as tough isn't a fact

Playing better against the good teams is an improvement. Having the same record while facing a tougher schedule is showing improvement

Your facts are mostly just your opinions

The schedule improvements have been negligible, at best, which really hurts your argument. And head to head last year wasn't close.

 

[ezluke]

And that's where we part. I think IU should aspire to be better than Maryland in football. Hard to suggest a progression toward building a successful program if the bar is set that low.

Unfortunately UMd had a head start on building a winning program and the expectations that go along with it....expecting IU to catch up and surpass programs that have valued football much longer than IU is ridiculous

Once IU gets the program on a level playing field than you can have those expectations. After decades of neglect it's going to take time to get to where even UMd is now. To think otherwise shows how little you understand about IUFB

 

[ezluke]

The schedule improvements have been negligible, at best, which really hurts your argument. And head to head last year wasn't close.

Have I said that we are or were as good as UMd? Why do you keep bringing up last years game?

SOS rankings says its one of those pesky facts that you talk about

 

[TheSpa]

Unfortunately UMd had a head start on building a winning program and the expectations that go along with it....expecting IU to catch up and surpass programs that have valued football much longer than IU is ridiculous

Once IU gets the program on a level playing field than you can have those expectations. After decades of neglect it's going to take time to get to where even UMd is now. To think otherwise shows how little you understand about IUFB

They didn't have a head start. That's really unformed, as are most of your posts. They simply fired a coach who was already winning at a high level and the program blew up as a result. I will agree, however, that your lower standards are consistent with your lower knowledge base concerning IU football.

 

[TheSpa]

Have I said that we are or were as good as UMd? Why do you keep bringing up last years game?

SOS rankings says its one of those pesky facts that you talk about

Where did I say you did? You're trying so hard to do battle that you need to put words in my mouth. And we both know what's coming next. Lol.

 

[ezluke]

Where did I say you did? You're trying so hard to do battle that you need to put words in my mouth. And we both know what's coming next. Lol.

I'm trying to understand why you keep harping on last years game, why?

I didn't put words in your mouth, I was asking if you thought I was talking about the game

Try to stay on topic

 

[mattndallas]

If Indiana had a more "quality win" tham at Mizzou last year....since Mallory was here....I'd love to know when it was.

Beating Penn State for the first time ever, and a couple moist under-carriges against OSU ain't bad either.

 

[ezluke]

They didn't have a head start. That's really unformed, as are most of your posts. They simply fired a coach who was already winning at a high level and the program blew up as a result. I will agree, however, that your lower standards are consistent with your lower knowledge base concerning IU football.

They had a head start in valuing and supporting their football program. To say otherwise shows your ignorance on this subject.

We can do veiled insults back and forth all night or you can have one conversation where you don't resort to insults when you are shown to be wrong.

 

[ezluke]

If Indiana had a more "quality win" tham at Mizzou last year....since Mallory was here....I'd love to know when it was.

Beating Penn State for the first time ever, and a couple moist under-carriges against OSU ain't bad either.

Cam beating Wiscy?

 

[TheSpa]

I'm trying to understand why you keep harping on last years game, why?

I didn't put words in your mouth, I was asking if you thought I was talking about the game

Try to stay on topic

I'm not harping on it. I simply pointed out that they were superior to IU and, along with Edsall's modestly better record, nonetheless chose to replace their coach. You accurately pointed out that Maryland had higher aspirations in football than did IU. Not sure why you're quibbling over these facts.

 

[ezluke]

I'm not harping on it. I simply pointed out that they were superior to IU and, along with Edsall's modestly better record, nonetheless chose to replace their coach. You accurately pointed out that Maryland had higher aspirations in football than did IU. Not sure why you're quibbling over these facts.

I'm not quibbling over them I was simply asking why you kept repeating them.

 

[TheSpa]

They had a head start in valuing and supporting their football program. To say otherwise shows your ignorance on this subject.

We can do veiled insults back and forth all night or you can have one conversation where you don't resort to insults when you are shown to be wrong.

They didn't have a head start on anything. That's simply false however many times you state it. I certainly didn't start with the insults, and you haven't shown where I was wrong. Not once.

 

[ezluke]

They didn't have a head start on anything. That's simply false.

So you are saying that IU supported their football team as much as UMd does now and did in the past? Umm okay

IU only started really getting serious about football after the BTN money started coming in. UMd has periodically had a good program for years.

Two national titles, 26 bowl games(at least one in each of the past four decades) 11 conference titles, 4 undefeated seasons, and 12 undefeated conference seasons.

Yeah you're right IU is and has been their equal. Wow