Indiana jumps to No. 21 in AP poll

The Hoosiers didn’t have to work hard to make their latest jump in the Associated Press top 25.

Or, really, do any work at all.

Indiana moved up two spots to No. 21 in this week’s poll without having played a game since Dec. 22. Last week, the Hoosiers dropped a spot to No. 23 when previously-unranked NC State moved into the poll at No. 20.

IU has two games this week, returning from an 11-day holiday layoff on Thursday against Illinois at Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall. From there, the Hoosiers will meet No. 2 Michigan on Sunday in Ann Arbor.

The Hoosiers and Wolverines are two of the seven Big Ten teams ranked inside this week’s poll. Michigan is slotted at No. 2 for the second consecutive week, while Michigan State stands pat at No. 8.

Ohio State dropped a spot to No. 14, while Wisconsin fell seven places to No. 22. Nebraska moved back into the poll at No. 24 and Iowa dropped a spot to No. 25.

In the NET rankings, Indiana is slotted at No. 20 this week. The Hoosiers are rated No. 25 at


  1. Great news for IUBB and for the B1G BB as a whole! How would you like to be the Pac12 Commissioner with the whole conference in a true dumpster fire.

  2. It was “great news” when we were #1 in the polls. Unfortunately, we didn’t have a coach to match the talent on the roster. It’s a long road back up the totem pole(poll).
    Archie is bringing a very battered ship back to shore….We can only dream of what may be or what could have been had the timing of Archie been teamed with a Zeller and the recruiting momentum that once was….We are now another work in progress. We are a good team with limitations. We rebuild with a mishmash that comes as a result of wrong decisions slowly eroding the lore.

    It was once nearly an insult to this program to not be a top-10 and not be competing in Final Fours with the regularity Michigan has recently demonstrated.

    Another “new year” …but with so much time and track wasted while clinging to incompetent coaching, the “new” race doesn’t feel fair.

    1. Glad we dodged that bullet.

      He was a perfect fit at New Mexico. They have fallen on hard times. Wonder if they will ask him back?

      1. Chet if I were the Lobos AD I wouldn’t even have to swallow hard to make that call, buy him a new house and help him move in.

  3. UCLA’s AD and top administrators don’t realize that their basketball program’s glory days are gone, and that student-athlete life on UCLA’s campus, while a beautiful place, is no longer a great attraction to the best male athletes. Academic standards are very high and the majority of the student body doesn’t really care all that much about their sports teams. UCLA has lots of Alumni with deep pockets, but all that money is not going to turn that campus culture around. UCLA will hire another experienced coach with a winning record and then five or six years from now, they’ll fire him just like they did to Alford.

    Alford made a mistake taking the UCLA job. I wonder how long it took him to realize that and whether he is relieved that he’s now free to find a school that is a better fit for him?

    1. I hope you didn’t just describe IU Basketball…though our lower academic standards could still save us for a bit longer.

      IU was going to hire Steve but it was decided we couldn’t Alford him. Yup, we dodged a bullet…and got a clown shot out of a cannon for nine years. Things could have been so much worse with a decade of haircare products replacing tanning gel.

    2. Why a “mistake”? He got great recruits, made the NCAA Tourney, had a great run with his son, got national publicity, had a solid winning record, and made UCLA look unprofessional with the hasty firing and no winner to bring in right now? Alford looks good, UCLA looks bad!

  4. And although Alford as an IU coach was nothing I ever personally desired, listening to “Jay”(Jason) Williams use ESPN to spew his Duke agenda on Alford’s firing being “justified” is a disgrace to objective sports journalism.
    Note to Jay: Some of us still remember your last great moment in a Duke uniform choking at the charity stripe against the candy stripes. Remember, Jay…son? Remember the 17 point lead you blew as the grit of a stubborn Hoosier team with less “star-rated” talent kicked your #1 ass? But you have no agenda against Hoosier greats of the past…now do you? Difference between you and Alford? Alford made his free throws and buried clutch shots. The only thing you bury is your agenda….Alford underperformed as a coach? Maybe. But you underperform(along with your partners in agenda crimes) when you pretend to have an objective eye. Your eye is about as objective as Bill Walton’s (someone who I have never once heard mention the name of Bob Knight….even while covering numerous games for the Pac 12 and UCLA while Alford was coach).
    Alford’s inability to meet the UCLA standards still rises far above ESPN employing those who abandon all principles of the profession known as journalism. It’s sad that the profession has been taken over by ex-jocks with infantile skills compared to the true artists evaporating from the world of sports presentation.

  5. Besides the games, I really don’t watch Sportscenter any longer. Once a sports channel becomes leftist, I choose to change it. If they would have just stuck to sports, would have been good. John Skipper ruined it but at least he is gone. I agree with Po’s comments but I too kind of feel like IU could almost be the same. I think Alford was just fed up with it all. He should go back to a place like New Mexico. That was a perfect fit for him.

    1. ESPN is ‘leftist’.

      You are freakin’ hysterical.

      This would be a good chance for you to do a little introspection.

    2. Jeff H that’s my exact position of ESPN corporate. Remember Keith Olbermann? What a bag full of donkeys he is. But I don’t believe that about everybody that is seen on their broadcast screen. They’ve lost a lot of good reporters, analysts and announcers of the moderate, left and right varieties over the last couple of decades. 1 example being Colin Cowherd. He and I wouldn’t last 14 seconds together in the same Lyft ride as he is far left of me, can be controversial as hell but the SOB is a clear thinker about inside sports business. ESPN grew fat and biased after Disney took ownership. Viewers peeled away like banana skin, millions of them. Exactly why they had to adjust their business model a couple years back. Traveling which I still do plenty of, my vehicle radio is always set to not miss ‘The Herd’.

  6. Just curious, Jeff H. What is your definition (or “presentation” are H4H defined it) of “leftist” (your 16th word in your post on January 1 @ 7:53 pm).

    Am I correct in asserting that you are defining ESPN as “Leftist”? (if I am not mistaken there, what do you mean? Examples would be nice but not necessary, your opinion of the meaning of the word is my inquiry.

    I write this in all cordiality. I was actually reading a book today that stated something along lines that the concept that words had meaning but meaning is in fluctuation as they are presented (I’m paraphrasing).

  7. Just very liberal. Just watch outside the lines or majority of 30 for 30. Plus, when Keith O. came back 2nd time he would openly op-ed against Bush. It just got old. I would like sports and politics to be separate.

  8. Some of 30 for 30s are awesome though. I will admit that. I don’t care for the Michelle Beedle’s of the world. Even the Mike Greenberg show—-Get Up just tries to hard. Just talk about sports

    1. Try Colin Cowherd ….or Ferrall on the Bench (Scott Ferrall). Both are a lot of fun to listen to(my personal bias), brutally honest and don’t hesitate to expose their own biases.

  9. I don’t necessarily believe ESPN to be “leftist.” I actually believe the opposite. By not being objective and allowing the biases of those within the organization to skew or withhold criticism or praise due to, mostly, loyalties to where their own fandom/alma maters exist, they are acting in deception. Deception without honest intent to objectively educate the viewer of necessary facts or your own potential allegiances possibly getting the way of your fully honest eye, is more immoral than leftist.
    It’s more agenda based than political based. It’s a desire to ignore the wrongs/mistakes/incompetency of people/places which may have some connection to your own pathways in life while obsessing on the wrongs of those who stood as rivals or outside your choices/loyalties.

    I see “liberal” as a desire to present as much facts as possible. I also believe there is a real lack of effort to be self-examining and present your own potential to have a bias. Do we really expect Bill Walton(UCLA and surrogate son of Wooden) to ever mention Steve Alford may not get his true objective eye because he has a bias or disagreement with the culture of Knight? Do we really expect Jay Williams(upset by IU in his senior year with Duke) to feel warm and fuzzy about anything IU Basketball…or any former star for IU Basketball? We are all human. I don’t fault them for such a bias. I fault them by deceiving the viewer(especially younger or more casual viewers) who they leave in the dark by not being honest about their past.

  10. It was a mistake for Alford to take the UCLA job because there was no way he, or any other coach, could live up to the unrealistic expectations associated with UCLA Men’s Basketball. Many UCLA fans and alumni are living in the past and foolishly believe UCLA can resurrect the success enjoyed decades ago. Of course, they don’t want to admit that their beloved UCLA Basketball program was the most corrupt college sports program in history and that they could not get away with a fraction of the cheating they did on a routine basis back in the day. It was mission impossible because as I alluded to above, the environment and culture of UCLA is no longer conducive to winning National Championships. No coach wants to be fired from a head coaching job while still in his prime! It was a mistake because Alford could have continued to build at New Mexico or waited for a job to open at a school with the environment, culture and fan support necessary to sustain an elite program. Not sure he’ll ever get a chance to coach at a prominent basketball school again.

    I went to an Arizona/UCLA basketball game in L.A. a couple of years ago. I had attended the UCLA/Arizona game in Tucson earlier that same season. The difference in fan interest, attendance, and excitement between the two campuses was astonishing. There were more Arizona fans in attendance at UCLA than there were UCLA fans, and this was when the two teams were competing for the PAC-12 Championship. I bought good seats at face value at UCLA, but paid a premium price for tickets in Tucson. A blind man could see that UCLA had lost its passion for its basketball program, while the game in Tucson had the AZ fans in a frenzy.

Comments are closed.