Hoosier Morning


Kevin Wilson isn’t sure how healthy Ed Wright-Baker will be by Saturday, so he still isn’t sure who will start at quarterback this Saturday, I wrote.

From Tuesday’s paper, the Hardin brothers, Drew and Forisse, have had a tight bond their entire lives, I wrote.


IU is strongly considering giving more time to freshman quarterback Tre Roberson, Jeff Rabjohns of Rivals.com writes (subscription).

Dusty Kiel said the quarterback competition likely won’t be much different this week, Rabjohns writes (subscription)

Indiana’s coaches are impressed by Illinois quarterback Nathan Scheelhaase, Zach Osterman of Inside Indiana writes (subscription).

Andy Proffett of the Gary Post-Tribune also wrote about the quarterback competition.


Gary Harris will make an official visit to Kentucky on Oct. 22, Adam Zagoria reports.

Shane Hall, a 6-7 forward from Johnson Central in Kentucky, will be at IU for Hoosier Hysteria, Jody Demling of the Louisville Courier Journal reports.


At 5-0, the Fighting Illini have reason to think New Year’s Day bowl game, David Haugh of the Chicago Tribune writes.

Nathan Scheelhaase is helping wide receiver A.J. Jenkins backup his statement that he is the best receiver in the Big Ten, Joe Souligne of the Daily Illini writes.

Illinois linebacker Jonathan Brown is suspended for a cheap shot against Northwestern, Mark Tupper of the Decatur Herald-Review writes.


Known about this guy for a long time, but my brother was really pushing him on me while I was home for the wedding this weekend. Frank Turner. Good stuff.



  1. Wilson is building the new Hoosiers from the inside out. There is going to be gnashing of teeth and wailing from some…but that is the way this first year is going to go. I hope that the experience doesnt cost us some good players. But then again, how do you control that. If they want to play…really play…they will stick it out.

  2. I just read on CBS Sports that a Missouri official actually told the reporter that while the school would join the SEC, they prefer the Big Ten but the league ‘has no interest.’ I simply don’t understand that. It’s an arms race now, and soon, 12 members will be the obsolete position that more aggressive conferences have superseded. Thus if you have a good academic school that makes geographic sense, has strong athletics and wants to join, it’s senselessly stubborn and head-in-sand-ish to scorn that institution. Maybe I’m alone in this belief, but if other leagues (SEC, ACC) are expanding past 12 and you can cherry-pick a quality member like Missouri, I don’t see why you don’t do it. I’m just sayin’.

  3. I think Missouri would be a good fit but I haven’t seen the business plan for conference expansion. There’s more to it than numbers and I don’t know what they are looking at. The Big Ten is a money machine compared to other conferences. Even the SEC, with all their football prowess, pales in comparison in terms of revenue. Somebody knows what they’re doing.

  4. Eric, while I would like to see Missouri in the Big 10, the object of expansion is to increase the payout to member schools. Adding Nebraska last year would do that. Adding Missouri would not. Only 3 “available” schools fit that mode (Notre Dame, Texas, and Oklahoma). And I do not want TEXAS. The PAC 10/12 also decided not to expand past 12 for that very reason.

  5. Drbranam, I’m not arguing with you, just gathering facts. But I don’t understand how Nebraska, with no major media markets other than Omaha, which is marginally ‘major,’ would add revenue to member schools’ payouts, while Missouri, with St. Louis and Kansas City as its biggest alumni bases, would not. If it’s all about getting people to watch your conference’s games on TV, and thus derive more revenue from TV packages (and your own network), why would Missouri not be superior to Nebraska in this aspect?

    This is not a negative against Nebraska; I think they’re a wonderful fit in a number of ways. I looked forward to their debut game against the Badgers as much as I have a Big Ten game in a few years. But I don’t see why Missouri wouldn’t offer the same appeal.

    I’ll also point out in passing Missouri’s existing rivalry with Illinois and obviously Nebraska, though I know these are secondary concerns in expansion talk.

    The Big Ten is very innovative in some ways (instant replay, BTN), but IMHO bull-headed stubborn on others, and I’d say this is the latter. I won’t belabor my point except to say that I wish someone would effect a change of mind in the Big Ten offices.

  6. As I have speculated before the quest to add #13 is certainly ND. I also think the addition of Mizzou would not dilute the BTN pie when considering St.Louis and KC metros(but do not know if the #’s support)but I do not think Delaney wants to move into an odd #’ed total of teams as occurred when PSU joined. But I just as Eric stated really like the Tigers to the B10.

  7. I think Nebraska is considered a national draw, the same way Oklahoma or Notre Dame would be. Nobody outside their region would care about watching a Mizzou game but they might one of those three.

  8. Well then how about Missouri and ND? Oh wait, ND thinks it’s more logical to be in the Big East than the Big Ten.

    I just read on CBS Sports that Missouri does not have the votes to join the SEC (among SEC presidents). All the more reason to pursue them.

    Chet, certainly Nebraska is a bigger name than Missouri, but I think good quality games are the biggest draw. Missouri has a good coach and has had quite a few good teams over time. To me those are the building blocks of an attractive TV option for viewers around the country, who if a team they’re not connected to isn’t on, will generally choose the most entertaining game.

  9. Could be. I’m betting that the people making those decisions have a zillion dollars worth of marketing data sitting in front of them that I don’t have access to. I think Mizzou would be a nice fit, too, but it’s all about money and they’ve done the marketing research, I’m sure.

Comments are closed.