Hosts Bob Moats and Mike Wiemuth provide an emergency analysis of Indiana University basketball's current state following concerning recent losses and program developments.

Segment 1

After briefly discussing their recent trip to Philadelphia and the historic Palestra, they examine the underlying factors contributing to IU's current struggles:

• The unique nature of Mike Woodson's hiring and the dual expectations he faced
• Early successes in his first two years followed by concerning regression in year three
• Recruitment challenges, including going 0-31 on top-100 guard offers and losing key commitments

Segment 2

The hosts provide detailed analysis of ten key indicators that typically signal problems for a coaching tenure, based on Mike Wiemuth's research into coaching transitions:

1. Lack of winning relative to expectations: Despite a 14-5 record, recent blowout losses and struggles against top competition are concerning
2. Underperformance against rivals/contemporaries: Particularly notable given Purdue's success and recent losses to programs like Louisville
3. Erosion of trust with local coaching networks: Limited engagement with high school and AAU coaches, with many lacking direct contact with the staff
4. Declining attendance: Notable student section departures during games and increasingly visible empty seats
5. Loss of attraction with high-impact recruits: Going 0-31 on top-100 guard offers and losing key commitments like Liam McNeely
6. Increased media speculation: Growing national coverage questioning the program's direction
7. Staff stability concerns: While more stable than previous struggling tenures, signs of stress appearing
8. Social media sentiment: Reaching concerning 3-to-1 negative to positive ratio thresholds
9. Negative program leaks: Increasing behind-the-scenes stories emerging
10. Vocal fan displeasure: Growing audible frustration at home games, which research shows is often a late-stage indicator

The hosts note that these indicators tend to build on each other, creating momentum that becomes increasingly difficult to reverse.

Segment 3 and wrap up

The hosts discuss how to approach the remainder of the season as fans:

• Acknowledge that events are largely beyond fan control
• Understand that while turnarounds are possible, they become increasingly improbable
• Root for the current players while being realistic about the situation
• Recognize that significant changes may be coming regardless of late-season results

Throughout the episode, they emphasize providing analytical context rather than advocacy, helping fans understand the mechanics and patterns of college basketball programs during challenging transitions.

The episode ends with some lighter discussion of their recent Philadelphia trip, including authentic cheesesteaks and the historic Palestra.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hosts Bob Moats and Mike Wiemuth explore the concept of momentum in college basketball programs - what it really means, how it manifests, and what drives it in both positive and negative directions.

Segment 1

After briefly discussing recent football playoffs, they dive into defining program momentum and how it differs from game-level momentum. They explore how momentum is more about perception and emotional reactions from various stakeholders (fans, recruits, media, etc.) than purely on-court performance.

Key points:

1. Momentum is easier to identify than define - it's like "knowing it when you see it"
2. Social media acts as an accelerator of momentum, both positive and negative
3. Momentum involves multiple actors including coaches, players, fans, administration, and media all reacting to events and each other

Segment 2

The hosts examine specific examples of program momentum, both positive and negative:

1. Penn State under Mike Rhoades showing positive momentum despite coaching change
2. Michigan's transition from Juwan Howard to Dusty May
3. North Carolina's gradual decline under Hubert Davis
4. Villanova's struggles under Kyle Neptune

They discuss how momentum can be affected by:

• Coaching changes
• Recruiting success/failure
• Fan engagement
• Media coverage
• Regional rivalries
• Program expectations

Segment 3

The conversation shifts to Indiana basketball's current momentum situation, examining:

1. Recent recruiting setbacks
2. Early season performance concerns
3. Program expectations vs reality
4. The challenges of rebuilding momentum at a historically prominent program

The episode concludes with a tribute to Dick Van Arsdale, former Indiana University basketball great who recently passed away.

Throughout the discussion, Bob and Mike emphasize how momentum is about long-term patterns rather than individual events, and how it's often easier to lose momentum than to gain it, especially after a program's "honeymoon period" ends.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

On this episode of Xs and Joes, the crew explores how college basketball programs try to use pace of play to their advantage, bringing in Coach Tonsoni and Coach Adragna to provide tactical insights.

The discussion examines how tempo and pace interact with personnel, recruiting, and program philosophy in modern college basketball. Our panel explores how some traditionally slower-paced programs like Wisconsin are adapting to modern play styles, while others like Virginia maintain their methodical approach.

They also analyze how factors like the transfer portal and player development are forcing programs to evolve their systems and pace of play.

Segment 1

Everyone says they want to play "fast" (except members of the Bennett family) so why don't they?

1. Why do coaches want to push or pull back tempo? What are the advantages and disadvantages in playing at certain paces?
2. What do teams do to control the pace of play? What can a team do on both ends of the floor to pressure an opponent?
3. How total number of possessions can be misleading in how fast some teams want to play?

Segment 2

So, who is actually playing fast (like Wisconsin is...for them...this year) and how are they doing it?

1. What are some faster playing programs doing differently to get a quicker shot?
2. How are teams slowing down opponents' offenses but getting out ahead in transition or after a score?
3. How has overall roster moves and lineup construction impacted a team's pace of play?

Segment 3 and wrap up

How is a faster pace of play "modern" basketball even though teams have played "fast" (or taken lousy fast shots) throughout the ages?

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This episode examines how college basketball programs experience and handle regression, exploring both historical patterns and current examples of teams navigating performance declines. Bob Moats and Mike Wiemuth break down what separates programs that successfully bounce back from those that struggle to recover, while examining different strategies for mitigating regression's impact.

Segment 1: Understanding Regression

• Hall of Fame coaches like Tom Izzo demonstrate that program success follows peaks and valleys rather than steady progression
• Supporting players' statistical performance is significantly influenced by playing alongside All-American caliber teammates
• Matt Painter's tenure at Purdue shows clear cycles of program building and regression
• The "Baby Boilers" to "Johnson years" transition illustrates how roster turnover impacts program stability
• Discussion of how coach evaluation timelines have shortened in the transfer portal era

Segment 2: Teams on Regression Watch

• Analysis of Purdue's outlook after losing Zach Edey and the challenges of maintaining elite status
• Tennessee's adaptation to losing Dalton Knecht and their defensive identity
• Examination of Baylor's roster construction and recruiting approach
• The impact of minutes continuity on program stability and performance
• How conference strength affects a program's ability to manage regression

Segment 3: Bouncing Back

• Comparison of Indiana and UCLA's different approaches to rebuilding through the transfer portal
• Notre Dame's focus on high school recruiting under Micah Shrewsbury
• Cincinnati's emergence under Wes Miller through balanced recruiting
• The role of program resources and brand in determining rebuild strategy
• How NIL and the transfer portal have changed the timeline for program turnarounds

For coaches, administrators, and invested fans, this episode provides context for understanding the cyclical nature of program success and offers insights into how modern programs can manage inevitable downturns. The discussion helps set realistic expectations while examining the various paths programs can take to maintain or regain competitive status.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bob, Mike, and special guest Robie Malcomson discuss how opportunities for athletes to earn NIL and share revenue are transforming the competitive landscape in college basketball.

Segment 1: How Does This New Landscape Impact How We See “Amateur” Athletics?

1. Who were Jim Thorpe, Phil Dickens, Sam Gilbert and Curt Flood? Why Do They Matter Here?
2. Why Could We Add Ed O’Bannon To This Group? How Has His Case Paved The Way For Direct Compensation?
3. In The Era of Tik Tok Stars and Influencers: Is Anyone Really an Amateur?

Segment 2: What Are The Impacts Of Paid Players On Who Finds Success (and Who Doesn’t)?

1. What Pathways Have We Or Could We See For High Major/Mid Major/Low Major Schools?
2. How Have Other Related Yet Distinct Factors Also Have Impacted Teams and Programs? 
3. Why Water May Find Its Level In The Coming Years Like It Has In Other Sports Models?

Segment 3 and Wrap Up: How Will The 2024-25 Season (and particularly IU’s Activity) Demonstrate Some Of This And What We’re Looking For?  

Some relevant videos and articles:

• Sparta v Thebes
• O’Bannon v NCAA
• Curt Flood
• Jim Thorpe
• Mary Lou Retton
• McCaskeys and Kevin Warren

Robie is host of the Trapped in History podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/trapped-in-history/id1753424077

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bob and Mike open with some discussion about (what else?) IU football, as well as Hoosier Hysteria and some IU basketball recruiting.

Then it’s down to business for the main segment, which is dedicated to one of the most common buzzwords heard today when watching hoops: “modern” basketball.

What exactly does that term? And how are offensive and defensive systems evolving?

Segment 1: If Everyone Runs Motion and Plays Help Defense, Why Does It Look Different Than It Did?

1. What is a “good” shot? Getting Your Shot and Preventing The Other Guy From Getting Theirs
2. What It Was and What It’s Evolved Into? The Move From Passing to Dribble Penetration
3. How Do You Balance The Need For Freedom Against the Necessity of Structure?

Segment 2: Leads, Posts and Wings- How Changes In Player Skill and Athleticism Is The Leading Factor In What Teams Do.  

1.  What Does The Modern Player Look Like? (And Yes, They Are Built Better)
2.  Why Team Chemistry Still Matters A Great Deal? Longevity + Culture= Winning
3. Davids and Goliaths: How To Mitigate Your Weaknesses Versus Your Opponent’s Strengths?

Segment 3 and Wrap Up: The World Is Flat: An Idea and Innovation Can Span The Globe The Next Day

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

It’s October, the month of scares and frights. So what better time to dive into one of the most terrifying subjects in sports: the psyche of fans!

Specifically, Bob and Mike analyze fan biases and how they’re evolving. They also discuss the impact of these biases, and the expectations they create, on programs and coaches.

Segment 1: Why *Do* Fans See Their Program As “The Unicorn” in a Field of Plow Horses?

1. What Are Frequently Seen Fan Biases?
2. How Have Those Biases Played Out Over The Years? 
3. How Are Biases Evolving?

Segment 2: How Do Biases Impact What A Program Does?

1. What Does Playing (Your School’s) Basketball Actually Mean?
2. Why Are These Players (Your School’s) Type of Player?
3. What Are Outcomes of “Divergences” Between Fans’ Biases and Programs’ Paths? 

Segment 3 and Wrap Up: Why Do We (Mike and Bob) Do This To Ourselves In Our Personal Fandom?

In their next episode, Bob and Mike will discuss modern basketball and how both offensive and defensive systems are evolving. 

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bob and Mike take a little detour from their typical college basketball deep dives to discuss the most exciting current topic in Indiana sports: college football!

They share their own college football stories, look around the college football landscape, and discuss the encouraging beginning to the Curt Cignetti Era.

Two videos mentioned during their discussion:

• 1991 Florida State at Michigan
• 1979 Holiday Bowl: Indiana v BYU

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bob, Mike, and special guest Beau Haynes discuss the past, present, and future of the vaunted blue-blood head coaching job. How much have things really changed?

Segment 1: What Makes A Program’s Blood Blue?

• Which program are at the top of the social register and how did they get there?
• How do their fans and the program set expectations and maintain “standards?”
• The search for the next Lama, Pop, or Godfather: why are blue-blood hires different?

Segment 2: Do These “Blue Blood” Designations Really Matter Anymore?

• Why do prospective hires see offers they can refuse?
• Do 18-year-old kids really know about the history of Chuck Taylor?
• How have some programs broken into the country club locker room?

Segment 3 and Wrap Up

• Does the modern landscape allow for true blue bloods anymore? 

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Bob and Mike look back at last season and trace some highs and lows from different teams that went heavy in the portal to build their rosters.

Segment 1: How The Portal Worked Well For Some

1. The Levels of Success In College Basketball (Chart 1)
2. South Carolina
3. North Carolina

Segment 2: How It Didn’t Go Well For Some Others

1. Reviewing The Chip Stack Theory
2. Washington
3. Missouri 

Segment 3 and Wrap Up: Indiana’s Portal Haul

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.