Its not too early for IU to be thinking about 2017 opener (2024)

82hoosier said:

A big concern for the opening game against Ohio State game is how many players will be suspended for the first game? Last year it was 9. And this year it was 6. This could be a real problem. History tends to repeat itself.

Click to expand...

Can't think of a better opportunity to pull an upset.
We play them tough every year it seems.
First game of the year at home,possibly a night game.
Lots of evperience coming back, could be interesting, but first things first.

82hoosier said:

A big concern for the opening game against Ohio State game is how many players will be suspended for the first game? Last year it was 9. And this year it was 6. This could be a real problem. History tends to repeat itself.

Click to expand...

That game will be big, but we've still got one left in '16. The difference between 6-7 and 7-6 is huge. Last year we made it to a bowl; this year we need to win it. Go IU!

82hoosier said:

A big concern for the opening game against Ohio State game is how many players will be suspended for the first game? Last year it was 9. And this year it was 6. This could be a real problem. History tends to repeat itself.

Click to expand...

IU teams under CKW have played particularly poorly in first games. No real confidence here, especially with Lagow as our likely qb. Don't interpret this as a fire CKW post - our program is much improved under him, even with its obvious flaws, imo. Still an accurate observation.

When I was an undergrad somewhere in the northeast, where the drinking age was 18, I remember a survey in the student newspaper that something like 80% of students had tried pot and 60% were occasional users. I think occasional was defined as not before breakfast. And this is when it was a felony. Now it is legal in 8 states. Approximately 40% of college student "use elicit substances" now (source: 2014 University of Michigan study)

Call it a wild guess but I would not surprised if not all of those suspensions are related to skipping school. Its just a matter of time before pot is decriminalized or is just plain legalized in most states. I would think the NCAA realizes they have a problem that has no solution short of changing the drug test. I would hate to see opening season games around the country being determined by random drug tests. It is a problem that is only going to get worse.

82hoosier said:

When I was an undergrad somewhere in the northeast, where the drinking age was 18, I remember a survey in the student newspaper that something like 80% of students had tried pot and 60% were occasional users. I think occasional was defined as not before breakfast. And this is when it was a felony. Now it is legal in 8 states. Approximately 40% of college student "use elicit substances" now (source: 2014 University of Michigan study)

Call it a wild guess but I would not surprised if not all of those suspensions are related to skipping school. Its just a matter of time before pot is decriminalized or is just plain legalized in most states. I would think the NCAA realizes they have a problem that has no solution short of changing the drug test. I would hate to see opening season games around the country being determined by random drug tests. It is a problem that is only going to get worse.

Click to expand...

Very good point. Not only is the stigma of marijuana use decreasing by the day, how would you punish a player in a State where it is legal to consume. If the qb from Colorado State can legally smoke pot, how do other schools justify suspending kids for having the substance in their system. Granted, it's still illegal in most states but it's also illegal for those under 21 to have a beer and I doubt that anyone (ok maybe BYU or Liberty) suspends players unless there is an alcohol-related "incident".

I suspect that the player who is a problem user of any kind of drug will ultimately struggle performing as a player and dig his own grave so to speak. I would much rather see stringent and regular tests for PEDs than see kids out of uniform for sharing a joint at a frat party. In my opinion, the NCAA and all professional sports need to seriously ramp up the PED testing and let the other stuff go. Smoking pot never gave anyone an unfair advantage over the opposition unless there was a giggling or Doritos-eating competition. But whatever Bielema's linemen were using - presumably undetected (wink, wink) - at Wisky sure made a difference. George Perles' boys at MSU got themselves a Big Ten title that should have gone to the Hoosiers via the syringe and not the bong.

I have been googling the subject of drug testing and am a bit surprised by what I have found.

The NCAA does year-round drug testing, but it currently only tests for marijuana during bowl games in football and at the championship level for other Division I sports. If an athlete tests positive for marijuana, the person cannot participate in the bowl game or championship event and must sit out half of the ensuing season.

A college or university can conduct its own drug testing. The only requirement is that the school actually follow their own policies. Policies differ from school-to-school on which drugs are tested, testing frequency and amount of advance notice given, as well as on penalties.

Indiana has mandatory testing for all of its athletes. Everyone is tested before NCAA championships or bowl games, and 40 athletes are chosen randomly to be tested each month. Athletes are tested for street drugs, alcohol and, more infrequently, steroids.

I read the above as 40 athletes - not 40 football players. And I see that many of the schools give several days notice for the tests. I am in an industry where you are given notice of a test and you are required to be at a testing laboratory within 3 hours.

Pelkowski said:

We may have our best shot at an upset in game 1. We have played them tough through the years. I could see it happening.

Click to expand...

That's how Virginia Tech beat 'em.

82hoosier said:

That's how Virginia Tech beat 'em.

Click to expand...

I think it's possible but big difference between that year and next. Barrett was starting his second game and with a new OL. Next year He will be a 5th year SR with 15--18 returning starters. I'm assuming they will be preseason #1.

82hoosier said:

A big concern for the opening game against Ohio State game is how many players will be suspended for the first game? Last year it was 9. And this year it was 6. This could be a real problem. History tends to repeat itself.

Click to expand...

Both teams will have some I'm sure

Kelly_32 said:

Hopefully the opponent will inspire the guys not to be stupid during the off-season.

Click to expand...

Exactly right.....next year starts off with a yuuuuuuge opportunity!
Coming off an extra month of practice, what better time to build that' team as family concept',
and stay clean, work hard, stay out of stuff you have no business around.....and do it for yourself, but more importantly, for your family...!

ElMeson said:

I think it's possible but big difference between that year and next. Barrett was starting his second game and with a new OL. Next year He will be a 5th year SR with 15--18 returning starters. I'm assuming they will be preseason #1.

Click to expand...

I don't think it's any better than 50/50 that Barrett comes back next year. If they win it all it's probably 100/0 that he's gone.

Ohio State always loses a ton of starters that annually leave early for the NFL. I'm sure it'll be no different after the bowl season plays out. They'll have a bunch of guys get evaluated and jump for the $$$.

With IU's returning starters on both sides of the ball, that opening game would be the very best time of the year to beat them.

IU looks like it'll certainly have the defense to get the job done. IU fans MUST fill the stadium.