The reason they aren't playing there is because they lost.

 

Absolutely false.

Absolutely false.

 

Okay. :lol2:

Then why won't they play a home and home? Obnoxious fans are a part of playing a true road game, so Wireman's poor excuse there shouldn't apply.

 

To add, I'm not saying IU isn't at fault here either, but UK not willing to play in Bloomington is the blocker here, IMO.

 

It's not a poor excuse. I was there. I seen it first hand. I have videos of it. The fans were WAY over the line. I wouldn't play there again either.

It's not a poor excuse. I was there. I seen it first hand. I have videos of it. The fans were WAY over the line. I wouldn't play there again either.

 

Then your program is soft.

Then your program is soft.

 

Thank God they aren't playing the game at Grand Canyon.

Thank God they aren't playing the game at Grand Canyon.

 

That would be the most hostile gym UK would play in all year, outside of the Yum. :lol2:

That would be the most hostile gym UK would play in all year, outside of the Yum. :lol2:

 

EVER!!! :lol2:

Then why won't they play a home and home? Obnoxious fans are a part of playing a true road game, so Wireman's poor excuse there shouldn't apply.

 

To add, I'm not saying IU isn't at fault here either, but UK not willing to play in Bloomington is the blocker here, IMO.

 

UK wants neutral sites for the games like Indy and Louisville; IU wants to keep the games on home courts. That's why they aren't playing.

Then why won't they play a home and home? Obnoxious fans are a part of playing a true road game, so Wireman's poor excuse there shouldn't apply.

 

To add, I'm not saying IU isn't at fault here either, but UK not willing to play in Bloomington is the blocker here, IMO.

 

What's the blocker in IU not willing to play in Indianapolis? Doesn't seem like they have a problem playing Louisville there.

What's the blocker in IU not willing to play in Indianapolis? Doesn't seem like they have a problem playing Louisville there.

 

Because IU is being petty with UK just like UK is being petty with IU.

UK wants neutral sites for the games like Indy and Louisville; IU wants to keep the games on home courts. That's why they aren't playing.

 

What's the purpose of neutral site games?

What's the blocker in IU not willing to play in Indianapolis? Doesn't seem like they have a problem playing Louisville there.

 

Crean says playing on campus gives students to opportunity to attend; something that would not be possible if the game is moved to Indy. You know, because it's so far away.

What's the purpose of neutral site games?

 

Not sure. My 1st guess would be recruiting?

Because IU is being petty with UK just like UK is being petty with IU.

 

What's the purpose of neutral site games?

 

Probably dumb to argue who is being more petty, but in my opinion its more petty to say "Play here or we don't play at all". Especially when you could play in a venue, like the one in Indy which would give a great feel and experience for the players who hope to be playing in similar venues come March and April.

 

Playing in an extremely hostile environment like Assembly Hall doesn't prepare players for the type of atmosphere they'll have in March Madness in my opinion.

 

Plus I am no finance guy, but I'd think the money they could get would be more playing in the Fieldhouse.

Not sure. My 1st guess would be recruiting?

 

1st guess should be it eliminates the home court advantage IU has in Bloomington, obviously.