Indiana and Kentucky have played each other every season since 1969. Indiana wanted to keep the games at the schools' homecourts and Kentucky wanted to play in local off-site venues. Looks to be squabbling over a few dollars. This is unfortunate because Indiana is finally getting their team back to national prominece and Kentucky looks to stay at the top for the forseeable future.
Indiana-Kentucky basketball series coming to an end
Growing tired of neurtral site games....
neutral site games are sooo...passionate. "If I die, tell my wife 'Hello.'"
What's not to like about 2 powerhouses that share a border, played yearly since 1969, and just had two memorable games in one season?
Oh, not enough money. Ok, cancel it then....
Thank you for expanding my alliterative vocabulary. This might just unseat jumping junipers and crispy crematoriums.
Calipayme is worried that IU will end Kentucky's home winning streak.
That's a reach.
The IU-UK game hasn't always been played in Bloomington. Before the Mike Davis/Sampson meltdown years, it was played in Indianapolis at the RCA Dome. So I'm not sure the big deal is for IU.
Besides, it's December college basketball. It means almost as much as a April Tigers game.
Actually a lot of conference Cree is built up in the non-con season. Whenever Indiana was mentioned this past year their win over Kentucky was constantly mentioned. A few years ago we hung our hats on victories over UCLA and Duke in November/December games. They can go a long way to helping teams get into the Tourney, improve their seed, or even keep them out.
Yes, and in 2009, when the Tigers lost the one game playoff to the Twins, I'm sure they were kicking themselves about some game they lost in April as well. Was it important? Ultimately yes, but I'm doubting that Kentucky and Indiana will be concerned with tourney profiles anytime soon. I'm not sure teams worry about seeding as much as the fans do.
If this series ends because KY doesn't want to play at home courts that is real sad...
That's a bummer. Just when the rivalry was beginning to show some signs of parity, too.
Meh. I don't think it's any real loss. Kentucky won 17 of the last 21 games against Indiana. They were dominating this rivalry long before the Hoosiers program fell on hard times.
I'd say that's precisely the time IU fell on hard times. In the last 21 games, IU was only ranked 9 times, and more highly ranked than UK only 3 times (1-2 in those games, by the way, the lone win coming when UK was unranked).
Since 1969, the series has been only 26-21 in Kentucky's favor, so overall, it hasn't been a total mismatch, although as someone said, Kentucky is 17-4 going back to the 1990s. I will admit, it does leave me wondering how this would have gone in the future now that Indiana is beginning to get some solid footing in basketball again. Would they start to be a consistent challenge to Kentucky in the next few years? Apparently, we may never have good data on that one.
This would have looked better as a moral statement from Indiana, along the lines of "We don't want to play a school that has a coach who has cheated every place he's been, and who is trying to turn his team into "One-and-dones R Us."
I congratulate Indiana for their class, but it would be sooo entertaining if they had just a little bit less.
Kentucky didn't like that Indiana beat them at home, did they?
Some rivalry if you have to rework it every time you lose.
Kentucky offered to play the next two years in the state of Indiana both neutral sites. No home game for the wildcats.
make big bucks from playing the games at neutral sites
or make $0 not playing Indiana.
Neutral site games suck and totally undermine one of the best things about college sports: atmosphere. Watching neutral site games is like watching the Gator Bowl.
Boo as a recent Kentucky transplant I am quite pissed at this development. I worked with a few people who made the trip to Bloomington from Lexington for the game this year and obviously their stance on this "its for the better" which BS.