What Did Indiana Really Learn From Howard? The Question Behind IU’s Nonconference Schedule
BLOOMINGTON — What exactly did Indiana prove against Howard?
That it has better football players?
We knew that before kickoff.
That Indiana could overwhelm an FCS opponent?
We knew that, too.
Indiana beat Howard 55-0 at Memorial Stadium in a game so one-sided that the fourth quarter was shortened from 15 minutes to 10 after Howard requested the adjustment and both head coaches agreed.
Howard finished with 57 yards of total offense and four first downs. Indiana accumulated 506 yards and 24 first downs.
Indiana did exactly what the defending national champion should do against an opponent it substantially outmatched.
But that isn’t really the question.
The question is what Indiana actually learned about itself.
And maybe there’s an even bigger question:
What should the purpose of Indiana’s nonconference schedule be now that the Hoosiers aren’t chasing bowl eligibility — they’re chasing championships?
At Some Point, the Margin Matters
Howard wasn’t an isolated mismatch.
Go back three seasons.
In 2024, Indiana beat Western Illinois 77-3.
Last season, Indiana beat Indiana State 73-0.
Now Howard goes into the books at 55-0.
That’s a combined score of:
Indiana 205, FCS opponents 3.
Read that again.
205-3.
This isn’t criticism of those programs. And it certainly isn’t Howard’s fault.
It’s simply an illustration of how enormous the competitive gap has become.
There is value in winning. There is value in building confidence. There is value in executing assignments correctly and getting young players onto the field.
But when the competitive disparity becomes large enough that the fourth quarter is shortened, it’s reasonable to ask:
How much are we actually learning about Indiana?
Howard Had Value — Just Not the Kind Some Think
I don’t believe Saturday was meaningless.
From a coaching standpoint, Indiana had plenty to evaluate.
Communication.
Alignment.
Assignment football.
Protection calls.
Route depth.
Run fits.
Tackling.
Special teams.
Indiana also got something every coaching staff covets in September: developmental snaps without having to jeopardize the outcome.
Nine Hoosiers made their collegiate debuts. Young players who spend most Saturdays preparing without playing finally got legitimate game repetitions.
True freshman linebacker Jacob Savage is a perfect example. He played 13 defensive snaps, and the PFF grades we examined afterward showed an 81.2 overall defensive grade, including 78.5 against the run.
Those snaps matter.
Backup quarterbacks played. Reserve offensive linemen played. Young defensive linemen, linebackers and defensive backs got onto the field.
That’s roster development.
But let’s make an important distinction:
Development isn’t the same thing as being tested.
Howard could expose a missed assignment on film.
Howard probably couldn’t consistently punish Indiana for it.
Ohio State can.
Michigan can.
USC can.
Washington can.
That’s the difference.
Cignetti Knows the Difference
Curt Cignetti said something after the game that gets to the heart of this discussion.
Despite winning 55-0, he wasn’t talking as though Indiana had played perfect football. He pointed toward mistakes that could become critical mistakes in bigger football games.
That’s exactly how a coach should view a game like Howard.
The scoreboard says Indiana dominated.
The film asks whether Indiana executed.
An offensive lineman can take a poor set and still win because he’s simply bigger, stronger and more athletic than the defender across from him.
That’s still a minus on Monday morning.
A linebacker can fit the wrong gap and Howard might gain six yards.
Do it against an elite Big Ten running back and he may be running underneath the goalposts.
A defensive back can have poor eye discipline without Howard being capable of exploiting it.
Ohio State probably will.
That’s why Cignetti can walk into the meeting room after a 55-point victory with plenty to correct.
And that’s where Howard served its purpose.
This Isn’t an Accident — It’s Indiana’s Strategy
Here’s where Athletic Director Scott Dolson becomes important to this discussion.
Indiana’s nonconference schedule didn’t accidentally become this way.
It’s a strategy.
Dolson has explained that Indiana wants its nonconference schedule to position the program to be successful during the back half of the season — when Big Ten championships and College Football Playoff opportunities are actually decided.
He has also acknowledged that Indiana must remain flexible because the playoff system itself continues to evolve.
“We’re on a month-to-month basis and will continue to evaluate that as things change.”
In other words, Indiana isn’t declaring that this will be its scheduling philosophy forever.
It’s saying:
Tell us what the playoff rewards, and we’ll build a schedule designed to get there.
That’s not cowardice.
That’s strategy.
And Cignetti hasn’t tried to hide it.
With the Big Ten already playing a nine-game conference schedule, he has pointed toward the scheduling philosophy traditionally employed by the SEC and essentially asked why Indiana should voluntarily make its path more difficult if the system doesn’t reward it for doing so.
You can disagree with that philosophy.
But you can’t say Indiana hasn’t thought it through.
There’s One Big Problem With Criticizing Dolson and Cignetti
They’ve got the ultimate rebuttal.
A national championship trophy.
Last season Indiana played Old Dominion, Kennesaw State and Indiana State outside the Big Ten.
The Hoosiers won those games by a combined 156-23.
Then they went through the Big Ten.
Then the postseason.
Then the College Football Playoff.
And ultimately won the national championship.
So let’s be careful about declaring that Indiana needs a marquee nonconference opponent to become championship-ready.
Indiana just proved that it doesn’t.
The Big Ten provided the adversity.
The postseason provided the adversity.
The College Football Playoff provided the adversity.
Indiana handled it.
That’s why this isn’t as simple as saying, Schedule somebody better.
But Indiana Isn’t the Same Program Anymore
This is where my opinion starts to change.
Indiana isn’t trying to become bowl eligible anymore.
It isn’t hoping to steal six wins.
It isn’t simply trying to survive November.
Indiana is the defending national champion.
That changes expectations.
And I think it eventually should change the scheduling conversation.
The 2026 nonconference schedule consists of North Texas, Howard and Western Kentucky — all three in Bloomington.
Indiana has already beaten North Texas 52-16 and Howard 55-0.
Western Kentucky comes next.
Nobody is asking Indiana to schedule Georgia, Texas and Notre Dame in consecutive weeks.
That would make no sense.
But I do believe there’s a reasonable middle ground between scheduling a gauntlet and annually scheduling an opponent that has almost no realistic chance to push Indiana into the fourth quarter.
What Could One Better Opponent Give Indiana?
One legitimate nonconference test could provide something Howard couldn’t.
Adversity.
What happens when Indiana trails 10-0?
What happens when Josh Hoover gets pressured on consecutive possessions?
What happens when Indiana can’t run the football?
What happens when the opponent stuffs third-and-one?
What happens when a defensive back gets beaten twice?
What happens when your starting quarterback throws an interception?
What happens when the opponent answers your touchdown with one of its own?
What happens when Memorial Stadium gets nervous because Indiana is tied with six minutes remaining?
You cannot manufacture those situations.
Coaches try.
We script two-minute situations. Backed-up situations. Four-minute offense. Red zone. Goal line. Sudden change. Overtime.
We put the ball down in practice and create consequences.
But players know it’s practice.
There is no substitute for standing on the sideline in the fourth quarter of a real football game when the other team believes it can beat you.
Howard couldn’t give Indiana that Saturday.
Then Again — Why Volunteer for It?
And this is where I come back toward Dolson and Cignetti.
Why manufacture a difficult September game when the Big Ten is going to provide plenty of them?
Why increase the possibility of injury?
Why potentially put a loss on the résumé?
Why expose your roster to another physically demanding game?
Why schedule for television and perception when the objective is to qualify for the playoff and win the national championship?
Especially when recent history suggests the strategy works.
That’s the strongest argument Indiana has.
And it’s difficult to refute.
So What Did We Actually Learn Saturday?
We learned Indiana approached an inferior opponent professionally.
That’s important.
We learned the defense responded.
We learned Indiana’s depth is developing.
We learned some young players can execute when given opportunities.
We learned the offensive line can protect.
We learned the Hoosiers could play reserves without allowing the standard to collapse.
Those are all positives.
But did we learn whether Indiana can beat Ohio State?
No.
Did we learn whether Indiana can handle a hostile road environment?
No.
Did we learn what happens when Indiana gets punched in the mouth?
No.
Did we learn how this team responds when it’s behind in the fourth quarter?
No.
Howard couldn’t answer those questions.
And it wasn’t supposed to.
Coach Griff’s Take
I understand Indiana’s scheduling philosophy.
Actually, from a coaching standpoint, I understand it very well.
Get your wins.
Develop your football team.
Keep your roster healthy.
Correct mistakes.
Build confidence.
Then enter the Big Ten schedule ready to compete for championships.
And after Indiana went undefeated and won the national championship, I’m not going to sit here and tell Scott Dolson and Curt Cignetti that their approach doesn’t work.
It clearly works.
But I’m also not going to pretend a 55-0 victory over Howard proved Indiana is one of the four best football teams in America.
It didn’t.
It proved Indiana has substantially better football players than Howard.
It proved Indiana handled its business.
And it gave the coaching staff another week of film and another collection of developmental snaps.
That’s valuable.
But it’s different from being tested.
And maybe that’s the most important conclusion.
These games aren’t designed to tell us whether Indiana can beat Ohio State, Michigan or USC.
They’re designed to help Indiana prepare to beat Ohio State, Michigan or USC.
If that’s the standard, Howard served its purpose.
But Indiana’s rise has changed everything around this football program — expectations, recruiting, facilities, NIL, attendance and national perception.
Eventually, it may change scheduling, too.
Because Indiana isn’t building schedules simply to get to six wins anymore.
It isn’t building schedules just to reach Indianapolis.
And it isn’t building schedules merely to get into the College Football Playoff.
Indiana is building schedules to win another national championship.
That’s the standard now.
And that makes the question of who Indiana plays before the Big Ten schedule more interesting than it has ever been.
