Todd’s Take: Oumar Ballo Comments Touched A Nerve On A Multi-Layered Issue

Some Indiana fans took umbrage to Oumar Ballo’s comments about critical fans. Some Indiana fans praised him for his honesty. The comments exposed a disconnect between fans and players. One that is enflamed by over-the-top criticism.

Todd Golden | 18 Hours Ago

Indiana Hoosiers center Oumar Ballo (11) in the second half against the Rutgers Scarlet Knights at Simon Skjodt Assembly Hall. / Trevor Ruszkowski-Imagn Images

In this story:

Indiana Hoosiers

BLOOMINGTON, Ind. – As I stood in front of Oumar Ballo in the very cramped Indiana locker room after the Hoosiers’ 72-59 loss to Oregon Thursday at Gainbridge Fieldhouse, and I heard his emotional appeal about what he’s gone through with hyper-critical fans, I was hit with the contradictory emotion of being stunned by what Ballo said and also impressed with the unvarnished honesty of it all.

Whether you agree with Ballo’s comments or not, it’s how he feels. He didn’t play nice for the brand, and he didn’t hold back. That is refreshing in a world where every word is measured and often controlled. (It also dawned on me why colleges want to restrict this kind of access to the media. More on that later.)

What Ballo actually said? Honest though it was, there’s a lot to unpack. As much with what creates the environment for Ballo to feel as he does as with the words themselves.

Indiana fans aren’t alone in their vitriol

After Ballo’s comments were published by Hoosiers On SI and other outlets, the reaction was predictable. The very same fans that Ballo aimed at went right back to their vitriol, blissfully clueless in how they’re part of a problem.

Other fans had Ballo’s back, sick and tired of the overheated criticism that has been aimed at Ballo, coach Mike Woodson, and whoever is the Hoosiers’ scapegoat of the moment.

You know how I feel about it. Sometimes the criticism reaches cartoonish levels of self-flagellation. There’s this unspoken bizarro contest of sorts, where fans try to top each other in terms of how angry they get. Toddlers often act with more maturity compared to the worst of the worst social media trolls.

Trying to see it from Ballo’s point of view, you can understand his beef. He’s been called lazy, his effort has been questioned, he was subject to overblown criticism over a supposed late-night visit to a local watering hole in December, which may or may not have been what it seemed.

Ballo isn’t perfect. No one is on this flawed team, but based on some of the criticism he gets, you’d never guess that he’s Indiana’s leading rebounder and shot blocker, the second-leading scorer, and the second-best in the Big Ten in shooting percentage.

Where Ballo committed a faux pas was leaning into the “true fans” thing. All that did was annoy fans who don’t like being split into a camp – even if those camps do actually exist. It recalled Mike Woodson’s controversial comments from 2024 Senior Day, and it was a mistake to go down that road again. Many fans got perturbed with “true fans” and tuned out the message Ballo was trying to deliver.

Many Indiana fans do go way over the top in criticism, but they’re not alone. Internet trolls and keyboard instigators exist in every fanbase. Where Indiana seems different is in the sheer number of Indiana basketball fans. Even minority groups within the fanbase are plenty voluminous, but the rational ones are almost always the most silent in a fanbase. No one should lose sight of that.

The nature of the criticism

Indiana Hoosiers center Oumar Ballo (11) shoots the ball while Oregon Ducks center Nate Bittle (32) defends in the first half at Gainbridge Fieldhouse. / Trevor Ruszkowski-Imagn Images

The very fact that Ballo would go off on the fans touched a nerve on its own. There’s this quaint belief many buy into that players and coaches should never say a word back, even if criticism crosses the line of accuracy or good taste.

I’ve always thought that was nonsense. And I thought it was nonsense before the days where you could go directly at a player on social media. Players shouldn’t have to endure unacceptable behavior out of some misplaced justification of “I bought a ticket.”

Some players grin and bear it anyway. Former Indiana Pacer David West weighed in on Thursday. He leaned into the NIL aspect of the criticism players get.

Listen. Money is involved. Expectations are different. Productivity, professionalism, and personal accountability come with the pro sports environment. The college level is rapidly becoming that. Yall want the bag? This comes with it. https://t.co/6hSoPKZL1q
— David West (@D_West30) March 14, 2025

“Ya’ll want the bag? This comes with it,” said West, referring to NIL payments.

I covered West at the end of his days with the Pacers. You won’t find a more thoughtful, intelligent person in any locker room in any sport. But I disagree with him on this.

Here’s one very important rule of thumb that applies to this situation and to life in general. Those who are abused or bullied shouldn’t have to adjust to jerks. We should expect the jerks to adjust to a higher standard. Or even just the minimum standard of not being jerks. Think before you post is always sage advice. So is putting yourself in someone else’s shoes.

I get that skin needs to be thick if you work in a public-facing job, but there are limits, and there are lines that are crossed whether you’re a public figure or not.

Booing in an arena? Even the occasional player-specific jeering from the crowd? That occurs where criticism has its proper context. No problem there.

Anonymous nonsense posted into the social media ether? It’s odious, but a player needs to galvanize themselves to only care about the opinions of those who matter to them. Some jerk on X who can’t handle adversity (or maybe lost a bet) isn’t worth worrying about. In that way, I agree with West.

Where I don’t agree is when it crosses the line into direct messaging involving threats (whether they’re “death threats” or not is distraction-by-parsing, any threat is unacceptable) or going at players directly on their social media accounts. To me, that’s bullying at best and borderline stalking at worst in any other walk of life. Why should players tolerate it?

And being paid – I don’t care whether it’s $1 or $1,000,000 – isn’t some justification for this kind of behavior. Dollars to donuts that the vast majority of people who act this way haven’t given a penny to a NIL collective or to the athletic program in their lives, so where do they get off?

To say “they make money” as carte blanche for bad behavior is just a lame excuse to act like a jerk. We live in a crueler world, but it’s not that cruel. Not so much that we shouldn’t strive for class over crass.

The toll it takes

Some say suck it up, and in doing so, get away from social media. Many who say that come from my generation or older. I grew up the majority of my life without social media and would gleefully chuck it in the trash if I could. I partake, but I don’t need it.

That’s not so easy for those under the age of 30. They don’t know life without social media as their outlet of choice. Anyone who has college-aged kids, as I do, knows how social media has weaved its way into every fabric of their lives.

Few people that age can just walk away from social media when they’re wired to be part of it. Players are just a reflection of society in that sense.

Add to that the social media inevitably of building these players up when they’re being recruited, and the flowers they get before they prove anything. It makes criticism seem that much worse if it comes. Players feel people who were patting them on the back as recruits or transfers are stabbing them in the back in record time at the smallest sign of adversity. It would be hard for anyone to handle.

Two years ago, I wrote a multi-part series for a different media outlet on the impact of social media on athletes. I spoke to players, coaches (Woodson included) and sports psychologists about the phenomenon. The psychological impact of social media criticism is profound for people that age, athletes included and research is just now revealing how immersive it can be. Many college sports teams have counseling on-hand for players to cope with the social media criticism. NIL just adds to it.

Words do harm, whether we want to acknowledge it or not. Ballo’s comments are a window into how it feels.

The disconnect between fans, coaches and athletes

On a grander scheme, I think the disconnect between fans, coaches and players has a role in how people interact.

Indiana is one of many schools who severely restrict access to players and coaches. The locker room interview at the Big Ten Tournament that allowed Ballo the chance to speak without filter is a rarity. Most of the time? Players and coaches (true for both men’s and women’s basketball at Indiana) are only available during arranged press conferences.

There is little chance for players and coaches to speak their minds or tell their stories in their own ways.

In other words, there’s little chance to humanize these human beings for the fans.

Access to players is restricted out of a misplaced sense of protection – it’s funny how players are conveniently “kids” when it suits the powers-that-be, but then they’re “adults” when it comes to pulling a scholarship or some such thing. Access is also restricted in an effort to control the message.

It’s a big mistake for many reasons. But related to this topic, when players and coaches speak to the public, whether through the media or in their own unfiltered way, the more fans feel like they have a stake in their stories. It also makes players more accountable for their words. Shielding players in this way does more harm than good to them if they can’t learn how to back up what they do want to say.

Without that level of discourse, players and coaches seem more like commodities than human beings. They’re just someone filling the uniform, not a person fans have much of a connection to other than hoping that they help the team win. It creates a disconnect where fans don’t feel part of their journey. So why worry about the psychological impact of harmful vitriol when it’s spewed?

We have a recent example on how player access works to the benefit of both players and program. Indiana football has more player-and-coach interaction with the media than basketball.

Indiana's Elijah Sarratt (13) celebrates a touchdown during the Indiana versus Purdue football game at Memorial Stadium on Saturday, Nov. 30, 2024. / Rich Janzaruk/Herald-Times / USA TODAY NETWORK via Imagn Images

Winning big as Indiana football did in 2024 will make any player popular. But I don’t think it’s a coincidence that fans could fall in love with those Hoosiers easier when we learned from wide receiver Elijah Sarratt that his nickname is “Waffle House” because he’s always open. Or defensive tackle James Carpenter speaking of transitioning from hardly being recruited in high school to being a Big Ten starter.

Ballo’s comments hit home with a lot of fans. They hit home with me, too. I hope what he said isn’t dismissed as sour grapes. I hope what he said doesn’t make things worse than they already are.

We don’t have to agree with every word Ballo said, but we ought to listen with some sense of empathy and walk a bit in his shoes. We can’t just throw up our hands and give in to our worst instincts.

We expect the players to perform at their best for us. I don’t think it’s too much to ask for us to hold ourselves to a better standard of behavior for them.