ADVERTISEMENT

Beard, Oats, McDermott

All 3 have signed contract extensions rather than take jobs at Ohio State, Louisville or Michigan.

So when we move on from Woody, whenever that is, some of you are going to be very disappointed with who is actually interested in the job/who we get.

And this isn’t a ‘we should keep Woodson’ post because I wasn’t a fan of the hire to begin with and I see the warts clearly.
You don't see Woodson's warts clearly. Quit lying. But yes, the names being floated are likely remote possibilities at best.
 
Well, if he’s on ONE LIST from some guy no one has ever heard of, then chalk it up!

No, I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about, because you're proposing we hire a guy that can't even meet your standards. You are a bleating goat, mad because IU won't poison itself to make you happy.
Mike Woodson doesn't meet my standards. He can't recruit Jamie Dixion would be ten time better at Indiana Then Woodson.
UCLA wanted him but you know he isn't a good coach.

 
Mike Woodson doesn't meet my standards. He can't recruit Jamie Dixion would be ten time better at Indiana Then Woodson.
UCLA wanted him but you know he isn't a good coach.

Thanks for making yourself clear. Everyone was wondering when you'd finally take a side.

How does one coach become "ten times better" than another? Woodson is winning, what 19 games a year? Would "Dixion" win 190 games a year? Dang, that would be awesome.

UCLA was universally ridiculed for their amateurish search, where Dixon was among several coaches who turned them down publicly. I'm sure you'd love it if IU looked just as stupid.
 
Mike Woodson doesn't meet my standards. He can't recruit Jamie Dixion would be ten time better at Indiana Then Woodson.
UCLA wanted him but you know he isn't a good coach.

I’d take Dixon over Woodson 100 times out of 100, BUT HE’S NOT COMING HERE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Victorbmyboy
Thanks for making yourself clear. Everyone was wondering when you'd finally take a side.

How does one coach become "ten times better" than another? Woodson is winning, what 19 games a year? Would "Dixion" win 190 games a year? Dang, that would be awesome.

UCLA was universally ridiculed for their amateurish search, where Dixon was among several coaches who turned them down publicly. I'm sure you'd love it if IU looked just as stupid.
Who did we play to get those 19 wins?..you know who else had 19 wins..MSU. The MSU we beat and is a 9 seed. Straw man argument and NET told the real story
 
Who did we play to get those 19 wins?..you know who else had 19 wins..MSU. The MSU we beat and is a 9 seed. Straw man argument and NET told the real story
We sucked but the NET sucked more. Last year the NET loved Purdue and they got beat by a 300 ranked team.
 
Who did we play to get those 19 wins?..you know who else had 19 wins..MSU. The MSU we beat and is a 9 seed. Straw man argument and NET told the real story
I didn't say 19 wins was impressive. I just asked how we determine one coach is ten times better...because that is an objectively stupid and unprovable claim. If it was 12, the point would be the same.

I don't think you understand what the phrase "straw man argument" means. You might wanna google that one.
 
Our 19 wins = 98 net rating. MSUs 19 wins= 24 net rating. Our wins were effectively worthless. There are few arguments I'd use with our 19 wins to counter a point, even an exaggerated one.
 
Jamie Dixon wouldn't last 2 years here. You know, toxic fans and all. Crean 2.0.
Screenshot-20240317-201240.jpg

Dixon is way better then Crean. He was elite at Pitt he decided to go back to his Alma matter. With Indiana resources he would be elite not saying is coming but the guy can coach. Before he got there TCU was 50-89 under Trent Johnson. Billy Tubbs was the last coach before Dixon to take TCU to the tournament in 1997. To be honest Dixon is doing what Collins is doing at Northwestern.

 
Thanks for making yourself clear. Everyone was wondering when you'd finally take a side.

How does one coach become "ten times better" than another? Woodson is winning, what 19 games a year? Would "Dixion" win 190 games a year? Dang, that would be awesome.

UCLA was universally ridiculed for their amateurish search, where Dixon was among several coaches who turned them down publicly. I'm sure you'd love it if IU looked just as stupid.
Indiana has so many resources that Dixon would be great. Not saying he is coming but
Thanks for making yourself clear. Everyone was wondering when you'd finally take a side.

How does one coach become "ten times better" than another? Woodson is winning, what 19 games a year? Would "Dixion" win 190 games a year? Dang, that would be awesome.

UCLA was universally ridiculed for their amateurish search, where Dixon was among several coaches who turned them down publicly. I'm sure you'd love it if IU looked just as stupid.

DIxon would not turn down Indiana. I have a feeling he might take the Michigan job. You do realize that TCU was as bad as Northwestern before Dixon came.
 
Screenshot-20240317-201240.jpg

Dixon is way better then Crean. He was elite at Pitt he decided to go back to his Alma matter. With Indiana resources he would be elite not saying is coming but the guy can coach. Before he got there TCU was 50-89 under Trent Johnson. Billy Tubbs was the last coach before Dixon to take TCU to the tournament in 1997. To be honest Dixon is doing what Collins is doing at Northwestern.

Elite? Give me a break.
 
Elite? Give me a break.
He damn near got ran out at PITT. Hes a good coach but he’s not a fit. Not many are. My fear is the fans have too big of expectations. We aren’t that special. We show up. That’s about it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT