ADVERTISEMENT

Fire Woodson…

I can’t remember a coach in D1 basketball who got less than 3 years without off the court issues or a complete collapse with like <10 wins after being better than that prior to them coming.

What coach would risk leaving a team to coach at IU if they didn’t think they would get 3-4 years before being fired?
Matt Doherty won the ACC year 1 and was fired after 3 years. They were only able to hire a HOF coach who won them 3 titles.

UK fans ran out Gilispie after 2 years and completely forced the AD’s hand for Calipari. That’s worked out ok.

Why would anyone be so foolish as you fire Crean after going 12-20 year 3 and hiring that Stevens guy 45 minutes up the road who was in the title game that year? It was possibly the easiest layup an AD has ever had.
 
By whose acccounts? Anyone on the record? Any first-hand?
Well one of the hysterics for one. Now, against Purdue watch and see which staff member is sitting directly next to Woodson and is talking to him the whole game. After that find another program in the country where the DOBO is the most utilized assistant in games.
 
This is pathetic
He hasn't even had the job a full year yet - no patience. It is amazing the logic of people thinking it was going to be an instant turn around for any coach. No coach would have stepped right in & taken this group of players far.
 
Woodson’s time at IU is irrelevant. That was 40 years ago. He was beyond mediocre as NBA coach, and has proven he doesn’t get it as a college coach.

Laughable for your to include Matta in this. If Woodson wasn’t too arrogant and actually used Matta, we wouldn’t be in this situation. There is no better resource for Woodson than Matta, and yet they never speak.

Fife is only an assistant because Dolson wanted him to be. Woodson didn’t want him and treats him as such. Again, Woodson too arrogant to use his best resources.

By all accounts, the only “staff” Woodson listens to are Armond Hill, Jim Todd, and Randy Whitman. All NBA guys.
I saw the bailey and henderson years but Woodson is before my time and I have only seen him on you tube. Even to me he is irrelevant image what a 25 year old thinks. Other than making some fans in there 60's and 70's and former players happy the hire means nothing. He is 64 years old nobody knows who he is outside of older IU fans.
He hasn't even had the job a full year yet - no patience. It is amazing the logic of people thinking it was going to be an instant turn around for any coach. No coach would have stepped right in & taken this group of players far.
Tommy lyold at arizona has a top three team in year one. Woodson will get three years but he is old and he needs to win pretty fast. This isnt a crean rebuild. The program is a dumpster fire and to get any interest back he needs major improvement next year. Something that shows its moving in the right direction.
 
He hasn't even had the job a full year yet - no patience. It is amazing the logic of people thinking it was going to be an instant turn around for any coach. No coach would have stepped right in & taken this group

People did not think instant turn around they thought ncaa team.
 
Another indicator will be to see which assistants bolt after the season...all of the inside baseball that has been posted about this staff will be verified one way or another. My biggest concern was the player selection in the portal that brought us those transfers. Which one has proven to be a game changer? Some will argue Johnson...but his inconsistency is what it is. Who recruited those guys? I think all of the transfers could have replaced with better alternatives....particularly with real shooters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: birdforbogey
Another indicator will be to see which assistants bolt after the season...all of the inside baseball that has been posted about this staff will be verified one way or another. My biggest concern was the player selection in the portal that brought us those transfers. Which one has proven to be a game changer? Some will argue Johnson...but his inconsistency is what it is. Who recruited those guys? I think all of the transfers could have replaced with better alternatives....particularly with real shooters.
If Woodson does not really listen to Fife or Matta I would not be surprised if they left. Why would they stay if they are not listened too?
 
I saw the bailey and henderson years but Woodson is before my time and I have only seen him on you tube. Even to me he is irrelevant image what a 25 year old thinks. Other than making some fans in there 60's and 70's and former players happy the hire means nothing. He is 64 years old nobody knows who he is outside of older IU fans.

Tommy lyold at arizona has a top three team in year one. Woodson will get three years but he is old and he needs to win pretty fast. This isnt a crean rebuild. The program is a dumpster fire and to get any interest back he needs major improvement next year. Something that shows its moving in the right direction.
Arizona's top 5 scorers are all holdovers from last year. One of those guys is a projected lottery pick. Those holdovers have started 147 of 150 games. So totally the same situation.

Woodson hasn't been great this year but you can't go nuclear after one year.
 
I saw the bailey and henderson years but Woodson is before my time and I have only seen him on you tube. Even to me he is irrelevant image what a 25 year old thinks. Other than making some fans in there 60's and 70's and former players happy the hire means nothing. He is 64 years old nobody knows who he is outside of older IU fans.

Tommy lyold at arizona has a top three team in year one. Woodson will get three years but he is old and he needs to win pretty fast. This isnt a crean rebuild. The program is a dumpster fire and to get any interest back he needs major improvement next year. Something that shows its moving in the right direction.
That's a joke if you are thinking it is an even comparison, he was handed a little bit different talented team, much better paid team as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beorik
I saw the bailey and henderson years but Woodson is before my time and I have only seen him on you tube. Even to me he is irrelevant image what a 25 year old thinks. Other than making some fans in there 60's and 70's and former players happy the hire means nothing. He is 64 years old nobody knows who he is outside of older IU fans.

Tommy lyold at arizona has a top three team in year one. Woodson will get three years but he is old and he needs to win pretty fast. This isnt a crean rebuild. The program is a dumpster fire and to get any interest back he needs major improvement next year. Something that shows its moving in the right direction.
I will agree on relevance to coaching but if you didn't get to see Mike play you missed out. Not saying it should be any reason to cut him any slack as a coach

Reliving 1980: Mike Woodson's Final Year at Indiana, and the...


He wins Big 10 mvp playing 6 out of 18 games, SIX games! If not for the three point line coming and missing 15 games is likely IU and Big 10 all time leading scorer.
 
That's a joke if you are thinking it is an even comparison, he was handed a little bit different talented team, much better paid team as well.
The point is you can win in year one. Its not a comparison but that Arizona team was not even ranked going into the season it not like it was a consensus top 10 team. None of the starters on that team were five star players all those guys miller paid are gone. The expectations were not that high so are we allowed to say the coach had somehing to do with it or no? Do we just say those are Miller players.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sparkeyreturns
Do you understand simple math? You certainly don't have a grasp of simple statistics.
Yes. I understand math. 2 seconds is less than 10 seconds.

We were tied with 10+ seconds left. But we let Rutgers find its best clutch shooter to take the lead, leaving us only 2 seconds to catch up.

So how would my critics have prevented this? They haven't said.

Our defensive options were limited, since Rutgers could take the lead with either a midrange jump shot, layup or three-pointer (and it was unknown whether the unpredictable Big Ten refs would let us play real defense on any of those).

My critics have never explained what plan they had either for keeping Rutgers from scoring or what backup plan they had for IU's ensuing offense if Rutgers took the lead. What backup plan did they have? They haven't said.

So, what is the downside of fouling a weak Rutgers foul-shooter on the inbounds pass, to prevent Rutgers from winding down the clock and then executing its chosen offense anyway?

You could answer with basketball knowledge or you could just attack (again).
 
Woodson didn't miss the shots. Woodson put the team in positions to make the shots. His job as coach is to put the team in the best position to score the basketball. He inherited the team and added the best talent he could in a very short period of time. Without the additions, we'd be madder than hell right now.

He's a good coach that needs to learn the college game while recruiting players who excel in his program. Give him time - he'll be fine.
I don't really know what I expected from him, but I'm impressed with IU's defense this year.

The bigger problem is our offense and, to borrow from baseball, we just don't have a midrange closer, a ninth inning closer or any other type of reliable go-to guy on offense.

The Occam's razor/life is simple explanation is simple: We are lacking an offensive guy who wants the ball and dares the wussies on the other side to challenge him when he has it. If Nolan Ryan played basketball, then that's the kind of guy we lack.

 
Brilliant, detailed discussion. Do you have a link for those runner-ups?

No need to have a detailed discussion with someone who thinks the smart move is to foul a 70%+ free throw shooter in a tied game with 10 seconds left. There isn’t one basketball mind on this planet that would agree with you.
 
No need to have a detailed discussion with someone who thinks the smart move is to foul a 70%+ free throw shooter in a tied game with 10 seconds left. There isn’t one basketball mind on this planet that would agree with you.
Whoa, big man. I never once said to "foul a 70%+ free throw shooter." That's on you. Now I understand the rest of your reaction.

Quote my post and cite the number of my post if you still insist that I said that.

What I suggested was that that IU foul on the inbounds play so no time would run off the clock, and then we'd have more time to try to retake the lead if Rutgers hit some free throws. Rutgers has a selection of players who shoot FTs at less than 70%. Obviously, we should foul the worst FT shooter available if possible.
 
Whoa, big man. I never once said to "foul a 70%+ free throw shooter." That's on you. Now I understand the rest of your reaction.

Quote my post and cite the number of my post if you still insist that I said that.

What I suggested was that that IU foul on the inbounds play so no time would run off the clock, and then we'd have more time to try to retake the lead if Rutgers hit some free throws. Rutgers has a selection of players who shoot FTs at less than 70%. Obviously, we should foul the worst FT shooter available if possible.

Baker and Harper were the only two to touch the ball. You asking for one of our guys to foul a Rutgers player away from the ball? Watch the play, McConnel, Omoruyi, and Hyatt aren’t even trying to be in the play. How do you foul them without it be intentional?
 
Woodson was an experiment at best. He wasn’t qualified for the position he was given. They are more likely to pull the plug in this experiment more quickly than a coach with actual college basketball coaching experience.

Not that our athletic department is competent enough to hire a good coach after him.
Who wastes a timeout to get the ball to half court to design a play after coming out of a timeout called by the other team. What did we discuss in the first timeout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GThomas
All you calling for Woodson’s head should be ashamed. This is not Tom Crean, Archie Miller, or even Brad Stevens. Mike Woodson is arguably the best player Knight ever coached. He is a Hoosier from the best era of our program’s history. He’s built an elite coaching resume, and he’s returning to IU for sole purpose of restoring his alma mater to prominence. He deserves two, three, four years from Indiana fans to fix this dumpster fire.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bub-rub
All you calling for Woodson’s head should be ashamed. This is not Tom Crean, Archie Miller, or even Brad Stevens. Mike Woodson is arguably the best player Knight ever coached. He is a Hoosier from the best era of our program’s history. He’s built an elite coaching resume, and he’s returning to IU for sole purpose of restoring his alma mater to prominence. He deserves two, three, four years from Indiana fans to fix this dumpster fire.
You might be the dumbest poster here if you think Woodson has an elite coaching resume. You are correct that he isn’t Crean, Miller, or Stevens. He’s worse.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT