Fred to retire, Archie on the clock

[IndyResident16]

Rightfully so?

I personally can't see how even Archie's biggest fan would be saying that, based on results to date, he has any kind of rightful claim to continue on...particularly if we whiff again. Hell, he himself has made public comments about how dissatisfied he is with the results. Do tell, Ryan Joseph. Do tell.

That said, Glass had already made clear Archie would get another season, regardless how this season goes.

That's how we roll these days.

And it shows.

I'm willing to give a guy 4 years to establish a culture and see how he performs with his initial classes as upperclassmen before calling it quits and starting all over from scratch.

If Archie isn't winning with a team that he assembled himself after year 4, it will be time.

 

[ReadHall84]

Glass has built facilities, overseen a lot of progress, etc but the depressed men's basketball program is troubling.

 

[cmo1]

I'm willing to give a guy 4 years to establish a culture and see how he performs with his initial classes as upperclassmen before calling it quits and starting all over from scratch.

If Archie isn't winning with a team that he assembled himself after year 4, it will be time.

If Bob Knight had his health, this would be a great opportunity to get him back to IU!! He would make an excellent AD at IU!

 

[Courtsensetwo]

This is Pat Krafts job to lose.

That is the first guy to vet. I am not yet up to speed enough on what he has done at Temple to make a judgement.

Fred has created an amazing infrastructure at Iu if they can just get the BB program up two notches.

Perhaps he will do it for free just to get the hell out of NJ.

 

[iubud]

I can tell you that at least one trustee is 100% behind Archie and likes how the program is being built for the long run. The long term approach can take time as a roster gets reshaped with the players a coach wants and allowing players that don't fit to move through the program.

Assuming TJD returns next year, we will add 3 players that fit how Archie wants to play. Smart, tough, competitors that will play hard.

Our returning back court will include Durham (sr), Phinisee and Anderson (jr), Franklin (so), plus the 2 freshmen.

Our returning front court will have Smith and Brunk (sr), Thompson (jr), TJD and Hunter (so), and a freshman.

Balance by class, position, and all played only in Archie's system. This is the team Archie will be judged on. This year should give us an indication of Archie's abilities, but next year is the final product and where the sustainability of the program and incremental improvement will be measured.

Only a collapse without cause this year will cause a sudden change of direction. That would be disappointing because I like what Archie is doing. If you don't like Archie, you probably won't like another coach. Maybe you want a cheater or someone trying to build for a homerun year followed by rebuilding years. We had that. It didn't work out.

 

[IndyResident16]

I can tell you that at least one trustee is 100% behind Archie and likes how the program is being built for the long run. The long term approach can take time as a roster gets reshaped with the players a coach wants and allowing players that don't fit to move through the program.

Assuming TJD returns next year, we will add 3 players that fit how Archie wants to play. Smart, tough, competitors that will play hard.

Our returning back court will include Durham (sr), Phinisee and Anderson (jr), Franklin (so), plus the 2 freshmen.

Our returning front court will have Smith and Brunk (sr), Thompson (jr), TJD and Hunter (so), and a freshman.

Balance by class, position, and all played only in Archie's system. This is the team Archie will be judged on. This year should give us an indication of Archie's abilities, but next year is the final product and where the sustainability of the program and incremental improvement will be measured.

Only a collapse without cause this year will cause a sudden change of direction. That would be disappointing because I like what Archie is doing. If you don't like Archie, you probably won't like another coach. Maybe you want a cheater or someone trying to build for a homerun year followed by rebuilding years. We had that. It didn't work out.

Thank you.

If you think a new AD is going to come in in May and clean house and hire Billy Donovan, you deserve the reality posts that come your way.

Still have to remember that McRobbie is the president. No way in hell he signs off on a coach that has baggage previously tied to his name.

 

[bailey777]

The Spring Semester ends May 8th -- and that's roughly when Glass will retire.

I think it's very safe to assume that, barring something unforeseen, Glass will not be firing Archie Miller. And, should Glass' successor even want to make a coaching change, the timing would be horrible.

So I think it's probably right to say that this announcement guarantees Miller a 4th year. But he was essentially guaranteed that by Glass already -- who said that it wasn't a "make or break" year for Miller.

I think glass gave him 5 minimum. Probably more.

 

[bailey777]

I can tell you that at least one trustee is 100% behind Archie and likes how the program is being built for the long run. The long term approach can take time as a roster gets reshaped with the players a coach wants and allowing players that don't fit to move through the program.

Assuming TJD returns next year, we will add 3 players that fit how Archie wants to play. Smart, tough, competitors that will play hard.

Our returning back court will include Durham (sr), Phinisee and Anderson (jr), Franklin (so), plus the 2 freshmen.

Our returning front court will have Smith and Brunk (sr), Thompson (jr), TJD and Hunter (so), and a freshman.

Balance by class, position, and all played only in Archie's system. This is the team Archie will be judged on. This year should give us an indication of Archie's abilities, but next year is the final product and where the sustainability of the program and incremental improvement will be measured.

Only a collapse without cause this year will cause a sudden change of direction. That would be disappointing because I like what Archie is doing. If you don't like Archie, you probably won't like another coach. Maybe you want a cheater or someone trying to build for a homerun year followed by rebuilding years. We had that. It didn't work out.

He needs to make the tourney period in year three. If not something is not right imo.

 

[IndyResident16]

He needs to make the tourney period in year three. If not something is not right imo.

Would be disappointing no doubt.

But won't be losing his job over it.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

He needs to make the tourney period in year three. If not something is not right imo.

He should — and he may.

But, no, he doesn’t have to. It’s already been made clear publicly that he’s under no pressure (in terms of keeping his job, anyway) to make the tournament this year.

To heck with using things like B10 championships, Final Fours, or even Sweet Sixteen appearances as the barometer. We’re now measuring success merely by getting in...and a coach will have no fewer than 4 years to do it, too.

And what’s more is that a lot of fans and boosters seem perfectly fine with that.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Would be disappointing no doubt.

But won't be losing his job over it.

He should lose his job if that happens. If our PTBs actually had the kinds of standards and expectations that they ought to have, he would. But they don’t, so he won’t.

Which I’d say goes a long way toward explaining our enduring futility.

 

[IndyResident16]

He should lose his job if that happens. If our PTBs actually had the kinds of standards and expectations that they ought to have, he would. But they don’t, so he won’t.

Which I’d say goes a long way toward explaining our enduring futility.

I'd much rather have Archie coaching his guys, in his system, in the culture that he created in year 4 than somebody else starting over from scratch. You know, because that has worked so well for us the last 20 years.

 

[gator mcCluskey]

Excellent. Was it his decision? I wonder...

 

[IndyResident16]

Excellent. Was it his decision? I wonder...

As opposed to what? Him being forced out?

Anyone who thinks Glass was forced to retire because the basketball programs record doesn't understand the inner working of the athletic department, namely the AD.

It is the job of the AD to market and raise money for the university via their sponsored athletic programs, something Glass did tremendously well. I will assure you McRobbie didn't pressure Glass to resign because the basketball team has missed the tournament in Archie's first two years. Some people just don't have a grip on reality.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I can tell you that at least one trustee is 100% behind Archie and likes how the program is being built for the long run. The long term approach can take time as a roster gets reshaped with the players a coach wants and allowing players that don't fit to move through the program.

I'd be willing to bet that I know the Trustee you're talking about. And, if I'm right, then I can say that he's singing a very similar tune to the song I heard him sing for Archie's predecessor....."building for the long run", "the long term approach" and all that.

What else would you expect people in his position to say when it's apparent that the results to date are so underwhelming? Of course he's going to say "it's a long-term approach, it's going to take time to reshape the roster, etc."

I'm sorry, but I just do not buy that mealy-mouthed nonsense.

This is the team Archie will be judged on. This year should give us an indication of Archie's abilities, but next year is the final product and where the sustainability of the program and incremental improvement will be measured.

Speaking of mealy-mouthed nonsense. I'd say coaches -- like anybody else in any position of significant responsibility -- can and should be evaluated each time their team takes the floor.

That's not to say that they should be subjected to heated seats right off the bat. But it's not that hard to see if any team, for instance, improves or degrades as any season goes on. Are they getting mistakes corrected? Are they putting guys in the right spots? Do our offensive and defensive schemes fit our roster well? Is player development showing progress?

The evaluations might change from season to season. Did they emphasize the need to fill the right gaps in recruiting? Are the players progressing in the off-season?

They should always be evaluating. Any good manager does -- hopefully Archie's always evaluating players instead of waiting for their junior or senior years.

There is no good reason to say that "we'll judge a coach's abilities by year three, and wait until a fourth to determine sustainability." He should've been told after year two that the results aren't what we're looking for and he needs to step it up.

Only a collapse without cause this year will cause a sudden change of direction.

We've already been through that last year. It didn't matter.

That would be disappointing because I like what Archie is doing.

Based on what?

If you don't like Archie, you probably won't like another coach.

I can't speak for anybody else. But none of this is personal to me.

I don't dislike Archie. In fact, I was very excited by the hire. I just dislike being mediocre...especially for extended periods of time. He's had plenty of time and our team still looks average at best. And that makes it all the more frustrating to watch halves like our first half against FSU, because there's no question that we have the capability to play so much better than we have since.

Yeah, DG was hot as the sun that game. But is that really what it's going to take for our team to play at a high level? A player just happening to have the game of his life?

Maybe you want a cheater or someone trying to build for a homerun year followed by rebuilding years. We had that. It didn't work out.

First, that's a glaring false choice: either we need to hire a cheater or we need to wait 4 years to even so much as make the tournament field. Because that's what "building for the long term" requires. Pfft.

Plenty of coaches have righted wayward ships in a reasonable period of time. You may want to write off Bruce Pearl's quick success at Auburn. OK, I get that -- he does have a spotted record (although I think he's a phenomenal coach). But what about Rick Barnes at Tennessee? His first team there was 15-19. Two years later, they were 26-9, the following year they were 31-6. What about what Holtsmann's done? Bobby Hurley? Chris Beard? Chris Mack?

This notion that "well, it just takes a long time to build a good team" is a loser's mentality. It's simultaneously a self-comforting way to delay the pain of admitting that things haven't worked out as we hoped and a defensive response to the fear of unknown disruptions that may come from making a change.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I'd much rather have Archie coaching his guys, in his system, in the culture that he created in year 4 than somebody else starting over from scratch. You know, because that has worked so well for us the last 20 years.

Actually, most of what we've done for the last 20 years is precisely what I don't want us to repeat.

The only time we pulled the plug quickly was with Sampson -- and that wasn't related to the team's performance. The other two coaches (and now maybe a third) both got more time than they should have. In both cases, it was apparent well before they were let go that we could and should do better.

The problem in the first case was that we never should've hired Mike Davis. He was the wrong hire from day 1. Crean's situation was much different -- and, really, Crean did admirably well for a period, considering the state of the program when he took over. Few proven coaches would've taken on a situation like that. We were fortunate to find one who would.

But, even after it became evident that Crean's teams topped out in 3rd gear, we still hung onto him longer than we should.

 

[IndyResident16]

Plenty of coaches have righted wayward ships in a reasonable period of time. You may want to write off Bruce Pearl's quick success at Auburn. OK, I get that -- he does have a spotted record (although I think he's a phenomenal coach). But what about Rick Barnes at Tennessee? His first team there was 15-19. Two years later, they were 26-9, the following year they were 31-6. What about what Holtsmann's done? Bobby Hurley? Chris Mack?

Because not every coach starts on the same curve obviously. Comparing Holtmann to Archie in this instance just isn't right.

Archie inherited a team that wasn't all that good to begin with that had lost its 3 best players from the year prior with ZERO scholarships to work, not to mention only 2 players on the roster taller than 6'8 (Davis who got hurt 8 games into the season and Priller who played 70 minutes in 4 years).

On the other hand, Holtmann inherited a team who returned 3 starters, also got back 5* Bates-Diop who was hurt the year prior, inherited a top 25 recruiting class, and was even able to bring over some of his recruits from Butler.

This doesn't even include the night and day transition from Crean's philosophy to Archie. Ohio State at least hired a guy cut from the same cloth as Matta who run a lot of similar sets. Credit Ohio State for massively over-achieving in year 1, but what happened when Holtmann lost 2 senior starters he inherited along with a 5* B10 POY that left early? Finished with the same conference record as Archie.

Now I won't argue that in year 3 Holtmann is off to a much better start with a bunch more promise, but not every guy inherits the same situation. Sometimes success takes time.

 

[Harry Hondo]

I wouldn’t mind seeing someone like Chris Reynolds looked at for the new AD. Let’s face it, IU is known for basketball and Chris might be the most qualified former athlete for the job. He’s been in collegiate athletics for a long time, too. I think he’s still the AD at Bradley right now.

 

[IndyResident16]

Actually, most of what we've done for the last 20 years is precisely what I don't want us to repeat.

The only time we pulled the plug quickly was with Sampson -- and that wasn't related to the team's performance. The other two coaches (and now maybe a third) both got more time than they should have. In both cases, it was apparent well before they were let go that we could and should do better.

The problem in the first case was that we never should've hired Mike Davis. He was the wrong hire from day 1. Crean's situation was much different -- and, really, Crean did admirably well for a period, considering the state of the program when he took over. Few proven coaches would've taken on a situation like that. We were fortunate to find one who would.

But, even after it became evident that Crean's teams topped out in 3rd gear, we still hung onto him longer than we should.

Agree on keeping Crean too long, but 3 years is entirely different than 9. I'm not willing to throw the towel in on a guy who hasn't even had a single recruiting class go all 4 years. Last year was a total disaster and yet despite losing 12/13 we were basically a play-in game away from going to the tournament. As much individual talent IU had last year, it was still a pretty poorly constructed roster with very little depth. Had IU beaten Ohio state in the BTT and IU goes dancing instead of Holtmann and Ohio State it likely drastically changes your POV on Holtmann and Archie.

For the first time in Archie's tenure, IU has a decently constructed roster and it's only getting better in my opinion. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for a 4th year, barring a major scandal.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Sometimes success takes time.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. You might not believe this, but I'm a pretty patient person. But, along the way, you can usually tell if things are progressing in a tangible way.

Want a good example? Look at our football program. Are we knocking on the door of the CFP? No. Are we progressing in a positive direction? Yes. Has that been apparent since Allen took the reins? I'd say so.

My biggest problem with Archie's 2.5 year tenure is that I simply don't see any marked improvement -- not during a season, not from season-to-season. And whenever it seems like maybe we've turned a corner, the next game comes along to deflate hopes once again.

There's a fine line between a healthy amount of patience and getting caught up in the whole "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."

 

[mcmurtry66]

I'd be willing to bet that I know the Trustee you're talking about. And, if I'm right, then I can say that he's singing a very similar tune to the song I heard him sing for Archie's predecessor....."building for the long run", "the long term approach" and all that.

What else would you expect people in his position to say when it's apparent that the results to date are so underwhelming? Of course he's going to say "it's a long-term approach, it's going to take time to reshape the roster, etc."

I'm sorry, but I just do not buy that mealy-mouthed nonsense.



Speaking of mealy-mouthed nonsense. I'd say coaches -- like anybody else in any position of significant responsibility -- can and should be evaluated each time their team takes the floor.

That's not to say that they should be subjected to heated seats right off the bat. But it's not that hard to see if any team, for instance, improves or degrades as any season goes on. Are they getting mistakes corrected? Are they putting guys in the right spots? Do our offensive and defensive schemes fit our roster well? Is player development showing progress?

The evaluations might change from season to season. Did they emphasize the need to fill the right gaps in recruiting? Are the players progressing in the off-season?

They should always be evaluating. Any good manager does -- hopefully Archie's always evaluating players instead of waiting for their junior or senior years.

There is no good reason to say that "we'll judge a coach's abilities by year three, and wait until a fourth to determine sustainability." He should've been told after year two that the results aren't what we're looking for and he needs to step it up.



We've already been through that last year. It didn't matter.



Based on what?



I can't speak for anybody else. But none of this is personal to me.

I don't dislike Archie. In fact, I was very excited by the hire. I just dislike being mediocre...especially for extended periods of time. He's had plenty of time and our team still looks average at best. And that makes it all the more frustrating to watch halves like our first half against FSU, because there's no question that we have the capability to play so much better than we have since.

Yeah, DG was hot as the sun that game. But is that really what it's going to take for our team to play at a high level? A player just happening to have the game of his life?



First, that's a glaring false choice: either we need to hire a cheater or we need to wait 4 years to even so much as make the tournament field. Because that's what "building for the long term" requires. Pfft.

Plenty of coaches have righted wayward ships in a reasonable period of time. You may want to write off Bruce Pearl's quick success at Auburn. OK, I get that -- he does have a spotted record (although I think he's a phenomenal coach). But what about Rick Barnes at Tennessee? His first team there was 15-19. Two years later, they were 26-9, the following year they were 31-6. What about what Holtsmann's done? Bobby Hurley? Chris Beard? Chris Mack?

This notion that "well, it just takes a long time to build a good team" is a loser's mentality. It's simultaneously a self-comforting way to delay the pain of admitting that things haven't worked out as we hoped and a defensive response to the fear of unknown disruptions that may come from making a change.

Perfectly stated

 

[IndyResident16]

I don't necessarily disagree with that. You might not believe this, but I'm a pretty patient person. But, along the way, you can usually tell if things are progressing in a tangible way.

Want a good example? Look at our football program. Are we knocking on the door of the CFP? No. Are we progressing in a positive direction? Yes. Has that been apparent since Allen took the reins? I'd say so.

My biggest problem with Archie's 2.5 year tenure is that I simply don't see any marked improvement -- not during a season, not from season-to-season. And whenever it seems like maybe we've turned a corner, the next game comes along to deflate hopes once again.

There's a fine line between a healthy amount of patience and getting caught up in the whole "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result."

I think it's a little to early to throw the towel in on this season. I think this years roster is much more adept at handling adversity than last years team, ie I don't see this team losing 12/13 due to the way the roster is structured. I think this years team actually has an identity as opposed to last year where everything revolved around 2 players.

 

[T.M.P.]

I'd be willing to bet that I know the Trustee you're talking about. And, if I'm right, then I can say that he's singing a very similar tune to the song I heard him sing for Archie's predecessor....."building for the long run", "the long term approach" and all that.

What else would you expect people in his position to say when it's apparent that the results to date are so underwhelming? Of course he's going to say "it's a long-term approach, it's going to take time to reshape the roster, etc."

I'm sorry, but I just do not buy that mealy-mouthed nonsense.



Speaking of mealy-mouthed nonsense. I'd say coaches -- like anybody else in any position of significant responsibility -- can and should be evaluated each time their team takes the floor.

That's not to say that they should be subjected to heated seats right off the bat. But it's not that hard to see if any team, for instance, improves or degrades as any season goes on. Are they getting mistakes corrected? Are they putting guys in the right spots? Do our offensive and defensive schemes fit our roster well? Is player development showing progress?

The evaluations might change from season to season. Did they emphasize the need to fill the right gaps in recruiting? Are the players progressing in the off-season?

They should always be evaluating. Any good manager does -- hopefully Archie's always evaluating players instead of waiting for their junior or senior years.

There is no good reason to say that "we'll judge a coach's abilities by year three, and wait until a fourth to determine sustainability." He should've been told after year two that the results aren't what we're looking for and he needs to step it up.



We've already been through that last year. It didn't matter.



Based on what?



I can't speak for anybody else. But none of this is personal to me.

I don't dislike Archie. In fact, I was very excited by the hire. I just dislike being mediocre...especially for extended periods of time. He's had plenty of time and our team still looks average at best. And that makes it all the more frustrating to watch halves like our first half against FSU, because there's no question that we have the capability to play so much better than we have since.

Yeah, DG was hot as the sun that game. But is that really what it's going to take for our team to play at a high level? A player just happening to have the game of his life?



First, that's a glaring false choice: either we need to hire a cheater or we need to wait 4 years to even so much as make the tournament field. Because that's what "building for the long term" requires. Pfft.

Plenty of coaches have righted wayward ships in a reasonable period of time. You may want to write off Bruce Pearl's quick success at Auburn. OK, I get that -- he does have a spotted record (although I think he's a phenomenal coach). But what about Rick Barnes at Tennessee? His first team there was 15-19. Two years later, they were 26-9, the following year they were 31-6. What about what Holtsmann's done? Bobby Hurley? Chris Beard? Chris Mack?

This notion that "well, it just takes a long time to build a good team" is a loser's mentality. It's simultaneously a self-comforting way to delay the pain of admitting that things haven't worked out as we hoped and a defensive response to the fear of unknown disruptions that may come from making a change.

You wrote a lot of meaningless drivel there .. I want to highlight this .. because this is fking funny.

Lol Bruce Pearl's "quick" success?

You mean the four years it took him to get into the tournament after having 2 losing seasons 15-20 11-20 ..and going 18-14 in his third? So you should be fine and very happy with Miller, not only has he not had a losing season, compared to Pearl's two, he's only in year three.

Would you care to retort? Still waiting for you to enlighten me about basketball .. and this recent post is doing the opposite.

fwiw - you could save a lot of energy by just summing it up and typing "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah".

 

[mushroomgod_1]

I can tell you that at least one trustee is 100% behind Archie and likes how the program is being built for the long run. The long term approach can take time as a roster gets reshaped with the players a coach wants and allowing players that don't fit to move through the program.

Assuming TJD returns next year, we will add 3 players that fit how Archie wants to play. Smart, tough, competitors that will play hard.

Our returning back court will include Durham (sr), Phinisee and Anderson (jr), Franklin (so), plus the 2 freshmen.

Our returning front court will have Smith and Brunk (sr), Thompson (jr), TJD and Hunter (so), and a freshman.

Balance by class, position, and all played only in Archie's system. This is the team Archie will be judged on. This year should give us an indication of Archie's abilities, but next year is the final product and where the sustainability of the program and incremental improvement will be measured.

Only a collapse without cause this year will cause a sudden change of direction. That would be disappointing because I like what Archie is doing. If you don't like Archie, you probably won't like another coach. Maybe you want a cheater or someone trying to build for a homerun year followed by rebuilding years. We had that. It didn't work out.

We're going to have $10M into this guy by the end of year 3.....is it too much to have expected that he would try to address the team's glaring deficiencies of no back-up point guard and no baseline shooter with his open scholarship(s)? Isn't that pretty much on him by this point? Smith...27.8%; DA 33.3%...Franklin 14.8%; Hunter 15%...WHO WOULD HAVE THOUGHT? Other than about 100 posters on this forum..........

And in year 4, he finally recruits 3 guys with "attitude'. Wasn't attitude a problem before now?

Looking at Nebraska..............6-2 Cam Mack, jc transfer......6-4 Burke, transfer from Robert Morris....6-5 Cheathum, transfer. All 3 would play for IU. Hoiberg throws those guys together with 2 true freshmen and some fricking guy from Iceland and takes us to OT in AH?

It's not about liking or not liking Archie. I don't give a s*** about Archie one way or another. It's about results.

 

[snarlcakes]

You wrote a lot of meaningless drivel there .. I want to highlight this .. because this is fking funny.

Lol Bruce Pearl's "quick" success?

You mean the four years it took him to get into the tournament after having 2 losing seasons 15-20 11-20 ..and going 18-14 in his third? So you should be fine and very happy with Miller, not only has he not had a losing season, compared to Pearl's two, he's only in year three.

Would you care to retort? Still waiting for you to enlighten me about basketball .. and this recent post is doing the opposite.

fwiw - you could save a lot of energy by just summing it up and typing "waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah".

You really do whine a lot. You really can’t figure out the difference between Auburn and Indiana?

 

[snarlcakes]

I'd be willing to bet that I know the Trustee you're talking about. And, if I'm right, then I can say that he's singing a very similar tune to the song I heard him sing for Archie's predecessor....."building for the long run", "the long term approach" and all that.

What else would you expect people in his position to say when it's apparent that the results to date are so underwhelming? Of course he's going to say "it's a long-term approach, it's going to take time to reshape the roster, etc."

I'm sorry, but I just do not buy that mealy-mouthed nonsense.



Speaking of mealy-mouthed nonsense. I'd say coaches -- like anybody else in any position of significant responsibility -- can and should be evaluated each time their team takes the floor.

That's not to say that they should be subjected to heated seats right off the bat. But it's not that hard to see if any team, for instance, improves or degrades as any season goes on. Are they getting mistakes corrected? Are they putting guys in the right spots? Do our offensive and defensive schemes fit our roster well? Is player development showing progress?

The evaluations might change from season to season. Did they emphasize the need to fill the right gaps in recruiting? Are the players progressing in the off-season?

They should always be evaluating. Any good manager does -- hopefully Archie's always evaluating players instead of waiting for their junior or senior years.

There is no good reason to say that "we'll judge a coach's abilities by year three, and wait until a fourth to determine sustainability." He should've been told after year two that the results aren't what we're looking for and he needs to step it up.



We've already been through that last year. It didn't matter.



Based on what?



I can't speak for anybody else. But none of this is personal to me.

I don't dislike Archie. In fact, I was very excited by the hire. I just dislike being mediocre...especially for extended periods of time. He's had plenty of time and our team still looks average at best. And that makes it all the more frustrating to watch halves like our first half against FSU, because there's no question that we have the capability to play so much better than we have since.

Yeah, DG was hot as the sun that game. But is that really what it's going to take for our team to play at a high level? A player just happening to have the game of his life?



First, that's a glaring false choice: either we need to hire a cheater or we need to wait 4 years to even so much as make the tournament field. Because that's what "building for the long term" requires. Pfft.

Plenty of coaches have righted wayward ships in a reasonable period of time. You may want to write off Bruce Pearl's quick success at Auburn. OK, I get that -- he does have a spotted record (although I think he's a phenomenal coach). But what about Rick Barnes at Tennessee? His first team there was 15-19. Two years later, they were 26-9, the following year they were 31-6. What about what Holtsmann's done? Bobby Hurley? Chris Beard? Chris Mack?

This notion that "well, it just takes a long time to build a good team" is a loser's mentality. It's simultaneously a self-comforting way to delay the pain of admitting that things haven't worked out as we hoped and a defensive response to the fear of unknown disruptions that may come from making a change.

Great post.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Agree on keeping Crean too long, but 3 years is entirely different than 9. I'm not willing to throw the towel in on a guy who hasn't even had a single recruiting class go all 4 years. Last year was a total disaster and yet despite losing 12/13 we were basically a play-in game away from going to the tournament. As much individual talent IU had last year, it was still a pretty poorly constructed roster with very little depth. Had IU beaten Ohio state in the BTT and IU goes dancing instead of Holtmann and Ohio State it likely drastically changes your POV on Holtmann and Archie.

For the first time in Archie's tenure, IU has a decently constructed roster and it's only getting better in my opinion. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for a 4th year, barring a major scandal.

I would divorce the question of him getting a 4th year from the question of what kind of a job he's done to this point. As the the latter, I'd say a pretty crappy job.......as witnessed by the fact that we're now getting about 14000 people to our home games.

My hope is that he's just had a bad 2 1/3 years to this point, and we will soon start seeing some ROI. I don't feel very confident in that hope.

 

[IndyResident16]

Looking at Nebraska..............6-2 Cam Mack, jc transfer......6-4 Burke, transfer from Robert Morris....6-5 Cheathum, transfer. All 3 would play for IU. Hoiberg throws those guys together with 2 true freshmen and some fricking guy from Iceland and takes us to OT in AH?

We talking about the same Nebraska team that lost to UC-Riverside? The same Nebraska team that lost to Southern Utah? George Mason by 21. You would have lost your shit. They hit some shots out of their ass, but don't tell me you want Cam Mack or Burke over the likes of Phinisee, Green, Durham, etc? Don't be an idiot.

 

[T.M.P.]

You really do whine a lot.

Did I tell you you could speak to me? Ever? No, I didn't, you have not earned the right. I don't think you get our dynamic here, so, I'll explain but just once. I am up here, you are way way down there. Basically when I p*ss you get rained on . got it?

When you post something stupid and I by chance read it, like this, I will tell you it's stupid. This is our dynamic and will be until I feel like you have enough knowledge - I doubt that ever happens - to waste my time on conversation. Especially with someone that barely knows what he is talking about and doesn't have the reasoning or willpower to contain his own butt hurt malcontent bias. So, don't waste your time posting at me. it doesn't work like that and I just don't care what you feel.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I think it's a little to early to throw the towel in on this season. I think this years roster is much more adept at handling adversity than last years team, ie I don't see this team losing 12/13 due to the way the roster is structured. I think this years team actually has an identity as opposed to last year where everything revolved around 2 players.

I haven't thrown in the towel on the season, Indy. In fact, I haven't thrown in the towel on Archie as coach, either.

All I've ever really said is that he shouldn't get a fourth year if he doesn't even so much as make the tourney in 3. Making the tournament is not a terribly high bar. Shall I read the names of some of the teams that have made it in the years since we were there?

I have also said that I don't see the improvement. But that doesn't amount to throwing in any towels. Hope springs eternal that we'll see it next game, or the game after that.

The problem has been...anytime we do look better, it doesn't seem like long before we're back playing like garbage again.

I would love nothing more than for the team to start playing great and shutting people like me up. But that's up to them, innit?

 

[IndyResident16]

I would divorce the question of him getting a 4th year from the question of what kind of a job he's done to this point. As the the latter, I'd say a pretty crappy job.......as witnessed by the fact that we're now getting about 14000 people to our home games.

My hope is that he's just had a bad 2 1/3 years to this point, and we will soon start seeing some ROI. I don't feel very confident in that hope.

What do you want me to say? Did about as best as I thought he could in year 1 sans some bad early season losses to Indiana State and Fort Wayne. The did finish tied for 6th in the B10 and had a better record than the year prior with considerably less talent. We had a bad 13 game stretch last year thatr's inexcusable but at times looked very good with a still very young team still learning a new system. We're 10-1 this year. I don't know what else you want? I don't see any indication of a collapse like last year happening and barring an unforeseen collapse like last year this team should be dancing comfortably. No need to get so worked up. If we've learned anything this year about college basketball, you breathe a sigh of relief after thwarting off a team like Nebraska with nothing to lose. Is it any worse than losing at home to Wofford? Or Evansville. Stephen F. austin?

 

[IndyResident16]

I haven't thrown in the towel on the season, Indy. In fact, I haven't thrown in the towel on Archie as coach, either.

All I've ever really said is that he shouldn't get a fourth year if he doesn't even so much as make the tourney in 3. Making the tournament is not a terribly high bar. Shall I read the names of some of the teams that have made it in the years since we were there?

I have also said that I don't see the improvement. But that doesn't amount to throwing in any towels. Hope springs eternal that we'll see it next game, or the game after that.

The problem has been...anytime we do look better, it doesn't seem like long before we're back playing like garbage again.

I would love nothing more than for the team to start playing great and shutting people like me up. But that's up to them, innit?

You don't see improvement from last year to this year? I guess time will tell, but I see a much deeper, talented, and better roster.

 

[snarlcakes]

Did I tell you you could speak to me? Ever? No, i didn;t, you have not earned the right. I don't think you get our dynamic here, so, I explain but just once.

When you post something stupid and I by chance read it, like this, I will tell you it's stupid. This is our dynamic until I feel like you have enough knowledge - I doubt that ever happens - to waste my time on conversation with someone that barely knows what he is talking about and doesn't have the reasoning or willpower to contain his own butt hurt malcontent bias. So, don't waste your time posting at me. it doesn't work like that.

This is the 2nd time you broke up with me. Perfect timing. You avoid having to buy a gift for Christmas. I’m not taking you back in the spring, though. See ya dork.

 

[minneman]

We talking about the same Nebraska team that lost to UC-Riverside? The same Nebraska team that lost to Southern Utah? George Mason by 21. You would have lost your shit. They hit some shots out of their ass, but don't tell me you want Cam Mack or Burke over the likes of Phinisee, Green, Durham, etc? Don't be an idiot.

Over them? No. But I'd take him in addition to them using 1 of the 2 available scholarships. He tore up both IU (double-double 15 pts/10 assists) and Purdue (triple-double 11 pts/12 assists/10 rebounds). I expect he'll have more really good games. He wouldn't play as many minutes so wouldn't have those kind of stats at IU but he would certainly play and contribute.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

You don't see improvement from last year to this year? I guess time will tell, but I see a much deeper, talented, and better roster.

Well, it's still early. But, to this point, no. I think we're still a middling team that is likely to finish on the wrong half of the Big Ten standings.

I certainly agree that we're deeper. But that doesn't mean that we're better. And a roster doesn't win games. How the guys who get on the floor play wins games.

So I don't see any marked improvement over last season yet. Hopefully that will change. But it'll have to.

 

[mushroomgod_1]

We talking about the same Nebraska team that lost to UC-Riverside? The same Nebraska team that lost to Southern Utah? George Mason by 21. You would have lost your shit. They hit some shots out of their ass, but don't tell me you want Cam Mack or Burke over the likes of Phinisee, Green, Durham, etc? Don't be an idiot.

I would 100% take Cam Mack over Green or Durham. Do you realize the guy just had a triple-double against Purdue, or did you have your head up your ass?

I notice you didn't mention Franklin. That's the guy you saw 50 times, that was going to be our back-up PG this year. How's that working out? Burke and Cheathum would both play over Franklin this year.

Yes, Nebraska was horrible at the beginning of the year. They are almost all transfers or freshmen. But they are not horrible now. And you have to give Hoiberg great credit for that.

 

[Al Bino]

This doesn't even include the night and day transition from Crean's philosophy to Archie.

This fact is overlooked by many. I don't think you could get two more diametrically opposed systems if you tried. There is a reason that most of our best players are freshmen and sophomores.

 

[IndyResident16]

Over them? No. But I'd take him in addition to them using 1 of the 2 available scholarships. He tore up both IU (double-double 15 pts/10 assists) and Purdue (triple-double 11 pts/12 assists/10 rebounds). I expect he'll have more really good games. He wouldn't play as many minutes so wouldn't have those kind of stats at IU but he would certainly play and contribute.

That’s assuming they come IU. GT’s like Cheatham and Burke go to Nebraska so they can start and put up 15 shots a game. They aren’t getting that role at IU. Every bad team has a best player.

 

[IndyResident16]

I would 100% take Cam Mack over Green or Durham. Do you realize the guy just had a triple-double against Purdue, or did you have your head up your ass?

I notice you didn't mention Franklin. That's the guy you saw 50 times, that was going to be our back-up PG this year. How's that working out? Burke and Cheathum would both play over Franklin this year.

Yes, Nebraska was horrible at the beginning of the year. They are almost all transfers or freshmen. But they are not horrible now. And you have to give Hoiberg great credit for that.

I’ll take 4 years of Franklin over 1 year of Burke and Cheatham and 2 of Mack any day of the week you dipshit.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

What do you want me to say? Did about as best as I thought he could in year 1 sans some bad early season losses to Indiana State and Fort Wayne. The did finish tied for 6th in the B10 and had a better record than the year prior with considerably less talent. We had a bad 13 game stretch last year thatr's inexcusable but at times looked very good with a still very young team still learning a new system. We're 10-1 this year. I don't know what else you want? I don't see any indication of a collapse like last year happening and barring an unforeseen collapse like last year this team should be dancing comfortably. No need to get so worked up. If we've learned anything this year about college basketball, you breathe a sigh of relief after thwarting off a team like Nebraska with nothing to lose. Is it any worse than losing at home to Wofford? Or Evansville. Stephen F. austin?

You really shouldn't bring up our record to defend the team. Our first 8 games were at home, and 7 of them were against competition that ranged between not very good and awful. Those games may as well not even be on our CV, or count no more than exhibition games.

Since then, we've played two Big Ten teams with losing records -- getting blown out in one, and barely surviving in OT in the other -- and a middle-of-the-pack AAC team in another grindfest.

Now, I will say that I'm glad we found ways to win the two that were close games. That's certainly better than losing them. But they shouldn't have been close games.

We're 3-1, not 10-1. And even that has a bit of an asterisk next to it.