Did Archie recruit these players? These are his guys correct? Did Archie pick his assistant coaches? Archie is a coach right to coach players and make them better that's why he is getting paid 3 million a year correct?
I know a lot of you hate Archie...
- Thread starter SixthFlagComing
- Start date
Did Archie recruit these players? These are his guys correct? Did Archie pick his assistant coaches? Archie is a coach right to coach players and make them better that's why he is getting paid 3 million a year correct?
Let me answer this question: do you think someone like Izzo or Coach K would allow the all-too-often lack of urgency from these guys? Allow TJD not to hustle back on D if he gets his shot blocked? Remember when Izzo ripped Henry a new one a couple years ago? Do you see that happening here?
Accountability. A major requirement for success in any venture. And sorely lacking from Indiana Basketball.
The point of the post, tough guy, since you can't apparently read and figure it out yourself, is that there are three aspects to college coaching: recruiter, tactician and motivator.
Archie is a terrible motivator, a marginal recruiter and, I think, a pretty good tactician. People who say he's a terrible tactician don't know what they're talking about
A pretty good tactician?
Ok, I’ll bite - please tell us what about our offense is sound from a tactical standpoint?
Given the limitations of the roster...several things:
4th in the country in FT attempts
Even after our players shoot an atrocious percentage from the line we're still 13th in the country in made FTs
That, of course, doesn't happen if you're not running good sets.
We score frequently on out of bounds plays and don't get scored on often in out of bounds plays. That, again, is a sign of good coaching.
There are plenty of sites that can provide a quantification of quality shots...all of which will show that the Indiana offense generates good quality shots. But Guess What? We miss them.
The scoring droughts are not the result of not getting good shots. They're the result of missing good shots.
That's a start for you.
Last edited:
I back Coach everyday.
I feel his is doing a good job with such a young team, but I also feel it all comes down to execution.
I also think they just need to slow down just a bit.
Can some of the blame be placed on AAU ball. Just run and gun. Then when they get to collage they have to much to learn. Just an opinion. But some of this has to be blamed on the players. Coach can’t shoulder it all.
They consistently feed the post to provide opportunities to our two best (by far) offensive weapons. That’s sound coaching. The issue with Miller is recruiting / roster construction. We have fewer offensive options because we don’t have good enough players. That’s not an issue of tactics, it’s an issue of (poor) recruiting.
Eric Eschelbarger, the head coach at IU Kokomo, could do better than Archie. He's taken a program that had ONE winning season in it's history (granted it only became a varsity sport in the 2011-12 school year) and made it a nationally ranked team all 3 years he's been there and lead them to a 59-16 record over this period.
You forgot the "it takes years to learn this pack-line defense."
Tom Crean had outstanding players, but he wasn't a good coach. How could a coach have the team with Oladipo, Zeller, etc. and not make it to the Final Four? Crean had no concept regarding how to counter when an opposing coach made changes during a game.
To maximize this scoring on out of bounds plays, maybe IU offensive strategy going forward needs to be, take the ball down on the block or drive from corner to baseline every time, then stop and throw it hard off the defender, thus resulting in more OOB plays. This scheme may be more effective than their regular offense. Will also rely less on the subpar guard play (by guards he recruited, can’t motivate and can’t develop).
Matt Painter +5 wins with this IU roster.
Stop right here.
We jump out to a 19-6 lead. Why? By feeding the ball inside. 14 of those points were from layups or FT’s (4-5).
Yet MSU outscores us 20-7 over the next 10 minutes. Again, why? Maybe because we go away from that and go 1-6 from behind the arc?
Who holds guys responsible for not working the ball inside? Tactician is more than coming up with a game plan or scheme, it’s also implementing it and making sure it is followed.
You asked a minute ago about “who could win with these players”. Yet you find no correlation in our building a lead and losing a lead has anything to do with accountability?
You think maybe some of those "quality" shots that are "generated" by Archie's offense are part of the opposing coach's game plan? If I'm playing a team w/o great shooters, I will be willing to give up shots to certain players that on paper look like good ones that in actuality aren't high percentage ones.
Just a thought...
It seems like Archie is getting out coached more and more each year. Dude makes no adjustments whatsoever, either on the fly or at halftime.
Bingo!
We work and move to create angles to feed the post and get opportunities for layups/FTs. But when the opposition makes adjustments to try to deny that, do we continue to run our stuff and impose our will inside, continue to battle to get the kind of shot we REALLY want?
No - we settle. Which is why we go 1-6 over the next 10 minutes. We don’t have the discipline to maintain play; even worse, no one DEMANDS it. Especially from the coaching staff.
I actually disagree about the halftime bit. Plenty of evidence this year where we come out of the half rolling, including today. On the fly maybe not so much.
Has nothing to so with him changing things up. What you are referring to is when we come out not ready to play, and get yelled at at half. We have the same line up and rotation no matter what.
I actually agree with this and have mentioned it a few times in comments. We get a lot of open shots. We just don’t make them. I think recruiting has been ok. I am uncertain on the development. It looks bad. But there had been some bad luck injuries with a few guys too.
Unfortunately for him the coach doesn’t get to use excuses when the ultimate results for 4 years is below expectations. If he would have had a few successful seasons under his belt you get the benefit of the doubt if you have some bad luck. If there isn’t a big jump next year he will pay with his job.
Matt has had like 1 good NCAA Tourney out of 16-17 seasons. Archie has also been to an Elite 8. If you want Matt results and a coach that has actually been to a FF, you know where to find Crean in Georgia. If we can't do any better than Archie, Crean, or Painter, somebody shoot me.
Indiana, Purdue, Wisconsin, Iowa and Ohio St. are all within 1 or 2 of each other in Top 20 wins over the past 4 years. Wisconsin has the least with 9 and OSU has the most with I think 11. It's been a few days since I looked, but I think I've kept mental note. Anyway, IU is far behind the others in overall conference record during that period (except Iowa). Pont being, IU has enough talent to beat top teams at pretty much the same rate as the other top teams, but they aren't talented enough to beat the lower teams consistently.... or maybe it's not talent level.
That would have merit if 99% of the coaches in this country weren’t dealing with the exact same thing!
It’s like the oft-used line these days of “It’s been a challenging year for us with COVID.”
No shit, Sherlock. You’re not the only group with unusual and difficult circumstances.
Crean never ever recruited balanced teams. His roster management was pathetic. He would recruit the friend or brother of a recruit he wanted but the desired recruit would never sign and we‘d be stuck with the brother.
Let's not blame the current shit-show on Crean, well past time for AM to be held to account
Pater, glad you responded; you’ve always been one of the posters I’ve respected the most on here.
Looked up each team's results vs ranked teams since Miller has been here:
Indiana (12-19)
2020-21 (2-6)
2019-20 (5-4)
2018-19 (4-5)
2017-18 (1-7)
Purdue (18-20)
2020-21 (4-4)
2019-20 (5-6)
2018-19 (6-6)
2017-18 (3-4)
Wisconsin (12-22)
2020-21 (3-5)
2019-20 (5-3)
2018-19 (3-5)
2017-18 (1-9)
Iowa (18-20)
2020-21 (6-3)
2019-20 (7-5)
2018-19 (5-7)
2017-18 (0-5)
Ohio St (15-18)
2020-21 (5-1)
2019-20 (6-4)
2018-19 (2-9)
2017-18 (2-4)
Serious question: You REALLY think that talent is the difference maker? Or maybe, just maybe, coaching is it? Out of those 5 teams, who is getting the least out of the talent they have?
Let me ask this another way: Since Miller has been here, what good team have we beaten where his coaching has been the difference? Where we have beaten a superior opponent because of our gameplan / execution?
Everytime I read how well Crean recruited, the following names come to mind:
Tijan Jobe
Bawa Muniru
Guy Marc-Michel
Tim Priller
Jeremiah April
Grant Gelon
Other than Kelvin Sampson's record, Archie has underperformed the same as all the rest of the coaches in the post Knight era. And then we keep getting stuck with them because of high buyout amount. Also,
Archie has no NCAA appearances and no Big Ten titles. Maybe he needs another few years for that.
Archie has no NCAA appearances and no Big Ten titles. Maybe he needs another few years for that.
| Coach | Seasons | Record | Pct |
| Mike Davis | 2000–2006 | 115–79 | 0.592 |
| Kelvin Sampson | 2006–2008 | 43–15 | 0.741 |
| Dan Dakich | 2008 | 3–4 | 0.429 |
| Tom Crean | 2008–2017 | 166–135 | 0.552 |
| Archie Miller | 2017–Current | 67–53 | 0.558 |
No, I agree that it is coaching. I think it's obviously coaching at this point. I could definitely be wrong too, lol.
What I was trying to say is that if you are talented enough to beat good teams, then you can't blame the talent for not being able to beat the bad ones.
I'm off the Archie train. He's pulled off too many "first time ever" type of things. In year 1 we lose two home games by 20 as a double digit favorite. Those type of losses are difficult to find in the database and having two in the same season... fugetaboutit! Then we have 12 losses in 13 games after signing our dream recruit. Now we have 4 going on 5 straight seasons of .500 or less ball for the first time since the formation of the B10 in 1918.... and Al will be the first 4 year player to never crack the AP Top 10 and he's never even cracked the Top 20.
People don't even believe that last stat when I tell them, but it's true. Verdell, Pritch, Roth and Wilmont back in the Davis days were the close calls in the post-Kinght era, but they each spent one week in the AP Top 10. The close calls in the Knight era were Patterson, Miller, Mandeville and Eggers, but they managed to be Top 10 on two occasions. Finally, there was a trio on the 58-59 team who squeaked in with a single Top 10 ranking as juniors (Aldridge, Flowers and Balch).
I didn't like the hire, but I grew to really like Archie and became a believer. I still think he has a strong philosophy, he just can't coach at a level that separates him from the vast majority of coaches. I think there are many, many coaches who could've and would've done much better with a 4 year stint at Indiana.
Unfortunately... it's not over though. Unless Archie decides to move along on his own, we are stuck hoping it turns around. If it does turn around, we may be stuck with him even longer.
Also, I blame Jimmy Crews for this mess. His #17 St. Louis team lost their home finale to Dayton in 2014, which was the win that got Dayton invited to the dance. If the Billikins had taken care of business, Archie's Elite Eight team would have went to the NIT instead. Jett, being hobbled by a knee injury, only took 3 shots that night as St. Louis lost their 3rd straight game on the way to an outright A10 title. That loss didn't really hurt Jim Crews and his Billikins, but it was yet another nail in the IU basketball coffin.
VanPastorMan
Hall of Famer
That is my alma mater. I did take a couple of classes there. I also used those classes to complete my Moody Bible Institute degree. Bachelor of Arts in Bible and Theology.
*Strategic. Tactics are adjustments to strategy.
and fwiw - the offense scored 1.1 per possession, which is generally good enough to win games, the defense is what failed yesterday by allowing over 1.4 in the 2nd half.
Corner threes and late closeouts killed us .. more than not hitting shots. Though any difference in either could have only helped.
sports-reference shows the IU offensive eff. as 102.5 yesterday. Different sites may have different calculations though. Second half defense was putrid though.
All good points.
Thing that bothers me is lack of discipline to maintaining standard of play. Whether it’s settling for shots or poor defense (Hunter is still try to find his jock after Aaron Henry blew by him), we too easily look distracted and unfocused. We have enough talent to win, but not without giving concentrated effort.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Pacers take it to Milwaukee tonight tie the series 1-1
- Latest: TomEric4756
