Knowing what you know now, what would you have done 2 years ago

[T.M.P.]

That is the exact rationale many Crean supporters used. Interesting

No it isn't .. you're FOS ..

 

[BigNutsIUFan]

Mike Davis called, he’s wondering where his statue is.

Thats ancient history.

 

[BigNutsIUFan]

And Knight wanted the ND job, but they hired Digger and he “settled” for IU. Digger had decent teams, but needless to say, ND fu*ked that one up (although, I can’t imagine RMK settling for always being second to football, not to mention, ND dealing with Knight’s personality).

John Wooden almost went to Purdue. Whew we really dodged that one or maybe John dodged a bullet there. Could you imagine of Purdue had ripped off 10 straight championships. It helped that Wooden had Gilbert doing his dirty recruiting

 

[darkhawk returns]

Exactly, and you can't teach 6'10. Plus he had 4 months until Fall semester started when he took over. Not exactly a lot of time to evaluate the players committed let alone replace any that left. Revisionist history has been loved on this board since around the time Knight got fired. The reasons our program fell behind are long gone (mostly 2 AD's, 2 Presidents, and a board of trustees who helped them try to make athletics less of a priority). The 2002 run with Davis and obligatory extension set us back several years. The Athletic Department being in the red (how this was possible I'm still not sure) despite no investment in facility upgrades until Greenspan was gone contributed to the fall. Thankfully, we are investing heavily to catch up to the rest of the B10, at least, now. Hiring a someone who had already twice broken a rule the NCAA had made clear it was focusing on (and don't give me the "just phone calls" argument as he had been caught twice doing the same thing before he got here) pretty well finished the job of destroying the program. Crean did well to bring us back to mediocrity from nothing, but it was clear he had no idea how to have a recruiting strategy, coach defense at all, or have any offense other than dribble around and jack up a 3. We would have had a PR nightmare and trouble finding any self respecting coach had we got rid of him immediately after winning 2 outright B10 championships in 3 years. Don't blame Archie and Glass for any of these things (again, Glass didn't hire Crean). Holtmann took over a team with tons of talent with Matta just having a ton of injuries his last year (sound familiar?). Though Matta never was the offensive coach Holtmann is. Not at all saying Holtmann isn't better than Archie or the other was around (I wanted, in this order: Mack, Archie, Holtmann....mostly cause of Archie's age and what he has done with Dayton level talent). I'm just saying there is absolutely no way to get a real idea on Archie comparing the two situations (nor can we compare them to Mack's roster of Pitino's guys and a couple grad transfers). It takes time to build a program back from where we were. First year, we didn't make the NIT and lost 5 scholorship players to graduation (including 3 starters). Second year, One win away from the tourney and a 1 seed in the NIT (while starting 2 freshmen and 2 Sophomores with 1 Senior). What is the next logical step? This isn't the pros where you can remake a roster with trades and making the biggest offer. I'll wholeheartedly agree we missed on Fitzner, but I'll also say it was well worth taking a shot on a 6'10 guy who could shoot to give us an extra schollie in this class (I would assume Franklin's as TJD was always the #1 priority). Either way, if we don't continue to see progress, I'll happily line up with the fire Archie crowd, but let's have some realistic expectations and give him some time....

I agree with most of what you said but a lot of it is in hindsight.

Development of a player is as much on him as it is on the coaching staff (See Vic). I would bet that Archie thought that Moore and Forrester would have been farther along in their development than they are. Obviously some of that is on him and his perceived inability to maximize their talents and/or not to be able to identify their work ethic.

In Fitzner's case, he was obviously brought in as a shooter. Which we sorely needed. Yes, the physicality of the BT proved too much but surely he showed flashes in practice to earn the PT that he got.

 

[Harry Hondo]

And Knight wanted the ND job, but they hired Digger and he “settled” for IU. Digger had decent teams, but needless to say, ND fu*ked that one up (although, I can’t imagine RMK settling for always being second to football, not to mention, ND dealing with Knight’s personality).

John Wooden almost went to Purdue. Whew we really dodged that one or maybe John dodged a bullet there. Could you imagine of Purdue had ripped off 10 straight championships. It helped that Wooden had Gilbert doing his dirty recruiting

Wooden was an average coach until he got the best talent. Not sure about the history of Gilbert, but he may have been a UCLA guy and had no connections or intentions to help Purdue.

 

[fpeaugh]

Tom Crean's left behind upperclass recruits did not perform as high as expected, or lead. Archie has had 1 class that he originally recruited.

You’re right. Morgan was a terrible player and leader. So was Robert Johnson.

 

[fpeaugh]

Mack was the most successful. I really liked the way Holtmann's Butler teams played grind it out defense and ran a patient fundamental half court offense. Archie took Dayton (Dayton!!) to the Elite 8 in only a few years. Archie teams played very hard, and Archie's Packline Defense works with the right personnel, knowledge, and effort. Archie was the youngest of the 3 coaches with the most upside, and likely the highest ceiling.
If IU could not get Brad Stevens, Billy Donovan, Tony Bennett, Greg Marshall, it would have been between Archie and Holtmann to recruit Indiana HS players, play solid defense to keep you in every game, and make in game adjustment to win close games. Given time, i still think Archie has the most upside and highest ceiling, and being good is not the goal at IU, being great is the goal by winning National Championships. So IU rolled the dice on the youngest coach with the perceived highest upside. It is that upside thst warrents more patience from the IU fanbase whose patience is running out after after 2 decades after RMK. Mike Davis, Kelvin Sampson's sanctions, and 9 years of roller coaster, mediocre, turnover prone Crean.

You’re living in a fantasy world. Archie will never accomplish half of what Davis or Crean did. He’s the worst coach we’ve had since at least WW2.

 

[jsig]

2 years ago I was rooting for Mack because I have rooted for teams he played on and teams he has coached. If I was choosing between the 2 now, I'd go Mack for the same reasons.

I voted to Hire Archie based on the question and the fact that he was the guy hired. There is nothing in the last 2 years that makes it clear that Mack or Holtman or Archie would be the better hire.

Obviously in hindsight IU should of hired Beard but the masses here would of flipped out had he been hired 2 years ago. You could see he was a coach on the rise in his 1st season at Tech as pointed out then.

https://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/littler-known-candidates-for-iu.146853/#post-2039446

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

I wouldn't have wasted so much time watching this basketball team. It is two years of bitter disappointment that I will never get back. I have been broken since the Nebraska game. After 40 years, Apathy has set in, unfortunately.

It’s okay hoosierhat.....football is right around the corner.

Oh crap....what sports does IU have left at the P5 level?

When does men’s cross country season start? There’s nothing left.

 

[fpeaugh]

2 years ago I was rooting for Mack because I have rooted for teams he played on and teams he has coached. If I was choosing between the 2 now, I'd go Mack for the same reasons.

I voted to Hire Archie based on the question and the fact that he was the guy hired. There is nothing in the last 2 years that makes it clear that Mack or Holtman or Archie would be the better hire.

Obviously in hindsight IU should of hired Beard but the masses here would of flipped out had he been hired 2 years ago. You could see he was a coach on the rise in his 1st season at Tech as pointed out then.

https://indiana.forums.rivals.com/threads/littler-known-candidates-for-iu.146853/#post-2039446

No one would have flipped. Everyone would have put their caps on and joined his cult just like we do with every hire. He would have been crowned before he ever stepped foot on campus.

But the difference is he would’ve been the real deal. Unfortunately we hired the worst choice possible.

And as I’ve admitted I liked the Archie hire too. But I was wrong and I have no problem admitting it.

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

No it isn't .. you're FOS ..

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Have you considered changing your handle from T.M.P to F.O.S?

You couldn’t be more out of touch with the real state of things in our athletic department.

 

[Al Bino]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Have you considered changing your handle from T.M.P to F.O.S?

You couldn’t be more out of touch with the real state of things in our athletic department.

What does the state of things in our athletic department have to do with his post?

 

[jsig]

No one would have flipped. Everyone would have put their caps on and joined his cult just like we do with every hire. He would have been crowned before he ever stepped foot on campus.

But the difference is he would’ve been the real deal. Unfortunately we hired the worst choice possible.

And as I’ve admitted I liked the Archie hire too. But I was wrong and I have no problem admitting it.

Yada Yada Yada with cult hyperbole. There is no cult here for Crean or Archie.

 

[fpeaugh]

Yada Yada Yada with cult hyperbole. There is no cult here for Crean or Archie.

There was for Crean. And it lasted 5 years at a minimum. Some posters were members for 8+ years.

 

[Tasmanian Devil]

I'm not an Archie hater, but here's some things I think Archie should have done differently:

--He should not have re-recruited Moore.

Considering when Archie was hired (March 25th) and who else was available, can't say this was a grievous mistake. Hindsight is always 20-20.

If Archie hadn't, who should have he attempted from the 2017 class to have recruited in Moore's place?

--He should not have recruited Damezi. Pork Chop didn't offer him. There was a reason why. His recruitment was another thing I wondered about at the time.

Not sure where you got your info, but it's not correct. Purdue was his first high-major offer in March 2017.

--Instead, he should have continued to recruit Henry hard.

Offers were out to both Henry and Anderson, a situation much like Brandon Newman and Armann Franklin - who commits first?

Again, hindsight is 20-20. Who's to say Henry didn't develop better at Michigan St. because of the culture already established there and the veteran upperclassmen - as compared to the IU roster?

This is a big summer for Damezi. From what I've heard the staff likes his length and think he could turn out to be a really good player. He just has to get stronger and be more committed on defense.

--The approach he has utilized with Green & Smith hasn't worked. He shouldn't have wasted 2 years on those guys and let their lackadaisical attitude affect the team, as it apparently has.

What approach should he have taken?

Get rid of them? It's likely the APR issues left behind by Tom Crean impacted staff decisions on whom to retain.

Hold them more accountable? He did suspend Green (the cause behind that is up for debate) and he did bench Smith at Iowa.

This is one of the biggest issues I had this year with Archie. But in retrospect it's a frying pan/fire situation: if you bench Smith, whom do you play? When we were going thru the January portion of the schedule (up to the first MSU game) we had no Hunter (for the season), no Race Thompson and had Davis for only 15 minutes. That leaves you with Fitzner, Moore and Forrester - none a particularly good option.

--He should not have continued to play Fitzner as much as he did when it was clear he couldn't play at the BT level. Unless he had determined that both Forrester and Moore had no future with the program, he should have played them more. If he determined that Forrester had no future with the program, he erred in recruiting him in the first place.

Really do wonder what was going on with those guys - especially Forrester.

Without being there on a day-to-day basis we don't know what those guys were giving in practice. Were they giving the effort Archie was demanding? Were they not playing D as he wanted?

I do appreciate you taking the time to specify your concerns. We might disagree on things - which is fine - but it just blows me away on how some on here categorically say "Archie is a failure". Thanks for putting in the effort on your opinions.

 

[82hoosier]

Wooden was an average coach until he got the best talent. Not sure about the history of Gilbert, but he may have been a UCLA guy and had no connections or intentions to help Purdue.

That’s just absolutely absurd. Thanks for the laugh!

 

[mushroomgod_1]

Considering when Archie was hired (March 25th) and who else was available, can't say this was a grievous mistake. Hindsight is always 20-20.

If Archie hadn't, who should have he attempted from the 2017 class to have recruited in Moore's place?



Not sure where you got your info, but it's not correct. Purdue was his first high-major offer in March 2017.



Offers were out to both Henry and Anderson, a situation much like Brandon Newman and Armann Franklin - who commits first?

Again, hindsight is 20-20. Who's to say Henry didn't develop better at Michigan St. because of the culture already established there and the veteran upperclassmen - as compared to the IU roster?

This is a big summer for Damezi. From what I've heard the staff likes his length and think he could turn out to be a really good player. He just has to get stronger and be more committed on defense.



What approach should he have taken?

Get rid of them? It's likely the APR issues left behind by Tom Crean impacted staff decisions on whom to retain.

Hold them more accountable? He did suspend Green (the cause behind that is up for debate) and he did bench Smith at Iowa.

This is one of the biggest issues I had this year with Archie. But in retrospect it's a frying pan/fire situation: if you bench Smith, whom do you play? When we were going thru the January portion of the schedule (up to the first MSU game) we had no Hunter (for the season), no Race Thompson and had Davis for only 15 minutes. That leaves you with Fitzner, Moore and Forrester - none a particularly good option.



Really do wonder what was going on with those guys - especially Forrester.

Without being there on a day-to-day basis we don't know what those guys were giving in practice. Were they giving the effort Archie was demanding? Were they not playing D as he wanted?

I do appreciate you taking the time to specify your concerns. We might disagree on things - which is fine - but it just blows me away on how some on here categorically say "Archie is a failure". Thanks for putting in the effort on your opinions.

I could have sworn Purdue backed off DA, but Rivals listed a PU offer (247 did not), and the Purdue posters at the time (7/20/17) said he had an offer and were pissed he came to IU......

 

[mathboy]

I could have sworn Purdue backed off DA, but Rivals listed a PU offer (247 did not), and the Purdue posters at the time (7/20/17) said he had an offer and were pissed he came to IU......

As far as I know, Anderson had an offer and Purdue was actively recruiting him right up to when he committed to IU. Most of us out-of-the-know casual fans heard he was a Purdue lean. Maybe the staff knew differently.

It seems that as soon as Anderson committed, Purdue pulled in Tre Williams. It seems odd to me that the slot for Anderson went to a big center in Williams, but hey, I don't really have any inside info. Since Painter pursued Anderson, I was surprised that he didn’t get on the floor more this past year.

I thought highly of Anderson’s skills, and thought he was a Purdue lean as well. I had only one theory on this situation. Maybe Painter told him he would red shirt his first year, and Archie said he could earn playing time. That would make IU a more attractive choice. I don’t really know if this was the case. Just a theory on why he chose IU.