ADVERTISEMENT

No More Concession Hires!

There is having trouble with a different look and defecating on oneself every time you see it ha… plenty of coaches have been thrown off by a different look, but CTC consistently looked shell shocked even when he knew he would be facing it.
He was totally unprepared for that Syracuse game. He did a lot of other things that were very good, but that game made far too many fans forget how much he helped the program when IU was down.

Record at IU: 301-166
Record at Georgia: 122-47.


Or, people can just say he sucked because of one game and move on.

I think a lot of teams have trouble with a well-played zone, because they (and their coaches) simply don't run up against one that often. It's a little like that unusual "Wildcat-ish" offense that Navy runs, and drives their much larger opponents nuts because because they don't know what it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbafficionado
He was totally unprepared for that Syracuse game. He did a lot of other things that were very good, but that game made far too many fans forget how much he helped the program when IU was down.

Record at IU: 301-166
Record at Georgia: 122-47.


Or, people can just say he sucked because of one game and move on.

I think a lot of teams have trouble with a well-played zone, because they (and their coaches) simply don't run up against one that often. It's a little like that unusual "Wildcat-ish" offense that Navy runs, and drives their much larger opponents nuts because because they don't know what it is.
I actually agree with you completely. People are way too quick to write off his success because of what was a frustrating string of underachieving seasons in the end. I know my commentary was disparaging, but it was really focused on this one aspect. If it were not for him, we would have really no success over the last 30 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bbafficionado
Woodson was risky. The assumption with Woodson and Crean was they could bank high level recruits. What has changed is some of the dolts out there have finally learned that you can't win consistently unless you can coach.

Those of us who watched Knight dismantle the Fab 5 knew coaching is #1, recruits and their stars is secondary.

Woodson was an unknown other than recruiting stars. He was mediocre. So was Crean. Not good enough.

Indiana needs a coach who can coach the doors off a team. The fans will get behind that.
Flash in the pan needs not apply.
that's Beard
 
I actually agree with you completely. People are way too quick to write off his success because of what was a frustrating string of underachieving seasons in the end. I know my commentary was disparaging, but it was really focused on this one aspect. If it were not for him, we would have really no success over the last 30 years.
If
I actually agree with you completely. People are way too quick to write off his success because of what was a frustrating string of underachieving seasons in the end. I know my commentary was disparaging, but it was really focused on this one aspect. If it were not for him, we would have really no success over the last 30 years.
Wanna let your mind wander a bit? Think about this and the words "steadily deteriorating":


A mediocre season at Arkansas plus a "steadily deteriorating" relationship with Kentucky plus an ego the size of Montana plus an oversized budget at Indiana. Hmmmm.
 
Can we be fair and call Crean "decent"? It was obviously time for Indiana to move on from him, but he did win a couple B1Gs, went to a few S16s, had a #1 seed, and if you take away the first three building years won 68%, all while reviving Indiana from the ashes.
Crean gets credit for giving some good memories to alot of Hoosier fans. 2013 and 2016 were super fun seasons.

He couldn't beat a zone. He couldn't win consistently. But he did recruit some really good players to IU.

I'm guessing Purdue fans would rather have Painter than Crean. I'd rather have someone better than both. Painter took a lot of criticism when his teams struggled. After the 2014 season they thought he was a reviver but maybe not a 'forever coach".
IU needs a stable coach who wins consistently. Think Bo Ryan, Tom Izzo, Jay Wright. The next coach has to be a really good one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iulb
He was totally unprepared for that Syracuse game. He did a lot of other things that were very good, but that game made far too many fans forget how much he helped the program when IU was down.

Record at IU: 301-166
Record at Georgia: 122-47.


Or, people can just say he sucked because of one game and move on.

I think a lot of teams have trouble with a well-played zone, because they (and their coaches) simply don't run up against one that often. It's a little like that unusual "Wildcat-ish" offense that Navy runs, and drives their much larger opponents nuts because because they don't know what it is.
He went 47-75 at Georgia, and he certainly didn't win 300 games at IU either. I think you're adding the wrong columns.

EDIT: He went 166-135 at IU.

As with pretty much every coach since RMK, the problem isn't his ceiling, it was that the floor was too low. Too many throwaway seasons.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: hookyIU1990
If we don't make anymore concession hires, who will sell me cheeseburgers outside the football stadium after the current kids die? That doesn't seem like a good plan.
 
He went 47-75 at Georgia, and he certainly didn't win 300 games at IU either. I think you're adding the wrong columns.

EDIT: He went 166-135 at IU.

As with pretty much every coach since RMK, the problem isn't his ceiling, it was that the floor was too low. Too many throwaway seasons.
You're right. I misread the data at the bottom.
 
Yeah, it still astounds me that a man can attain his level of success without figuring out how to beat a zone defense. I’m not even talking about just Syracuse because that zone was a whole different animal, but I remember once the word got out it was like watching Jon Lester try making a throw to first. It just couldn’t compute for the man despite all his success.
The main problem IU had that game was Syracuse's length gave Yogi, Jordy, and Vic big problems. And it took us entirely too long to get Cody and/or Christian the ball in the middle/high post area of that zone.

The hidden problem though...our defense was soooo soft. Syracuse's guards bullied our guards all game, and we didn't have many transition opportunities because of it...and that was one of the areas teams like Michigan and Louisville had success against that Syracuse team.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT