Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If true, that is a good sign. This is where we need to leave two spots open and use Davis and Morgan to sell them on how great it will be to play with them. Even though Durham, Phinisee, and Green would all be PGs, I would still take Garland. Green could play more of the 2 role with CuJo. Phinisee and Garland would play the point with Durham as a third option.per Rabby. IU has a chance....
That's a good sign!per Rabby. IU has a chance....
Move Langford to the starting 2 and Smith, Anderson, or Hunter as the 3.If true, that is a good sign. This is where we need to leave two spots open and use Davis and Morgan to sell them on how great it will be to play with them. Even thought Durham, Phinisee, and Green would all be PGs, I would still take Garland. Green could play more of the 2 role with CuJo. Phinisee and Garland would play the point with Durham as a third option.
Getting ahead of myself here and guessing what roles the new players will play:
1. Garland, Phinisee, Durham
2. CuJo, Green
3. Langford, Smith, Anderson, Hunter
4, Morgan, Thompson
5. Davis, Moore
If one of those 3's end up playing as a 4, we would be pretty balanced. I wouldn't mind if we got only got one and left a scholarship open for someone that can defend. the post
I assumed as juniors, either CuJo or Green would be ready to start. Langford could be a 2 or play as a 3 in a 3 guard lineup. It's hard to predictct where any of them will be since only 4 of the 13 have ever played college basketball.Move Langford to the starting 2 and Smith, Anderson, or Hunter as the 3.
Landing both of these guys would finally expose that Tom Crean was not as good of a recruiter as people say.
Exactly. Crean's two conference championships basically extended the agony.I wish we could've had this coach a few years ago.
Full court press. Land both of them.
If that 3 star forward commits today, I'm going to break something.
The only way accepting the Forrester commitment would be acceptable is if Archie knows someone is leaving after the season, freeing up room for three recruits. Assuming Langford is a one and done, that leaves two spots open in 2019. I would prefer not to use the oversign. I hated that about Crean.
can forester defend the 5? If so he would make sense..we need a post defender/rebounderAnd even then I still don't like it.
As I've said many times before, when Archie was hired, one thing we were told over and over and over is that he doesn't use up all of his scholarships and usually only has 11 players on the team......it's one of the reasons why I thought he was a great hire (still do before the "real" fans wet themselves).
So, why bring in yet another forward to fill that final spot when we have a glut at that position?
We do not have 7 guys at his position. Please quit spreading this falsehood, it's pure ignorant bullsh%t.I finally agree with you on something. I mean we only have like 7 guys at his position already and are supposedly leading for Brooks in 2019. This would definitely be a Tommy like signing.
CAM needs a couple classes to get the balance he wants before he leaves an open ship out there. Sheesh give him at least one game before calling him out.
Thanks for the call out. CAM hasn't coached a game yet , been on the job for just 5 months or so, has us in the mix for two of the best players in the country and people on here are going ape $hit about a possible recruit.CAM needs a couple classes to get the balance he wants before he leaves an open ship out there. Sheesh give him at least one game before calling him out.
No not even closeI love Archie and think he's doing great but offerring Forrester at this point would be as big a gaffe as offering Priller, April, Gelon, David Williams, Capobianco, etc.
You will see lineups with say...anderson at the 2, hunter or Smith at the 3,Moore at the 4 and Thompson at the 5Hunter, Smith, Anderson, Thompson, Moore, Mcroberts, Morgan, etc all play his position.
Yea, he's skilled, has huge upside, is still growing, is quick and long and has a huge wingspan. No one needs a player like that. dws....No not even close
I would prefer we add romeo and Garland but it wouldn't be dumb to sign him. Archie knows our chances with elite recruits. He isnt stupidYea, he's skilled, has huge upside, is still growing, is quick and long and has a huge wingspan. No one needs a player like that. dws....
Crean has made our fanbase stupid .
No they don't ...Hunter, Smith, Anderson, Thompson, Moore, Mcroberts, Morgan, etc all play his position.
He's got a lot of upside and that wingspan will serve him well in Arch's defense and offense. I don't know if we'll sign him, but I understand why we're looking at him.I would prefer we add romeo and Garland but it wouldn't be dumb to sign him. Archie knows our chances with elite recruits. He isnt stupid
You are nuts to compare him to those players. I think the coaching staff knows a hell a lot more than fans on a message board.I love Archie and think he's doing great but offerring Forrester at this point would be as big a gaffe as offering Priller, April, Gelon, David Williams, Capobianco, etc.
Crean has made our fanbase stupid .
I'm just assuming it's the orange ignorance .. we used to be smarter than this.Have to demure...many were/are entirely "self-taught" so to speak and a goodly number of IU's not-so-brilliant pre-date CTC's tenure. He could be credited with making more than few desperate, which like necessity is another mother of invention...
NFSWhat the hell is wrong with these people? It's like they've never watched basketball other than a Crean coached team.
You are nuts to compare him to those players. I think the coaching staff knows a hell a lot more than fans on a message board.
You can't read can you? I never said Forrester wasn't a lot better than the players I mentioned. I'm sure he's tons better than Gelon, Priller, etc. I'm sure he can play for a good program. But his signing will be a very stupid move. Bank it.
You are nuts to compare him to those players. I think the coaching staff knows a hell a lot more than fans on a message board.
Yea, he's skilled, has huge upside, is still growing, is quick and long and has a huge wingspan. No one needs a player like that. dws....
Crean has made our fanbase stupid .
No they don't ...
Morgan is a 4, Moore is a 4. Thompson will be a 5. Smith and Anderson are 3's. Forester will most likely be a 5. Where are you getting this crap at? It's pure ignorance.
McRoberts, he's a walk on. Crean isn't here anymore.
lol ... "forwards" ..
I'm just assuming it's the orange ignorance .. we used to be smarter than this.
I remember grandmothers in this state breaking down the rules to help side and motion. Now, we have people thinking big wings, stretch fours and posts are all "forwards" and play the same position.. .My god..
fwiw Crean's average lineup was appx. 6'0, 6'2, 6'3, 6'7, 6'9 and played "positionless" basketball without well defined roles. ie everyone was expected to handle, penetrate and pass.
Arch will be more in the range of 6'2, 6'4/5, 6'6/7, 6'9, 6'9, and though everyone will be versatile, the roles will be well defined and be damn sure you won't see post players dribble penetrating into the middle of zones..
It's a brand new day and a style of basketball that doesn't rely on gimmicks, and one the purists will like.