ADVERTISEMENT

This is going to get ugly.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. You're certainly right that a number of aggravating factors have been beyond his control. But I don't think it gets him off the hook. He was hired, like all coaches, to win. And here we are 2.5 years in and our team still just isn't very good. We fans can (and do) have long discussions about exactly why that is. But diagnosing a problem doesn't fix it. And it's his job to fix it.

As I've been saying, it's a foregone conclusion that he's going to get another year. Glass' announcement all but ensures that (and he probably would've gotten another year even if Glass weren't retiring). I don't think he should, if we miss the tourney again. But reasonable people can differ on that. I think it's absurd that we'd retain a coach that misses the tourney for 3 consecutive years -- whatever the explanations and excuses. But other people apparently don't think so.

That's no surprise to me, BTW. It's among the reasons we're stuck in a rut of mediocrity. Few among us seem to expect, much less demand, much in the way of success anymore. That goes for way too many boosters and fans as well as the IU brass.

All that said, like you I'm hoping we start seeing significant improvement and all this becomes moot. I'd love nothing more than for the team to start shutting its critics up. But I'm not optimistic -- and I hate saying that.
Archie's first year was basically replacing Crean with Archie. Had Crean returned, he would have coached the same roster. I expected that team to be under .500 for the season and the conference. It was a terribly assembled roster that one could see coming 2 years before it happened. We knew it was likely that Bryant would leave after 2 years and that Blackmon wouldn't be there for 4 years. Crean did not plan for what we saw coming. Rojo was the best returning player at the time and he was never comfortable as the primary or secondary scorer. Credit Archie for getting Morgan to accept the role of a scorer instead of being the do everything role player.

Some will disagree, but Archie over achieved or did much better than expected of Crean. Actually, any defense instead of Crean's would have been an improvement.

Last year was Archie's first year for him coaching and beginning to overhaul the roster. His recruits led us in scoring and became the starting PG.

I look as this effectively being Archie's second year and a year closer to having total responsibility for the roster. Archie hasn't been perfect, but he is building a better team and he is doing it with Indiana talent. We can take a bigger step next year if TJD stays for a second year.
 
Archie hasn't been perfect, but he is building a better team

At the end of the day, there's really only one way to measure that -- and that's Ws and Ls. Sure, there's a lot that feeds into that. But, everything else serves that final metric. And, I'm sorry, but there isn't yet any evidence that we have a better team. I wish I could say there was. But surely you're watching the same games I'm watching. We're not very good, iubud.

I notice you've used a future tense -- because, well, you kinda have to. It's like the old Minnesota Vikings...when they were always the team to beat, next year.

Anyway, I don't think giving a coach 3 years to accomplish something as minimal as making the post-season tournament is unreasonable -- nor is it unreasonable to fire a coach who can't.

and he is doing it with Indiana talent.

I've never understood why this mattered. I mean, it certainly mattered that Davis and Crean were so obviously unsuccessful at landing great players from the state. The list of names is long and we all know it, so I won't bother going through it.

But the reason it was so troubling wasn't simply that they were from Indiana, but that they were great players. Saying we should be more effective at recruiting our state's best players is not the same thing as saying that we should aim to build a roster full of players from Indiana for its own sake.

I'd be happy with a team full of Hawaiian kids, so long as they were tough to beat.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT