Would Indiana fans prefer Steve Alford over Archie?
- Thread starter Drmac22
- Start date
We are in a major rebuild because admin has purposefully avoided anything to do with IUs Knight era on purpose. I don’t know if Alford is better choice vs Miller but I am 100% sure that 1 IU guy sometime in the past 20 years would have been better than what’s been done to the program in that time frame.
Yes...he probably would bring in the best transfers. You have a problem with “one and done” players too or just want 4 year players?
Man i am a huge bball fan. Keep up with most information and news around the game. I havent heard much if anything about this player and Alford while he coached Iowa. Was it like ten years ago? Really dont think womens groups have kept up with Alford or his career. Wouldnt they of protested him at his last two stops since Iowa? If these so called womens groups had a issue with Alford coaching. You would think the big stage and publicity of being the coach.at UCLA would of got. These groups inspired to go after him. Sorry, but i dont think these groups are just waiting for Alford to take over IU. Think your being a little dramatic and think something better will come a long.
They did protest him at UCLA. School had PR problems before he even coached a game.
Arnold Ziffel, you are a smarter Broilee coed than that! IU fans want Pork Chop to coach in Broileeland forever. That way, you never play a game in April.
In this day and age, it is difficult to find a coaching candidate who checks all the boxes. As much as the hardcore fans think that we can snap our fingers and a 30 year old Bob Knight clone will walk through the door, it isn't happening. If you can find a relatively young coach (35-40) years old with several years of head coaching experience, and a guy you think can lead your program for 10- 15 years, that is about as well as you will do, unless you hit a home run and find a guy who is the perfect fit who can last 20-25 years.
I believe Alford is in his early 50's (52 or 53). Assuming you can ignore all the warts and hire him, you would be lucky to get 10 years out of him, and based upon the stories/ rumors that circulate about him, you might be lucky to get 5, if he rubs everybody the wrong way.
I believe Alford is in his early 50's (52 or 53). Assuming you can ignore all the warts and hire him, you would be lucky to get 10 years out of him, and based upon the stories/ rumors that circulate about him, you might be lucky to get 5, if he rubs everybody the wrong way.
So Painter doesnt coach in April while Archie will barely ever coach in March? And you think that’s a good thing?
The regular season lasts until March.... so..... ugh.... yea....... he'll coach in March every year.
4 times minimum this season.
*eyeroll* ...
I can't believe there are people so biased they actually think Alford would be a good coach at IU after his failed stints at Iowa and UCLA. Only on this board.
I don’t want Alford but come on, be honest, he’d do better than this dumpster fire we have now.
Are you saying he could use our current roster and get better results? It's hard to know isn't it? Someone the other day was comparing Steve Kerr with Fred Hoiberg. They said if you switched the teams they coached who would still have a job today? Obviously if Fred had Curry, Thompson, Durant, and Green he would do better than the Bulls roster.
Maybe, maybe not. Considering your reaction Miller was hired you're not better at judging how well a coach will perform than anyone else on this board. Alford's record speaks for itself, though. He was 7-6 with a more talented team than this one at the time he was fired. So saying he'd do better is far from certain.
What I would consider to be certain is that as a long term hire he wouldn't be any more successful than he was at Iowa and UCLA.
[/QUOT
Guy why would i BS ? I have no dog in this fight. I just didnt remember a lot of up roar at UCLA about hiring Alford. Dosent mean im right. I agree. If this hire at IU would cause negative pub. Then i agree. Move past. IU dosent need it. Alford was at UCLA for a min. Recruited really well. Just didnt coach them up. My point is. In my opinion. Alford because of his history in Indiana. Recruiting would be better then it had been. Since Sampson. If Alford did shady things over a sexual assault or whatever happened. Then I agree. Pass. I just dont remember a lot of backlash when he took over UCLA.
This would have been a good question prior/during last 3 hires. Succeed or fail, would have answered IU guy question which splits fan base to this day.
I'm glad fans don't make hiring decisions. We have our coach and we will be watching what he does to recover from a bad situation.
Steve Alford will never be the coach at IU. The window has closed for a Knight return and Steve to coach at IU.
I would say Archie is a good coach, he has a difficult situation with some very talented players and not winning, Its much different coaching mid major teams who have a bunch of guys that are good but not overly good, they dedicate to the team and put in the work to have success as a TEAM. In Archies case at IU he has a couple of players that are Stars and they come in with the thought process that "I" will make the team better not that the Team will make them better (Playing as a Team I mean) I honestly think Archie will have better success as he recruits his type players. As for Alford.. I know he is an Indiana legend but I also feel he would not be a good fit for IU at this moment. Maybe never.
He was fired mid season from UCLA which is currently a sub 100 Ken Pom team and has pretty much nothing but 5 and 4 stars...and they aren't all freshmen (Wilkes, Ali, Hands, Smith) then add in their freshman (Brown, Riley, Bernard, Singleton) and per your own basketball genius that should be a top 10 team if you simply count the stars.
Funny how it's a wreck. Hmm chemistry is a bitch isn't it.
So yeah, he'd be much worse than this dumpster fire this year.
.
Hmm... that was not my response, that's interesting. It was till the last line, but I didn't write that, interesting. I'd probably agree, but that was not me.
Last edited:
Remember when you said we’d be better off without Romeo? HA! How dumb was that?
We'll find out when we're much worse next year according to you right?
I'm just glad he's not coasting as much as he was earlier and actually competing on the defensive end these past 3 games. I figured he would have quit by now like you suggested and hoped.
Still, we might not be .500 on the season if he would have played with this effort all season. It might have also helped with the chemistry issues too.
What did you think of Thompson's one point? Pathetic right?
Interesting how we've been much more competitive, especially defensively since he's gotten into the rotation and taking some of Smith's minutes while giving us an actual power forward who can bang.
But you said he sucks and insignificant to winning.
Again, we'll find out next year.
You defend Archie for two awful seasons but then say Alford got fired for uhhhh a bad season. Ok makes no sense
If you guys want to get rid of Painter, just fire him! Don't try to dump your trash in our yard.
No, Alford has had maybe 4 good seasons in 20.
My reply was to the comment that he'd do better with this team this year when he was fired mid season, this year with a team he built (that has three times more burger boys and high star players than ours since Freepie is a classic stargazer).
Alford has never won anything important as coach. He failed miserably at UCLA, and there’s no evidence to suggest that he would become a magician if he made it back to Assembly Hall. I don’t get the obsession.
Similar threads
