BGleas

He was getting a lot of respect last night from the refs.

I'm watching a little UCLA vs. Colorado and I know everyone is saying he's doing such a great job, I think IU is better. Honestly, I think IU beats them head-to-head, their record is good because the PAC-12 is hot garbage.

I'd personally prefer Matta but obviously I don't know where his health is. If he's ready to coach, I think he's the best option. Been to multiple Final Fours and more Elite 8's, has won multiple conference regular season and tournament titles. If he isn't healthy or interested in coaching again, then Drew might be a guy that given the last couple of years could come with some momentum.

Our administration has not been good enough. It has not supported the coaches it has hired well enough and it hasn't hired the right coaches. The admin also hasn't emphasized winning enough. The coaches that were hired also have not been good enough and have failed at their jobs.

I don't follow UCLA closely enough to answer all of that. I'd be happy if we hired a coach and then supported him 100% and let him do what he does. If we hired Cronin and he wanted to release 3 recruits and bring the point guard from UCLA that he had previously signed, then I'd hope our administration would let him do that. You're so focused on the money, its more than that.

I don't know about the IU guy part, but the rest is exactly what has been missing. The culture changed towards the end of Knight's tenure and he saw that. Having a dominant basketball program was actively being deemphasized. That winning culture comes from the top, even higher than the coach most times.

It's been over 25 years. How long do you need? The coaching hasn't been good. The administration has actively worked to deemphasize basketball. Both things are true. But for any coach, it's going to be more difficult when you don't have full organizational support. Again, nobody is saying Archie has been good or that he doesn't deserve to be fired. But, the job is more difficult without an all-in administration. That's all we're saying, and everyone tried to make it some huge defense of Archie.

Bo Ryan had a phenomenal AD, hence the organizational support. There's a reason Wisconsin football and basketball have gone from the basement to consistent winning over several different coaches. The university is all-in from the top.

Did they tell him he had to keep Crean's recruiting class and they he couldn't bring McKinley Wright? I don't know that for a fact, but its been reported by reputable people. Are there handcuffs on some of the kids he's able to go after? I don't know that for a fact, but its been reported by reputable people. Again, that doesn't mean Archie has done a good job. That doesn't mean he shouldn't be fired. But how can you look at the last 25 years and not see that beyond the coaching there are organizational issues at play here?

How in the world is this so difficult to understand?!?!

Exactly this! Archie has not done a good job. The program is in a tailspin, and it is absolutely time for a change. (The above means that Archie is at fault too and isn't blameless) With that said, I'm 99.9% confident that Archie and Crean before him are not supported, in a variety of ways, the way Self is at Kansas, Williams at UNC, K at Duke, Izzo at MSU, Wade at LSU, Beard at TT, etc., etc.

The football team has had like 2 good years in 100 years. Nobody has said you can't have good years at IU. Also, no sport at IU is comparable to basketball. Basketball is it's own beast at a school like IU and as @dbmhoosier and others have said, the admin hasn't supported it to be the face of the university. Comparing the sports isn't apples to apples.

Again, nobody has said that. Literally, nobody.

On page 37 that poster was convinced to change their opinion from page 16. Happens all the time...

Literally, nobody has.