Jump to content

go_iu_bb

Members
  • Posts

    2,007
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by go_iu_bb

  1. I already thought IU was an unlikely destination for him. At least this makes it likely he won't be a Boiler, either.
  2. Yet UI finished 13-7 which was good for 4th place. That means the 2 years prior were even worse than Miller's first 2 so UI made quite an impressive jump which Miller hasn't been able to do. This is your defense? BTW, in this thread you claimed that the difference between 4th and 10th last season was 3 games. It was actually 4.
  3. There are grad transfers and other transfers with immediate eligibility every year that could've filled the shooting void. It's not my job to know all the potential targets, it's the coaching staff's job. You're welcome to look up who all the transfers were before last season and how well they did shooting before the transfer, if you wish. There is probably a thread here somewhere that talks about that. Miller got one the year before (Fitzner) who didn't really work out but I can't fault him for trying. It looked like he either didn't try last year or he completely whiffed on all of them.
  4. I was talking about last season specifically. Hunter was still questionable for the season in regards to how much he'd be able to play and how effective he'd be. Franklin was an incoming freshman who was unlikely to contribute greatly during the season. Sure, they got better as the season went on but, outside of a few games last year, it still wasn't a good shooting team. That caused all kinds of issues on offense. During those 15 games Franklin did shoot well but didn't shoot that much. Only ~1.5 3-point shots per game (22 total shots). That's including 2 games of 5 shots. Outside of those 2 games he was only shooting once per game, which isn't enough to really help. It was expected that would happen entering the season. Or are you saying that you thought last years team actually shot well? Teams didn't pack the lane and IU didn't go on long scoring droughts? Miller had 2 open scholarships which could've been used to more immediately address that glaring weakness.
  5. I agree with you and I hope that the coaching staff is emphasizing that (in a way that is within whatever restrictions they have) to recruits. They could at least point out the size and passion of the IU fan base as well as the resources the AD has already set up to help the athletes.
  6. It does, but if people want to use the excuse of "IU had no shooters" they could maybe explain why they didn't. It wasn't a secret going into last year that it would be a poor shooting team. Yet no shooters were added even with 2 available scholarships. That's a coaching decision so at least part of the blame belongs to Miller.
  7. Yes. And it isn't as though Miller had no available scholarships to use.
  8. I would think more highly of Miller if he had won 74.2% of games overall and 60% in conference last year as opposed to 64.5% and 45%, respectively, that he actually won. I can't speak for Brass Cannon but, yes, that would've done a lot to relieve my doubts. You act as though 3 games isn't much. It's 15% of conference games.
  9. I'm not negative on him but I'm not sold on him, as I've said multiple times. His first three years have not impressed me. Have they impressed you? If so, why? Yes, he has his foundation now. So is thinking that better than 7th place in the B1G in year 4 too much to ask with that foundation and a stud (possibly 2 with Lander)? If so, how much longer does he get with his foundation in place before the team can be realistically expected to see improvements in results and B1G standings? We'll see how he does with Miller and Mohammed but if he doesn't land them, which seems likely at this point, then '21 recruiting doesn't look good. A class in which there was a lot of hype for the state of IN and Miller has been at IU long enough to establish relationships with the recruits. This could still be a great class if he lands those 2. Far from great if he whiffs. If he does whiff do you think that has nothing to do with his first 3 years at IU and how down IU has been during their lifetimes? I think that a 7th place finish in the conference would be disappointing because I think this team is better than that. I've said that multiple times in this thread. How is that "thinking year 4 is already in the toilet"? Round and round we go. You guys can have the last say, I'm tired of this conversation.
  10. You're right. Replacing bad coaches with other bad coaches doesn't help a team have sustained success. Davis was bad then replaced by a good but dirty coach in Sampson. Sampson ended in disaster and was replaced by bad coach Crean. Crean was replaced by Miller. That hire looked good on paper but so far the results have been lacking. Miller may end up being a good hire but it's comical to pretend like the results so far leave no reason for concern. Miller's team have improved each year, true. But they've gone from really bad, to just bad, and last year achieved the level of bad to mediocre. Sure, there have been reasons for those teams to perform badly but many teams have adversity and some of those who are well coached will overcome that. Wisconsin last year. MSU has had some injuries to some of their starters in recent years. Yet they still do well because of good coaching. So what kind timeframe makes sense for judging a coach? Is it really too much to want to see concrete evidence of improvement in year 4 after 3 years of uninspired play without having to delve into the analytics to find it? Lack of results matter to recruits. A lot of players talk about offense so they pay attention to that. IU's under Miller has been disjointed and out of sync. The recruits see that. Recruits also see that IU hasn't really been relevant very often in the time they can remember. Do you think the reasons behind that matter to them? They remember a team that has been bad more often than not with brief bursts of really good only to flare out the next season. I recognize the reasons why IU has been bad for a long time, but I, unlike some, also recognize that the recruits probably don't care about that. They just know that IU hasn't been a consistent winner in their lifetime and still aren't so far under Miller. So I think this year is important. The team needs to start looking like a team and playing better than the sum of its parts. If they do that then they'll finish higher than 7th in the conference. If they don't then recruiting will get even harder.
  11. I'm well aware of what IU has been through the past 20 years. Excuses can be made but results still matter. The point of those posts was to dispute what IU Scott was saying which was essentially that it's unrealistic to expect a team to be able to finish near the top of the B1G every year or at least on a consistent basis. Those numbers show that 2 teams have been able to do that for 20 years, with a few more not every year but still consistently. The 10 year numbers in the post you quoted aren't a good range, either? That is the span of time that the players IU is now recruiting will be able to remember and most closely reflect the current B1G. 1 of the 2 teams that has finished in the top 4 of the B1G in 9/10 seasons had a coaching change in that time, as did IU. Crean either finished 1st in the conference or outside of the top 4. I'm sorry if the numbers don't look good, but the fact is that IU hasn't been very good recently. That is the IU the recruits know. I hope everything works out and this team plays well consistently and that carries over into future teams. That type of consistency has been missing at IU for a long time.
  12. I agree with a lot of your points here except for a couple. While I agree that we know what to expect at this point from Brunk and Durham, Franklin was just a freshman last year and showed flashes of good play. So I don't think we can say we know what he brings this year as it he could make a jump in productivity. It also sounds like Galloway is doing really well in practice so we might get more out of him than you expect.
  13. 20 games, or roughly 2/3 of the regular season, are played against B1G opponents. That means to be relevant nationally year after year (which I think most here want) a school has to win against conference opponents. So I don't think it's too much to ask for a coach learn how to win against those. Also, this year he has an experienced team and a preseason all-conference player who is getting talk about being a contender for national POY in TJD. Miller has brought in one best point guards in the 2020 or 2021 classes. Of course, he had a similar situation with Morgan and Langford but that didn't turn out well. Maybe this time will be difference due to the overall team experience coupled with the following reasons: A couple of players who were rumored to either not buy in to Miller's playing philosophy and/or otherwise be distractions are gone. Injuries plagued the last few years but so far this off season there haven't been reports of those. Miller teams at IU have had games here and there where they were clicking on all cylinders but have not been able to string a bunch of those together. This means they've lost games they could've won. These preseason projections are based on this team continuing to play like the last few seasons except with more experience. So with the factors that may have caused that inconsistent play no longer applying to this team we should see a team that is more consistent than previous Miller teams. This also means they should play better than just an small incremental improvement from last season. If they finish 7th, it will likely mean they were plagued by uneven play yet again. I'm not saying, nor have I ever said, Miller should be fired. I am not sold on him and have found the last few seasons disappointing, not just because of the wins/loses but because they haven't looked like a well coached team and have often looked unprepared. I hope it was due to factors mostly out of his control. I'm waiting for him to put it all together and have the team look like a well coached, consistent team.
  14. Did I say I wouldn't care? Nope, sure didn't. But 7th place in the conference would still be disappointing and certainly wouldn't answer questions of whether or not Miller can get it done at IU.
  15. Considering IU finished 10th last season and 8th the season before, 7th place would be an improvement. But it would mean that the team once again failed to exceed expectations under Miller and that with all but 1 player recruited by him. With TJD and possibly Lander leaving after this season, if it doesn't happen now it might not happen.
  16. I understand that. But at some point the improvement has to be reflected in conference standing which means conference wins, not just overall. The majority of the season, after all, is played in conference (20 games). I can't help but to think that some of his recruiting misses have been because not only has the team not win a lot, but their offense has often been ugly and stagnant. Maybe Miller will figure it out, maybe not. I hope he does, and sooner rather than later.
  17. In that same timeframe Purdue had 11 top 4 finishes. If you look at just the last 10 years those teams are even more dominate: Michigan: 6 MSU: 9 Purdue: 6 Wisconsin: 9 Maryland since joining B1G: 4 of 6 seasons That's 2 dominate teams and 2 teams that have finished top 4 more often than not. This shows that doing consistently well in conference isn't impossible, even now. Wisconsin hasn't had that HoF coach the whole time. IU the last 20: 8 times. The last 10: 2 (both 1st place) I agree that it's coaching. IU hasn't had good coaches the last 20 years. The jury is still out on Miller but his record hasn't been great so far. Hopefully this will be the breakout year.
  18. CincyHoosier did say "nearly." Here are some numbers. Top 4 in conference since 2000-2001 (last 20 seasons): MSU: 16 (1st 7 times also 1st the 3 years prior '01) Michigan: 7 (5 in last 20 years, 1st 2 times) Wisconsin: 18 (5th in '01, 9th in '18, 1st 5 times)
  19. So he would be able to play basketball and baseball (assuming the coaches were all okay with that) but couldn't do so on a baseball scholarship.
  20. It's to prevent schools from loading their football or basketball teams with scholarship "walk ons." If they play football, they receive a football scholarship or no scholarship. If they play basketball, they receive a basketball scholarship or no scholarship unless they have a football scholarship. There's few other sports that are affected by the rule. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NCAA_Division_I#Rules_for_multi-sport_athletes
  21. If he attends IU instead of going pro, he would not be able to walk on to the basketball team and receive a baseball scholarship. If he played basketball it would be a basketball scholarship or no scholarship.
  22. I take that as replying to a snarky comment with some snark of his own. You taking that response as seriously saying IU shouldn't recruit him is odd.
  23. Indeed. I'm not very excited about this guy because I don't think he'll end up at IU. But Purdue did just land a player from southern Indiana so who knows?
  24. This is not a rule yet. It was proposed but a decision on it was punted due to covid.
  25. To keep the number of scholarship players in sports like football and basketball the same for all schools. Can't get an extra scholarship player by giving them a full (or even partial) ride in rowing, for example. The single exception being a football player who also plays basketball, since that counts only against football.
×
×
  • Create New...