Does Archie get one more "honeymoon" year .....

[PoHoosier]

I believe someone stated in the mega-thread that the Langfords were desiring a coach that would push and challenge Romeo to be the best he can be.  He would fit.

[NCHoosier32]

a lot of things have to come together for just about any team to make a deep tourney run, but we will have the talent if Morgan is back, we have Romeo, and Davis puts it together.  that's when it's more fair to "judge" Archie.  i do think in the day that good players stay 1 or 2 years, it's a little different than when you used to say a coach needs 4 years to get his guys in.  not saying i don't think CAM deserves a 4 year period before really seeing what he can do.  i do think that to an extent, but for once i also agree with Kobe, you are forming your opinions/judging a coach from day 1.  doesn't mean Miller should have done anything magical this year due to the talent level he had to work with.  we should be judging him every year on his ability to recruit and then his ability to get the most out of what he has to work with.  i personally think we will be very happy.  

[HoagieRoll]

4 years? Why stop there? Maybe Archie deserves 2-3 full recruiting cycles until we can judge him. 

 

Jeez, some of you acting like we’re a MAC school. Pearl turned around Auburn in two years, same with Barnes and UT, Holtmann at OSU

archie didn’t inherit the mess Crean did, like someone said above the trajectory is important but I’d be pretty disappointed if we aren’t top 4 big ten and/or talking Sweet 16 at least in the next couple of years 

[5fouls]

9 hours ago, Drroogh said:

Okay, don't know what I'm saying, but going to say it anyway. Romeo is an awesome player no doubt, and any team would be better having him, but the question I have (and I have no clue) does Romeo fit CAM's system? I think CAM's success is going to come when he has players that buy in to what he is selling, we saw some of that this year. Will we see more of that next year,( I think so) Bottom line for me is, I'm buying what CAM is selling and I'm hopeful he can land some high level recruits that also are buying what he is selling!

The one area of Romeo's game that needs some work is defense.  He wants to be an NBA player, and the defensive improvement he saw from IU this season has to be appealing.  Is the Romeo of today the defensive player Archie will expect him to be?  No.  He is not.  But, we wants to improve, and with his offensive talent, that desire will ensure that he fits into Archie's system.  He's simply too good offensively to not fit even if he struggles a bit defensively, because the defensive effort will be there even if it takes him a while to learn.

 

 

[tdhoosier]

9 hours ago, dbmhoosier said:

I'm talking maybe an Elite 8.  Romeo is better than Cody was and Cody inherited a 3-15 team with no impact recruits coming with him.  We would've probably been in the FF his freshman year if we're not in Kentucky's bracket or if they don't have that once in a lifetime 35-37 night from the stripe.  It's a very realistic expectation. 

Also, put Romeo on this year's team and we probably beat Duke, Purdue, MSU, OSU, Nebraska, and Illinois and easily make the tourney.  Johnson, Hartman, and Freddie are not big losses.  We're getting Deron back too.

I also hypothetically think, what happens if this year’s team repeats this past season, but with a year of Archie’s system under their belt? How many more games do they win and do we find that acceptable, given the still-flawed roster?  3-4 wins?  Beating ISU and IPFW alone would have greatly pushed up our ranking in the polls, gets us closer to the bubble and maybe gives us that motivational edge to push past OSU and Rutgers. 

I guess what I’m saying is that I greatly under-estimated how tough it’d be for this team to adapt to the new system. And we have a lot of freshman coming in next year who will need to adapt as well. Of course they won’t have huge roles, but unless Romeo comes we still do not have a perimeter weapon (our biggest weakness this year) we can depend on. I think Green make big strides this summer but it’s possible he doesn’t develop into that guy. Phinissee and Anderson will be freshmen and it’s not fair for me to depend on them to that degree yet. There are still big obstacles this team needs to over come next year.

that said....

Given the present circumstances, although I still do expect improvement, I’m giving Archie a honeymoon next year, but it’s over after that. 

[CapnRon]

I think Archie deserves at least another year of leeway. Sadly some of the posts I read on facebook we have some really really stupid fans.  Our team is in no way a dumpster fire, but crean's inability to recruit a balanced team really did a number on us this year, and I'd expect that to continue into the beginning of next season.  You really can't be successful at this level without a PG, and none of the current players fit the bill.  RP will do a great job, but it is just going to take a little time to get him used to this level. 

I'd expect Archie to get 3 more years.  We overachieved this year, and saw really big growth from our team especially on the defensive end, which we haven't seen in awhile.  Hopefully next season our upperclassmen can keep the defense going and allow Archie to focus on the other aspects early in the year. If we get Romeo I think we are a tourney team, if not, I think we will be on the bubble, but we are definitely on the uptick.  Archie is the guy, I'm positive on that.  Avoid those really bad losses like ISU and Fort Wayne. Come away with the win at Illinois, and just steal one of those close PU MSU DUKE Louisville level games next year, and we are in. 

Just get to the games and support our guys. 

[BGleas]

I’ve been saying it since all the way back in the Scout days and I’ll say again here. Im more concerned with IU’s coach building a long term, elite program than the results of any one season. I want our coach putting IU in a position where we’re competing for BIg Ten Titles on a consistent  basis. Have us routinely in the conversation as a conference title favorite and winning the conference every few years, and IU will be good shape. 

I think hanging your hat on any one tournament run is shortsighted and asking to just be unhappy. The Tournament is about at bats. The tournament is about consistently putting yourself in a position to be a high seed. But even the current top schools (Duke, Kansas, MSU, UK, etc.) have years where they get upset early. 

Its about consistency at a high level. Have IU in the top 4 in the Big Ten, winning the conference every couple/few years and consistently getting top 4 seeds in March and the tournament will take care of itself. To be honest, I hated the 2013 Sweet Sixteen loss as much as anyone, but ultimately the bigger disappointment was the nosedive the next two seasons. I can deal with a tournament upset if we’re right back there in contention the next season. 

So while I’ll be disappointed if we land Langford and keep Morgan and don’t go deep in March, it won’t be some big point of judgement on Archie for me. More important will be how he bounces back the next season. Will he have us back in contention the next season, or nosedive and lose all momentum like Crean typically did. It’s about at-bats in March. 

With all that said. I’m really happy with Archie. I saw enough this season to be really excited and think we have our long term solution. If the record isn’t as great next year will I be concerned? Sure. But, it took Bennett two full mediocre seasons at UVA to get things rolling. It took Beilein almost 4 years at Michigan, etc., etc. 

I’m more looking for a program that looks like it’s being molded in a program that has a clear identity. A tough, defensive, smart program. I saw the beginnings of that this season, so am hoping to see it continue to develop. I’m also looking for Archie to start to plant his flag recruiting-wise. 

[StLHoosier]

I think part of the disconnect with some of the fan base in regards to expectations are that they’re still stuck in 1987.  Besides a couple years under Crean and the magical run in 2002, we haven’t been relevant on the national stage for quite some time.  A good coach can only get you so far.  IMO, it’s all going to come down to how well CAM can recruit.  With that being said, he deserves one recruiting cycle to get his players in before people start calling for his head.  There should be improvement between then and now with NCAA appearances, but he needs time to build this roster his way.

[rico]

14 minutes ago, StLHoosier said:

I think part of the disconnect with some of the fan base in regards to expectations are that they’re still stuck in 1987.  Besides a couple years under Crean and the magical run in 2002, we haven’t been relevant on the national stage for quite some time.  A good coach can only get you so far.  IMO, it’s all going to come down to how well CAM can recruit.  With that being said, he deserves one recruiting cycle to get his players in before people start calling for his head.  There should be improvement between then and now with NCAA appearances, but he needs time to build this roster his way.

To be honest, I am still stuck in the Knight years.  In his career here, now get this, he missed the NCAAT a grand total of 5 times.  Only 1 of those 5 times did IU not see any post season action and that would have been the 76-77 season.  Yep, that is what I expect.

[Colonialcrester]

 

I have the same expectations as Fred Glass.  If I think Coach Miller is moving us in that direction with a sense of urgency, then he gets a break from me.  I don't expect to see a big jump until year 3.  His system takes time and dedication.  I think by year 3 we should see the results.  Keep in mind, if we had just one consistent shooter this year and/or decent, just decent free throw shooting, I think we would be in the tournament.

"The expectations for Indiana University basketball are to perennially contend for and win multiple Big Ten championships, regularly go deep in the NCAA tournament, and win our next national championship -- and more after that. We will identify and recruit a coach who will meet these expectations." Fred Glass

[StLHoosier]

14 minutes ago, rico said:

To be honest, I am still stuck in the Knight years.  In his career here, now get this, he missed the NCAAT a grand total of 5 times.  Only 1 of those 5 times did IU not see any post season action and that would have been the 76-77 season.  Yep, that is what I expect.

And I don’t disagree with you, but we have to give him time.  It’s not going to happen in 2 years.  Some people want to already put him on the hot seat if we don’t make a sweet 16 next year.  That’s unrealistic imo.   Like BGleas said, if we can be a top contender year in and year out in the BIG, the tourney will take care of itself.

[CapnRon]

9 minutes ago, rico said:

To be honest, I am still stuck in the Knight years.  In his career here, now get this, he missed the NCAAT a grand total of 5 times.  Only 1 of those 5 times did IU not see any post season action and that would have been the 76-77 season.  Yep, that is what I expect.

The game has changed so much in the last 20 or 30 years.  It's all about money and scoring now, and apparently cheating.  Plus it seems like some of the refs do not like us, possibly because Knight?  I think Knight in this day and age would still get us in the tourney, but really that's about it.

[FW_Hoosier]

Archie will be fine as long as he makes the tournament next year, which I definitely expect as long as we have one or both of Morgan and Langford.  If we don’t have either of them, it will be a struggle, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see the team even take a step back from where they were this year.  It seems like Archie really counts on upperclassmen to step up and lead the team, and we’re going to be very young next season.  I like the way the incoming class is put together, but it’s pretty rare for recruits outside the top 50 to come in and produce consistently as freshmen.  We just won’t have the horses without Morgan and/or Romeo.

I’ll admit that I’ll be pretty concerned if we don’t make the tournament next year, for whatever reason.  Archie needs to start building momentum, and Year 3 will be make or break for him if he can’t get into the tournament next season.  On the other hand, I won’t be too upset if we have a good season, get a top 4 or 5 seed in the tournament, and get upset relatively early.  As others have said, the tourney is a crapshoot, and it’s all about getting there consistently.  Will be really interesting to see how it all unfolds next year.  

[Fiveoutofsix]

1 hour ago, CapnRon said:

The game has changed so much in the last 20 or 30 years.  It's all about money and scoring now, and apparently cheating.  Plus it seems like some of the refs do not like us, possibly because Knight?  I think Knight in this day and age would still get us in the tourney, but really that's about it.

Been like that for as long as fans payed to see games.  Not just last 30 years.  Read about Wilt Chamberlain and his recruiting battle between IU and Kansas, which lead to Oscar Robinson not being recruited by IU at the end based on assumption.  Just one example.  

[CapnRon]

20 minutes ago, Fiveoutofsix said:

Been like that for as long as fans payed to see games.  Not just last 30 years.  Read about Wilt Chamberlain and his recruiting battle between IU and Kansas, which lead to Oscar Robinson not being recruited by IU at the end based on assumption.  Just one example.  

I'm not exactly sure what point you are trying to make, but to even compare 30 years ago to the 1-and-done era, and the excessive amounts players make now for "potential" just seems ridiculous to me.

[Fiveoutofsix]

not trying to argue, debate, or even agree.  Just saying that recruiting has always had behind the scene illegal challenges.  And, if you look at the 1950's championship games ranged from 68 points to 90+ points.  Yes the game has changed and different coaches have different systems.  Points were always needed to win, and the shady side of recruiting should of been dealt with years ago.

2 hours ago, CapnRon said:

The game has changed so much in the last 20 or 30 years.  It's all about money and scoring now, and apparently cheating.  Plus it seems like some of the refs do not like us, possibly because Knight?  I think Knight in this day and age would still get us in the tourney, but really that's about it.

Been like that for as long as fans payed to see games.  Not just last 30 years.  Read about Wilt Chamberlain and his recruiting battle between IU and Kansas, which lead to Oscar Robinson not being recruited by IU at the end based on assumption.  Just one example.  

[rico]

31 minutes ago, CapnRon said:

I'm not exactly sure what point you are trying to make, but to even compare 30 years ago to the 1-and-done era, and the excessive amounts players make now for "potential" just seems ridiculous to me.

Basically, it went on back then.  Corruption isn't something new to today's game.  

[milehiiu]

17 minutes ago, Fiveoutofsix said:

not trying to argue, debate, or even agree.  Just saying that recruiting has always had behind the scene illegal challenges.  And, if you look at the 1950's championship games ranged from 68 points to 90+ points.  Yes the game has changed and different coaches have different systems.  Points were always needed to win, and the shady side of recruiting should of been dealt with years ago.

Been like that for as long as fans payed to see games.  Not just last 30 years.  Read about Wilt Chamberlain and his recruiting battle between IU and Kansas, which lead to Oscar Robinson not being recruited by IU at the end based on assumption.  Just one example.  

More history, for some of our younger members.  And it also involved Kansas.  Larry Brown... out of the blue hired Ed Manning, Danny's father, who had been driving truck for the previous four years,  as an assistant coach.... claiming the hire came with no strings attached  ! 

WANTED: COACH AND SON

Of course, we now know of a long trail of crap that followed Larry Brown nearly everywhere he went as a college BB coach.  Think Kansas, to SMU, and decades in between.

I was thinking about Danny, just yesterday.   Thinking I don't know of any other player who did more as a player to individually win a championship for his team, than Danny Manning. 

[rico]

5 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

More history, for some of our younger members.  And it also involved Kansas.  Larry Brown... out of the blue hired Ed Manning, Danny's father, who had been driving truck for the previous four years,  as an assistant coach.... claiming the hire came with no strings attached  ! 

WANTED: COACH AND SON

Of course, we now know of a long trail of crap that followed Larry Brown nearly everywhere he went as a college BB coach.  Think Kansas, to SMU, and decades in between.

I was thinking about Danny, just yesterday.   Thinking I don't know of any other player who did more as a player to individually win a championship for his team, than Danny Manning. 

You left out UCLA.

[milehiiu]

3 minutes ago, rico said:

You left out UCLA.

That would take forever.   LOL

[CapnRon]

Just now, rico said:

Basically, it went on back then.  Corruption isn't something new to today's game.  

So you guys don't think corruption has reached a new high?  We all know there were a few back then, but I think now we are talking almost every top team.  As if it's a requirement to win titles.  Which brings me back to my point that I don't believe Knight would have been able to win another title if we kept him.

[milehiiu]

46 minutes ago, CapnRon said:

So you guys don't think corruption has reached a new high?  We all know there were a few back then, but I think now we are talking almost every top team.  As if it's a requirement to win titles.  Which brings me back to my point that I don't believe Knight would have been able to win another title if we kept him.

Scandals  in college BB go back to the late 1940's and early 1950's.   Including Kentucky.

scandals threaten college hoops

[Seeking6]

51 minutes ago, CapnRon said:

So you guys don't think corruption has reached a new high?  We all know there were a few back then, but I think now we are talking almost every top team.  As if it's a requirement to win titles.  Which brings me back to my point that I don't believe Knight would have been able to win another title if we kept him.

Corruption no. It's always been around. Problem now is the number of zeros at the end of the corruption in today's world. These street runners can earn a quick 6 figures by delivering guys. To them it's worth the risk. 

To me Knight lost his way after the Fab 5 era. He still was kicking a-- but right around 95/96 years is when it felt like he kind of was just fed up with the whole scene. Missed on plenty in that 4-5 year stretch. Of course he got back to himself with the likes of Haston, Jeffries, Moye, Fife, Hornsby,,etc...and should probably be partially credited for the 02 run

[CapnRon]

24 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Corruption no. It's always been around. Problem now is the number of zeros at the end of the corruption in today's world. These street runners can earn a quick 6 figures by delivering guys. To them it's worth the risk. 

To me Knight lost his way after the Fab 5 era. He still was kicking a-- but right around 95/96 years is when it felt like he kind of was just fed up with the whole scene. Missed on plenty in that 4-5 year stretch. Of course he got back to himself with the likes of Haston, Jeffries, Moye, Fife, Hornsby,,etc...and should probably be partially credited for the 02 run

Well said.  I always wondered how he would have done with that '02 squad.  Other than beating Duke we had a nice path to the finals.  Can't believe we lost to Maryland.