Jump to content

Aminu Mohammed Commits to Georgetown


KDB

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

How many championships have they won since they started the one and done practice. Each win 1 championship which is less than Villanova and tied with UVA.  I just think as a fan I would be more proud and find it a bigger accomplishment by winning like Villanova did over how UK does it.

All I know is that IU’s various “our way” strategies have not produced a natty in 33 years and we are currently being picked to come in 7th or 8th in the conference (not nationally). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last thing is this is nothing about Muhammad because he might not be a one and done player.  If Archie is recruiting him and feels good about it then I am fine with it.  If he comes I will root for him like any other player even if he is a one and done player.  It is just my.preference not to go after to many one and done players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU878176 said:

All I know is that IU’s various “our way” strategies have not produced a natty in 33 years and we are currently being picked to come in 7th or 8th in the conference (not nationally). 

So is winning the championship the only thing that matters. I want to win championships as well but it is not the only thing I care about.  I never want IU to get so desperate to win they look the other way and start cheating

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

So is winning the championship the only thing that matters. I want to win championships as well but it is not the only thing I care about.  I never want IU to get so desperate to win they look the other way and start cheating

WHAT ????

I posted that we had a good foundation of talent and thought adding a one and done could be good. Not sure how that transpired into being in favor of cheating and looking the other way.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, IU Scott said:

Some of us don't like seeing IU used as a minor league system and still believe in the student athlete part of college sports.  It has been proven just stock piing 5 star one and done players is not the only way to win.  You mentioned Purdue where they have no 5 star players yet they win at a good percentage.  I want IU to build their roster like UVA and Villanova and UW over the one and done factories of UK and Duke.

Just win, who gives a crap where they come from. Trey K. just changed my mind on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

How many championships have they won since they started the one and done practice. Each win 1 championship which is less than Villanova and tied with UVA.  I just think as a fan I would be more proud and find it a bigger accomplishment by winning like Villanova did over how UK does it.

Both championships are equal. One isn’t any more special or more significant then the other because it had more seniors. Not many even Virginia or Villanova start 4 seniors or don’t have kids leaving early. Those schools both had kids opt to go to the nba early. Nba talent is the key...whether they stay 1 year or 4 you aren’t going to consistently win without them. I respect your opinion of going for four year players but i don’t see it in today’s landscape as even possible with so many kids transferring and those that are talented enough going pro. I think having a mixture of all three will make for a well rounded and flexible roster. 1-2 and done, 4 year guys, and a transfer here and there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dgambill said:

Both championships are equal. One isn’t any more special or more significant then the other because it had more seniors. Not many even Virginia or Villanova start 4 seniors or don’t have kids leaving early. Those schools both had kids opt to go to the nba early. Nba talent is the key...whether they stay 1 year or 4 you aren’t going to consistently win without them. I respect your opinion of going for four year players but i don’t see it in today’s landscape as even possible with so many kids transferring and those that are talented enough going pro. I think having a mixture of all three will make for a well rounded and flexible roster. 1-2 and done, 4 year guys, and a transfer here and there.

Maybe to you it doesn't mean anything but to me it means more when I know the kids are more invested in IU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I would have rather have a 4 star player who stays multiple years over Romeo or any one and done player.  To me that helps develop your team better than having a guy for a year.  What did Romeo really bring to IU in his one year just like Gordon or Vonleh.  I get today's fans want instant gratification and that comes by getting the one and done players.  In the long run if it does not bring winning what good does it do to your program by having those players. What good did Ben Simmons bring to LSU.

Everybody wants 4 star players to stay 4 years and be great. It just doesn’t happen very often. With transfers being as they are and the current landscape of college basketball. This isn’t 1980 or even the 90’s when top 50 kids wanna come in and sit and wait until their junior years to produce. I haven’t seen one person say “ I only want 1 and done players”. So do you not want Trayce because he’s a 2 and done? And Zeller also? Og shouldn’t have been on the team because he was 2 and done? Well he wasn’t even a 4 star rated between 20-80 so he shouldn’t have been on the team anyway. In a perfect world you want the best talent as long as you can and make an actual “team”. Not just a bunch of individuals in it for them. Hell when Kentucky won it with Davis they had one and done players and they played as a team, then the team with Skal was trash. It’s always gonna come down to the players, but saying no to 1 and done talent( which it ain’t like there fighting to get in here) is ludicrous. I know Archie doesn’t feel that way, but the “ I’d rather lose with 4 year fringe guys, than win with top ranked players” argument is ridiculous to me because then the same guys are gonna be complaining when the team isn’t good and we’re getting beat by Rutgers and struggling with Nebraska and northwestern every year. Guess why? Because they have the same fringe 4 year kids... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hoosierfan1215 said:

Everybody wants 4 star players to stay 4 years and be great. It just doesn’t happen very often. With transfers being as they are and the current landscape of college basketball. This isn’t 1980 or even the 90’s when top 50 kids wanna come in and sit and wait until their junior years to produce. I haven’t seen one person say “ I only want 1 and done players”. So do you not want Trayce because he’s a 2 and done? And Zeller also? Og shouldn’t have been on the team because he was 2 and done? Well he wasn’t even a 4 star rated between 20-80 so he shouldn’t have been on the team anyway. In a perfect world you want the best talent as long as you can and make an actual “team”. Not just a bunch of individuals in it for them. Hell when Kentucky won it with Davis they had one and done players and they played as a team, then the team with Skal was trash. It’s always gonna come down to the players, but saying no to 1 and done talent( which it ain’t like there fighting to get in here) is ludicrous. I know Archie doesn’t feel that way, but the “ I’d rather lose with 4 year fringe guys, than win with top ranked players” argument is ridiculous to me because then the same guys are gonna be complaining when the team isn’t good and we’re getting beat by Rutgers and struggling with Nebraska and northwestern every year. Guess why? Because they have the same fringe 4 year kids... 

I have seen plenty of teams that have won without one and done players and had players staying 3-4 years. UVA, Villanova, UW on Gonzaga just off the to of my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I would have rather have a 4 star player who stays multiple years over Romeo or any one and done player.  To me that helps develop your team better than having a guy for a year.  What did Romeo really bring to IU in his one year just like Gordon or Vonleh.  I get today's fans want instant gratification and that comes by getting the one and done players.  In the long run if it does not bring winning what good does it do to your program by having those players. What good did Ben Simmons bring to LSU.

You might have a point here if Miller used all the scholarships every year so that OAD would potentially be taking a scholarship which would have otherwise gone to a 4 year player. However, Miller has had open scholarships so the team could take both. How does that hurt the team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, go_iu_bb said:

You might have a point here if Miller used all the scholarships every year so that OAD would potentially be taking a scholarship which would have otherwise gone to a 4 year player. However, Miller has had open scholarships so the team could take both. How does that hurt the team?

Good point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Hoosierfan1215 said:

Everybody wants 4 star players to stay 4 years and be great. It just doesn’t happen very often. With transfers being as they are and the current landscape of college basketball. This isn’t 1980 or even the 90’s when top 50 kids wanna come in and sit and wait until their junior years to produce. I haven’t seen one person say “ I only want 1 and done players”. So do you not want Trayce because he’s a 2 and done? And Zeller also? Og shouldn’t have been on the team because he was 2 and done? Well he wasn’t even a 4 star rated between 20-80 so he shouldn’t have been on the team anyway. In a perfect world you want the best talent as long as you can and make an actual “team”. Not just a bunch of individuals in it for them. Hell when Kentucky won it with Davis they had one and done players and they played as a team, then the team with Skal was trash. It’s always gonna come down to the players, but saying no to 1 and done talent( which it ain’t like there fighting to get in here) is ludicrous. I know Archie doesn’t feel that way, but the “ I’d rather lose with 4 year fringe guys, than win with top ranked players” argument is ridiculous to me because then the same guys are gonna be complaining when the team isn’t good and we’re getting beat by Rutgers and struggling with Nebraska and northwestern every year. Guess why? Because they have the same fringe 4 year kids... 

Also where did I say I would rather lose with 4 year players over winning with one and done players.  I said I think it is better winning wit players who stay multiple years over one and done players.  I also think for IU to win consistently they have to do it with players staying multiple years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hoosierfan1215 said:

Everybody wants 4 star players to stay 4 years and be great. It just doesn’t happen very often. With transfers being as they are and the current landscape of college basketball. This isn’t 1980 or even the 90’s when top 50 kids wanna come in and sit and wait until their junior years to produce. I haven’t seen one person say “ I only want 1 and done players”. So do you not want Trayce because he’s a 2 and done? And Zeller also? Og shouldn’t have been on the team because he was 2 and done? Well he wasn’t even a 4 star rated between 20-80 so he shouldn’t have been on the team anyway. In a perfect world you want the best talent as long as you can and make an actual “team”. Not just a bunch of individuals in it for them. Hell when Kentucky won it with Davis they had one and done players and they played as a team, then the team with Skal was trash. It’s always gonna come down to the players, but saying no to 1 and done talent( which it ain’t like there fighting to get in here) is ludicrous. I know Archie doesn’t feel that way, but the “ I’d rather lose with 4 year fringe guys, than win with top ranked players” argument is ridiculous to me because then the same guys are gonna be complaining when the team isn’t good and we’re getting beat by Rutgers and struggling with Nebraska and northwestern every year. Guess why? Because they have the same fringe 4 year kids... 

Archie may not have 4 years to wait for these freshman to pan out....coaches have to win as soon as possible and as much as possible. I love our kids but I am not going to ignore we need a couple of studs whether they stay a year or two or three. Most coaches don’t have the luxury of waiting 4 years to compete...they need to get a program rolling much quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dgambill said:

Archie may not have 4 years to wait for these freshman to pan out....coaches have to win as soon as possible and as much as possible. I love our kids but I am not going to ignore we need a couple of studs whether they stay a year or two or three. Most coaches don’t have the luxury of waiting 4 years to compete...they need to get a program rolling much quicker.

I think that is a problem in college sports today is that coaches don't get enough time to really build their program.  I know it has been talked about a lot on here but there would have been a lot of great coaches that we would not have heard about if fans had there way.  I know there are some coaches who will never work out but here has been a lot of very good coaches take a few years to truly build their program.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...