Jump to content

At What Point......


5fouls

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Indykev said:

Crean cleared the debris threw it in a dumpster and set it on fire. And we got to watch it the last couple seasons. Its still burning.   :coffee:

Crean did good, but he wasn't the guy. I think he snowed Harry Gonzo. I'm not sure why a football guy got to pick the basketball coach, but it is what it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Just now, Mac said:

Crean did good, but he wasn't the guy. I think he snowed Harry Gonzo. I'm not sure why a football guy got to pick the basketball coach, but it is what it is.

I think Crean was the right guy at the right time.  Unfortunately, for him.... his time ran out.  And it was time for a change. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

I think Crean was the right guy at the right time.  Unfortunately, for him.... his time ran out.  And it was time for a change. 

He stomped out the fire. But if you can't get past the SS with two of the top four NBA picks, you aren't the guy for IU. It took too many seasons for us to realize that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU Scott said:

Yes we do have 5 banners but I think a lot of people mis remember a lot about our history.  Even under RMK we were not a championship contender every year.  It seemed like every 4 or 5 years we had those championship caliber teams. Take out 75 and 76 and 92 and 93 we never really have consistent championship caliber teams.  It seem like we had a couple of good years then another very good year then the next year we had a championship team.

I think this is fair. We were consistently a very good basketball program, we went to the tourney almost every year -- but we had our share of first and second round exits (quite a few), and we had down years after really good years. We also had several-year runs when we were one of the truly dominant college teams, but over the two-plus decades of RMK, we had a number of years (especially toward the end) when we were good but not great. 

I think we will get back there under CAM, based on what I've seen so far. I don't think he wins 3 NCs, but I do think we'll be seeing FF's again and lots of years of strong conference and national showings. It takes time to build your own squad and recruiting base. CAM is off to a good start, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Food for thought. 

Coach K of Duke.  He , of whom is still going strong with over 1,000 W's to his credit, went 6-8, 4-10, 3-11,7-7, and 8-6 in conference play in his first five years at Duke.  In fact, was 38-47 in his first three years.... a figure, that today, might have gotten him fired at many "name" schools across the country.

 

Had Duke won 5 championships before he got there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rico said:

Had Duke won 5 championships before he got there?

No, sir.  K is responsible for all five of Duke's national championships.   This is a guy who followed in Bobby Knight's foot steps.  Before moving off to Duke. As a grad assistant at IU.  As a HC at Army. And then onto Duke. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, milehiiu said:

No, sir.  K is responsible for all five of Duke's national championships.   This is a guy who followed in Bobby Knight's foot steps.  Before moving off to Duke. As a grad assistant at IU.  As a HC at Army. And then onto Duke. 

That was my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

So you knew the answer.  That's good.  Did you know that Vic Buba's preceeded "K" at Duke ?  And Vic is the one who is considered as putting Duke on the national stage.  And that Vic is from my old high school...... Gary Lew Wallace.

Vic Bubas - Wikipedia

I knew where Vic was from.  But I am pretty sure there were 3 coaches in there between Vic and K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rico said:

I knew where Vic was from.  But I am pretty sure there were 3 coaches in there between Vic and K.

That's correct.  Three coaches between Bubas and "K".  None that did as well as Vic, who moved on after Vic, to become conference commissioner.  In fact one Duke coach at that interval lasted just one year.... after losing more games than he won. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

That's correct.  Three coaches between Bubas and "K".  None that did as well as Vic, who moved on after Vic, to become conference commissioner.  In fact one Duke coach at that interval lasted just one year.... after losing more games than he won. 

And in fact Duke was pretty dang good before K took over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, rico said:

And in fact Duke was pretty dang good before K took over.

Ahh, iff'y at best... as far as I am concerned.  Buba's moved the program.. However, IMHO it regressed after him.  And even "K" had issues in moving it to the program we know today. Bottom line, for me.  Duke saw what they had with "K" and chose to stay with him.  Kind of what I think will happen with Archie...... just give him time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Ahh, iff'y at best... as far as I am concerned.  Buba's moved the program.. However, IMHO it regressed after him.  And even "K" had issues in moving it to the program we know today. Bottom line, for me.  Duke saw what they had with "K" and chose to stay with him.  Kind of what I think will happen with Archie...... just give him time.

Iffy?  At best?  They lost in the regional finals the year before K got there and at one time were ranked #1.  They had a great run including playing for the title in '78.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Thats...exactly how it works?

Nope, kids care about one thing and one thing only, playing time, some would say proximity to home as well, but that doesn’t hold much water anymore either. 5 star recruits go to where they know they will get big minutes. We can keep kidding ourselves and say it’s the coach or the history of the program, but that doesn’t matter one bit to the recruits. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Montana Hoosier said:

If anybody thinks kids go to school because of a coach, they are kidding themselves, that isn’t how it works.

Then I'm kidding myself based on your logic here.

That's about like saying they don't pass on a school because of a coach, which anyone in their right mind knows better. 

I'm pretty sure IU has had playing time up for grabs more than once in 30 years .I mean we had baseball players dressing for a season or so just about 9-10 years ago , yet the 5 stars didn't exactly kick the door in. They hadn't for the past 9, now it doesn't seem so far fetched to think it might happen soon. They're seriously considering already and the current coach hasn't even been coaching games at IU for 3 months.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay . fair enough , but in the same thought a coach like Kryzewski,  Self , or Izzo gets kids to come to them, playing time or not.

It has to start somewhere though, and that usually involves  recruiting grounds, resources, and some tradition of success never hurts. Elite coaches build this on their own. Others (coaches who end up running elite proograms) just know a good spot and land at the right time.

I do think that playing time is relevant as a factor from one individual to the next  , don't get me wrong.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Montana Hoosier said:

Nope, kids care about one thing and one thing only, playing time, some would say proximity to home as well, but that doesn’t hold much water anymore either. 5 star recruits go to where they know they will get big minutes. We can keep kidding ourselves and say it’s the coach or the history of the program, but that doesn’t matter one bit to the recruits. 

5* kids get playing time almost anywhere they go. It’s literally almost always about the coach, or who paid the most. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. A lot of people seem to believe that the current team has a talent problem, and that the incoming recruiting class is going to rectify that. What are you basing that on? Recruiting rankings are obviously not everything, but it's hard to judge the incoming kids on anything else at this stage, so here's a comparison:

 

Current Roster, key contributors (247 composite rankings): Davis #40. Johnson #49 . Smith #77. Morgan # 117. Green # 197. Hartman #225. Durham #230. (AVERAGE: 133)

Archie's signings: Hunter # 65. Anderson #122. Thompson #133. Phinisee #146. Anderson # 147. (AVERAGE: 122)

 

If our problem is a lack of talent, why are we so convinced the incoming group is going to be different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Shooter said:

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. A lot of people seem to believe that the current team has a talent problem, and that the incoming recruiting class is going to rectify that. What are you basing that on? Recruiting rankings are obviously not everything, but it's hard to judge the incoming kids on anything else at this stage, so here's a comparison:

 

Current Roster, key contributors (247 composite rankings): Davis #40. Johnson #49 . Smith #77. Morgan # 117. Green # 197. Hartman #225. Durham #230. (AVERAGE: 133)

Archie's signings: Hunter # 65. Anderson #122. Thompson #133. Phinisee #146. Anderson # 147. (AVERAGE: 122)

 

If our problem is a lack of talent, why are we so convinced the incoming group is going to be different?

They are being recruited because they fit Archie’s system. And they haven’t already been groomed in someone else’s system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shooter said:

I'm going to play devil's advocate here. A lot of people seem to believe that the current team has a talent problem, and that the incoming recruiting class is going to rectify that. What are you basing that on? Recruiting rankings are obviously not everything, but it's hard to judge the incoming kids on anything else at this stage, so here's a comparison:

 

Current Roster, key contributors (247 composite rankings): Davis #40. Johnson #49 . Smith #77. Morgan # 117. Green # 197. Hartman #225. Durham #230. (AVERAGE: 133)

Archie's signings: Hunter # 65. Anderson #122. Thompson #133. Phinisee #146. Anderson # 147. (AVERAGE: 122)

 

If our problem is a lack of talent, why are we so convinced the incoming group is going to be different?

Because a teams talent isn’t just an average of its recruiting rankings. At its core, basketball is a game of size, speed, length, athleticism, and skill, and this current team is currently very poorly constructed. We have no size and length, aren’t particularly athletic, fast or quick, etc. , and aren’t particularly skilled other than Morgan and maybe Davis. 

The recruits coming in begin the foundation of a new regime/style. I don’t think next years class all of the sudden makes IU considerably better out of the gate, but it begins an era where we’re adding size, length and athleticism at positions we haven’t had that. Instead of wings that are 6’2”, we’re going to have guys that are 6’6” and taller with length and athleticism. 

Instead of a bunch of combo guards trying to play point guard, we’ll have an actual point guard. Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4, which we haven’t had. 

Its pretty clear Crean wasn’t building rosters, he was recruiting players. That’s why there were several years where the roster had glaring issues (no shooting, no interior players, etc.). It’s really early with Archie, but next years class not only brings in good players, but players that seem to address what we need. Anderson is a really good shooter, both Andre and Hunter bring size, length and athlticism on the wing, Phinissee finally brings a true point, and Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, milehiiu said:

Tom Crean cleared the debris, and set the foundation.  Now it is up to Archie Miller to build the skyscraper. 

I think this is a very wise and important quote because we have to give Coach Crean the respect he deserves because he took us from not even ten win seasons to two Big ten championships and brought us back to where guys like Archie actually wanted the job. Crean did a lot for this program and now Archie takes the reigns and i have faith of what ive seen that he will build a sky scraper off the foundation crean laid, it might take a couple years but I truly believe we will see a skyscraper in Bloomington for years to come

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, milehiiu said:

Food for thought. 

Coach K of Duke.  He , of whom is still going strong with over 1,000 W's to his credit, went 6-8, 4-10, 3-11,7-7, and 8-6 in conference play in his first five years at Duke.  In fact, was 38-47 in his first three years.... a figure, that today, might have gotten him fired at many "name" schools across the country.

 

True.  But, it's a totally different game today.  In many ways, it's easier to evaluate talent and recruit now than it was then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...