Jump to content

Potential replacement coaches


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I'm not convinced of this position, but just to offer another perspective...

Why is it a bad thing that a coach, who seemingly wants to make a difference in the lives of young men, targets young men from broken homes and rough backgrounds? And what does it say about us as a fanbase if we cannot accept those type of young men?

Again, not convinced of anything, just offering another perspective. 

Very, very well said. Historically it has worked in several title winning football programs....why not in hoops? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 5.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
10 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

So while I'm certainly not convinced Sampson was bringing in kids from rough backgrounds out of the goodness of his heart, I take major issue with this position if we are going to ardently support Archie. 

Why is it not okay to take exception to Archie, who is a grown man and extremely well compensated, but it's okay to say kids from rough backgrounds don't deserve a chance here? I can't get on board with that. 

I agree, but there has to be a cap on chances...

Take the case of Teddy Allen

He had chance after chance with 3 different schools...Regardless of what was said on his split with Nebraska, I firmly believe that he ran out of chances with Hoiberg...Fred finally saw his team was better off without Allen...and he was right...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Very, very well said. Historically it has worked in several title winning football programs....why not in hoops? 

I think the key part of this is for the coach, administration, support staff, all to be on board with this kind of approach, and not let the kids go unchecked. I am sure that in his position, Badger was able to keep good tabs on the kids he took chances on. On the other hand, Sampson did not. I think John Thompson was the poster child for this kind of approach, and from everything I have ever read about John, a kid absolutely did not want to cross him.

To make the commitment to bringing some of these kids in, it has to be all in. I also believe there has to be a limit to how many "taking a chance" types can be on a roster at the same time. If this is the approach, there has to be a lot of good, solid, grounded kids surrounding and helping .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I agree, but there has to be a cap on chances...

Take the case of Teddy Allen

He had chance after chance with 3 different schools...Regardless of what was said on his split with Nebraska, I firmly believe that he ran out of chances with Hoiberg...Fred finally saw his team was better off without Allen...and he was right...

Sadly the CBB landscape is littered with these types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

I think John Thompson was the poster child for this kind of approach, and from everything I have ever read about John, a kid absolutely did not want to cross him.

I know very few people in general that would have wanted to cross an angry John Thompson...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I'm not convinced of this position, but just to offer another perspective...

Why is it a bad thing that a coach, who seemingly wants to make a difference in the lives of young men, targets young men from broken homes and rough backgrounds? And what does it say about us as a fanbase if we cannot accept those type of young men?

Again, not convinced of anything, just offering another perspective. 

There's zero evidence that Sampson was trying to make their lives better... and lots of evidence he wasn't.  His graduation rate before IU was abysmal, and in his short time at IU there were widespread, and consistent problems with academics and behavior outside of school.  There was also no outside evidence of accountability  that I remember (e.g. player suspensions, mysterious starter X is not playing tonight and we don't know why, etc...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, andy_puiu said:

There's zero evidence that Sampson was trying to make their lives better... and lots of evidence he wasn't.  His graduation rate before IU was abysmal, and in his short time at IU there were widespread, and consistent problems with academics and behavior outside of school.  There was also no outside evidence of accountability  that I remember (e.g. player suspensions, mysterious starter X is not playing tonight and we don't know why, etc...)

I am pretty sure there was some weed suspensions under Sampson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you're right.  I do remember that, but I also remember rumors that players were not being suspended A) by him, and B) when they were supposed to.  i.e. only after repeated failed tests, beyond what was supposed to trigger suspension per school or ncaa policies, and I think it was forced upon him.

I'm going only off my memory which could be faulty though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I know very few people in general that would have wanted to cross an angry John Thompson...

People can search on their own but John Thompson was very close with DC Kingpin Rayful Edmond....basically said if I ever get wind of you talking with Alonzo or others again it will be it for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Bowhunter said:

Sampson recruits a lot of broken home kids. Lower academics eTc. He always said he thought his players were like family. Eli Holtman, Jordan Crawford, Jemarcus Ellis, Bud Mackey etc. That kind of culture may have played well on the court and may work at Houston, but it’s not going to cut it here. Samson is a great coach, but he targets a different kind of player.

 

By broken home you mean that some disadvantaged kids simply need a chance, guidance, and a mentor.... I would agree with that 100%.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, andy_puiu said:

There's zero evidence that Sampson was trying to make their lives better... and lots of evidence he wasn't.  His graduation rate before IU was abysmal, and in his short time at IU there were widespread, and consistent problems with academics and behavior outside of school.  There was also no outside evidence of accountability  that I remember (e.g. player suspensions, mysterious starter X is not playing tonight and we don't know why, etc...)

Really doesn't matter at this point.  Sampson is gone and off having success somewhere else and we've lost to Purdue and missed the tournament for an uncountable amount of times. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2021 at 2:37 PM, KoB2011 said:

Sure, if you want Duke to steal him from us the moment Coach K retires you pay him $5.5M. 

Nope, I disagree.

He'd be getting a $2M/year raise, and be the 3rd highest paid coach in college basketball. Is he worth #1 money? Of course, but he doesn't strike me as a guy solely interested in money.

He turned down Oregon money, among others, while still at Butler. 

If and when Duke, UNC, etc come sniffing around then you renegotiate the contract. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cbp4IU said:

Let’s say Porter Moser makes another run at the title again.....  Say final 4.... Should IU consider?

No thanks. .500 career record in the MVC and only made the tourney once before this year I think. Plays extremely slow. Teams seem to be like Archie's in that they're all defense and no offense. I want a coach that has shown they coach both sides and has an exciting brand of basketball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m thinking it’s gotta be Drew or Beilein at this point. Two proven guys. And Drew has spoken how Baylor is all about football.   
 

Matta is solid, but runs a similar philosophy to Archie.  
 

Beard is making $4.5mm in his beloved state. Doesn’t seem realistic.  
 

Fife, Musselman, Oats, Mack, etc ... too risky right now. IU is in a fragile spot and needs a proven guy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Bustout said:

I’m thinking it’s gotta be Drew or Beilein at this point. Two proven guys. And Drew has spoken how Baylor is all about football.   
 

Matta is solid, but runs a similar philosophy to Archie.  
 

Beard is making $4.5mm in his beloved state. Doesn’t seem realistic.  
 

Fife, Musselman, Oats, Mack, etc ... too risky right now. IU is in a fragile spot and needs a proven guy.  

Agreed. Beilein or Drew seem to be the two names that should show up frequently. If you can't get either one of these two, your just throwing darts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ephul said:

Agreed. Beilein or Drew seem to be the two names that should show up frequently. If you can't get either one of these two, your just throwing darts

I am still backing my Beilien pick to stabilize things and get us back in 6 years.  I think by year 3 he could have us back to competing for the big ten title.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2021 at 7:09 PM, John S said:

Can we all agree that if it ends up being offered to a ‘up and coming young coach’,  IU will do a thorough background review including input from ADs, former players, assistants etc?

He sure doesnt need to lower fans’ expectations.   

...did we not vet Archie?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...