Nebraska Post Game

[Inequality]

[jefftheref]

2 hours ago, IU Scott said:

Yesterday I gave myself a little timeout from message boards because I just needed a break.  I logged off around 4 and now just logged back on. It made it a little less miserable during and after the game last night.

Last night was so dissappointing and it is now hard to stay in a positive bview on this team. With last night's game and the UCONN and Auburn's games we just haven't competed with the better opponents.

Last night committing 19 turnovers is just unacceptable and most were because of our low basketball IQ. We just get ball and put our heads down and try to dribble between two defenders. In the first half our first shot defense wasn't horrible but it was letting to many points off of second shots. We had two straight possessions where we gave up 5 second half points when the game was still close.

Like most others I just think the main problem is our lack of guard play and not having players who can score off the dribble. We have no one who can break down the defense and create shots for others.

We have no guards, we are not athletic, we have no quickness, no physicality and we don't impose our will on the opponent. In my opinion this team might be as bad as Crean's last couple years and Archie's team. I am not and never have been a Woodson fan but I give him credit for making the tournament the last two years. I also blame him for the crappy roster and game management. Watching him coach is like going to a funeral. No emotion or enthusiasm.  
You think this year sucks wait till next year! 

[5fouls]

2 hours ago, IU Scott said:

I wish he would go the Larry Bird route where he had a offensive coach and a defensive coach. Bird was like the CEO and delegated responsibilities to his coaches.

Larry Bird's route caused him to transfer from IU to ISU.  

[Kdug]

3 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

That was my point, they improved from his first team YoY.

But I'll say we were 52 and 34 on KenPom in years 2 and 3 of Archie, and we were 48 and 30 in year 1 and 2 of Woodson. The two best years of each is not drastically different. This year hasn't fully played out so it can obviously change, but....

First 3 Years of Archie: average KenPom of 52.3 and average Adjust Efficiency of 13.3

First 3 Years of Woodson so far: average KenPom of 56.7 and average Adjusted Efficiency of 12.96

What exactly is the big difference?

Averages are a terrible way of looking at it, especially since this year is incomplete. I’d rather have an average of 60th if it meant 1st one year with a contender and 119th the next. Vs an average of 55th while being ranked 55th both years and missing the tournament twice.

Also you’re missing very important stats:

Archie in 4 years (3 if you want to exclude the covid year): 0 tournament appearances and 0 winning big ten seasons

Woodson in 2 years: 2 tournament appearances (including a protected seed) with 1 winning big ten season.

I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t be concerned with the way things are going this year, but nothing about Archie is comparable to Woodson imo. I guess good job to Archie for being so bad his first year that he was able to improve efficiencies while still missing the tourney.

[KoB2011]

24 minutes ago, Kdug said:

Averages are a terrible way of looking at it, especially since this year is incomplete. I’d rather have an average of 60th if it meant 1st one year with a contender and 119th the next. Vs an average of 55th while being ranked 55th both years and missing the tournament twice.

Also you’re missing very important stats:

Archie in 4 years (3 if you want to exclude the covid year): 0 tournament appearances and 0 winning big ten seasons

Woodson in 2 years: 2 tournament appearances (including a protected seed) with 1 winning big ten season.

I’m not arguing that we shouldn’t be concerned with the way things are going this year, but nothing about Archie is comparable to Woodson imo. I guess good job to Archie for being so bad his first year that he was able to improve efficiencies while still missing the tourney.

I am not sure how the takeaway was that I was defending Archie. I certainly wasn’t making the case he is better than Woodson.

And while I agree with your point about averages, 2 of the 3 seasons being compared in the averages are within 4 spots of each other. Neither coach has put a real contender together.

But I guess the point I’m making is Woodson’s tenure is very much not beyond questioning. If someone wants to chalk this up as just one bad year that’s fine, but it’s also fine to look at the almost three years and ask questions about if that’s good enough.

I don’t think anyone is making the case he should be fired if this year continues on its current trajectory, but I will go ahead and say if it does I think he should be on the hot seat next year. He can blame the guards he’s coached the entire time he’s been here (and the scholarship he foolishly left open) for the problems all he wants. At this point, this roster is the most “his” of the three he’s had and it’s the worst product. Can’t blame the issues that have carried over from Archie on Archie at this point, it’s all Woody. The good, the bad, and the ugly. 

[Kdug]

23 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I am not sure how the takeaway was that I was defending Archie. I certainly wasn’t making the case he is better than Woodson.

And while I agree with your point about averages, 2 of the 3 seasons being compared in the averages are within 4 spots of each other. Neither coach has put a real contender together.

But I guess the point I’m making is Woodson’s tenure is very much not beyond questioning. If someone wants to chalk this up as just one bad year that’s fine, but it’s also fine to look at the almost three years and ask questions about if that’s good enough.

I don’t think anyone is making the case he should be fired if this year continues on its current trajectory, but I will go ahead and say if it does I think he should be on the hot seat next year. He can blame the guards he’s coached the entire time he’s been here (and the scholarship he foolishly left open) for the problems all he wants. At this point, this roster is the most “his” of the three he’s had and it’s the worst product. Can’t blame the issues that have carried over from Archie on Archie at this point, it’s all Woody. The good, the bad, and the ugly. 

Agreed with most of this. But there are absolutely people saying Woodson should be fired. Maybe it ends up that way, but to this point he’s still been responsible for 2 of our most successful seasons of the past decade (that’s more of a statement on where the program is at than anything).

If this season goes the way it’s looking, next year will be very important - starting with what we do in the portal.

[Inequality]

Crean won a B1G title and was removed the following season. Woodson hasn’t  shown me jack. Trace is mainly responsible for IUs most recent success.

[IUFLA]

12 minutes ago, Inequality said:

Crean won a B1G title and was removed the following season. Woodson hasn’t  shown me jack. Trace is mainly responsible for IUs most recent success.

Trayce credits Woody with the improvement in his game 

When y'all go into meltdown mode, you really stretch... 

[Inequality]

Trace is a great ambassador for the program and very loyal to his coaches. 

[Hoosier30]

 

[5fouls]

The team this year is not good, but in my opinion there are some overreactions as it relates to Coach Woodson.  

[IU Scott]

Listening to 107.5 today and Jake Query looked it up and IU winning percentage is 59%. He was telling IU fans that the old guard should realize this is who IU is and live with it. He went to IU during the Cheaney years and lived next door to Pay Knight. He grew up an IU fan so it isn't like he doesn't know IU basketball.

So with seeing our winning percentage is 59% during that time frame does Woodson's winning percentage of 63% looked that bad.

 

[kyhoosier29]

6 hours ago, Kdug said:

I don’t agree with the bold. When compared to Crean’s last year that got him fired, only Archie’s 3rd team was better. Even then, I’d say they were only marginally better than Crean’s last team.

I guess you can say he “improved” relative to his first team. But that’s only because we got worse in Miller’s first year. He took over a program that was one year removed from winning a big ten title, and turned it into a team that was consistently in the bottom half of the big ten.

Pretty sure the efficiency metrics were improving year over year with Archie until the last half of his last year. I know people just want to crap on him as much as possible, but …. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Correct me if I’m wrong. 

I disagree that he didn’t take over a dumpster fire…. Crean left very little in the cupboard. 

[KoB2011]

27 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

The team this year is not good, but in my opinion there are some overreactions as it relates to Coach Woodson.  

I am curious what you think is trending in the right direction under Woodson?

What do you think changes moving forward to show this season is the aberration and not the seasons with TJD?

[Kdug]

2 minutes ago, kyhoosier29 said:

Pretty sure the efficiency metrics were improving year over year with Archie until the last half of his last year. I know people just want to crap on him as much as possible, but …. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Correct me if I’m wrong. 

I disagree that he didn’t take over a dumpster fire…. Crean left very little in the cupboard. 

Archie took over and we immediately dropped 27 spots in kenpom his first year - and he absolutely did not take over a dumpster fire. In fact he inherited Juwan Morgan, who’s probably the 2nd best college player we’ve had behind TJD since Crean. He made marginal improvements the next year to still be worse than the team that got Crean fired, then finally had a team that was 8 spots better than Crean’s last year when COVID hit. I’m pretty sure we were projected as a 10 seed that year. Then, we immediately got worse again the next year.

There’s a reason people crap on Archie. He took over and recruited poorly, developed players poorly, competed in the Big Ten poorly, and generally was just a mediocre coach.

[HoosierDPU95]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

The team this year is not good, but in my opinion there are some overreactions as it relates to Coach Woodson.  

Overreactions about IU basketball?

 

[BGleas]

On the Archie thing, most things about the program are much, much better under Woodson. The enthusiasm around the program, enthusiasm from the players and how hard they play, our recruiting/talent, I think Woodson is much better at adjustments in-game. Obviously, we've also won some more, made 2 tournaments, have the 3 Purdue wins, etc., etc.

With all of that said, the comparisons are coming in because a lot of the improvements in terms of actual game performance are marginal. 

We still suffer from largely the exact same issues on the court as we did under Archie. The roster construction is bad, we lack talent and depth at the guard spot, we lack athleticism and shooting at the wing. We're a "big centric" team. 

We don't shoot nearly enough 3's, the offense is mostly 2 bigs clogging the lane, the offense is often stagnant. We can't rebound, we can't defend the 3, we overhelp on drives leaving shooters open, etc., etc.

Again, a lot is better. Most things are better. But the on the court things that plague this program from winning big on the court are largely the same. 

[kyhoosier29]

28 minutes ago, Kdug said:

Archie took over and we immediately dropped 27 spots in kenpom his first year - and he absolutely did not take over a dumpster fire. In fact he inherited Juwan Morgan, who’s probably the 2nd best college player we’ve had behind TJD since Crean. He made marginal improvements the next year to still be worse than the team that got Crean fired, then finally had a team that was 8 spots better than Crean’s last year when COVID hit. I’m pretty sure we were projected as a 10 seed that year. Then, we immediately got worse again the next year.

There’s a reason people crap on Archie. He took over and recruited poorly, developed players poorly, competed in the Big Ten poorly, and generally was just a mediocre coach.

Juwan and who else since “he absolutely did not take over a dumpster fire”? 

Priller 😂

Hartman - meh

V. Blackman 😂

Clifton Moore 😂

Freddie McSwain 🥴

De’Ron Davis 🥴

Zach McRoberts 🥴

Devontae Green 🤮

Robert Johnson ✅

Justin Smith 🥴

Al Durham 🥴

Josh Newkirk 😂

I’d love to hear your spin….

[tdhoosier]

I think a comparison between Woody and CAM is that none of their teams really had/have an identity. 

Creans teams had an identity. They were going to get a lot of possessions and shoot. And don’t forget deflections…Jk. 

CAM wanted to have hard nosed defensive teams but could never pull it off. 

I’m not sure what identity Woodys teams have. His defense has gotten progressively worse. They’re not physical. They don’t bang the glass. The offense most of the time is just ugly. What trait does a Woody coached team take pride in and opposing coaches really have to build their game plan around? 

Edited January 5 by tdhoosier

[KoB2011]

46 minutes ago, BGleas said:

On the Archie thing, most things about the program are much, much better under Woodson. The enthusiasm around the program, enthusiasm from the players and how hard they play, our recruiting/talent, I think Woodson is much better at adjustments in-game. Obviously, we've also won some more, made 2 tournaments, have the 3 Purdue wins, etc., etc.

With all of that said, the comparisons are coming in because a lot of the improvements in terms of actual game performance are marginal. 

We still suffer from largely the exact same issues on the court as we did under Archie. The roster construction is bad, we lack talent and depth at the guard spot, we lack athleticism and shooting at the wing. We're a "big centric" team. 

We don't shoot nearly enough 3's, the offense is mostly 2 bigs clogging the lane, the offense is often stagnant. We can't rebound, we can't defend the 3, we overhelp on drives leaving shooters open, etc., etc.

Again, a lot is better. Most things are better. But the on the court things that plague this program from winning big on the court are largely the same. 

Great post. I think the subjective, for lack of a better term, stuff is better under Woodson. I think he does really well at checking those boxes.

It’s the on court, basketball stuff that has open questions. 

[Kdug]

9 hours ago, kyhoosier29 said:

Juwan and who else since “he absolutely did not take over a dumpster fire”? 

Priller 😂

Hartman - meh

V. Blackman 😂

Clifton Moore 😂

Freddie McSwain 🥴

De’Ron Davis 🥴

Zach McRoberts 🥴

Devontae Green 🤮

Robert Johnson ✅

Justin Smith 🥴

Al Durham 🥴

Josh Newkirk 😂

I’d love to hear your spin….

Some of those guys were legitimately useful players lol. And with Smith all he needed was a good coach like he had after transferring to Arkansas, and he became a good player. But if we can ignore an all-big ten player let’s do that with what Woodson took over.

Race - good, also should play the same position as our all big-ten caliber player.

Galloway - who’s probably the only other player Woodson inherited that people would argue is good, averaged 3.5 ppg on bad shooting under Archie. You put a laughing emoji by Newkirk who was basically a more efficient, veteran version of Galloway.

Geronimo - lol

Leal - like him as a person, but basically a walk on

Duncomb - not good

Phinisee - not good

Lander - not good

So again, if Archie took over a “dumpster fire”, so did Woodson. The reality is that neither did, and people just like to make excuses for Archie while making Crean look bad. At least Archie inherited a starting big ten caliber guard to go along with his all-big ten forward, while woodson inherited another starting forward to go along with his all-big ten forward.

[Maedhros]

9 hours ago, kyhoosier29 said:

Juwan and who else since “he absolutely did not take over a dumpster fire”? 

Priller 😂

Hartman - meh

V. Blackman 😂

Clifton Moore 😂

Freddie McSwain 🥴

De’Ron Davis 🥴

Zach McRoberts 🥴

Devontae Green 🤮

Robert Johnson ✅

Justin Smith 🥴

Al Durham 🥴

Josh Newkirk 😂

I’d love to hear your spin….

Crean was fired after a season in which Indiana finished 44th in KenPom and made the NIT. Only Archie's COVID team finished higher on KenPom, and that team didn't have to finish out the Big Ten or NCAA Tournaments. Crean wasn't fired because Indiana was a dumpster fire, he was fired because Indiana underachieved with a roster loaded with young talent. 

The 2017 team didn't have a point guard, after thinking Josh Newkirk could replace Yogi Ferrel, but we had four star talent everywhere else. And every player on that roster had eligibility to return. 

Thomas Bryant, OG Anunoby and James Blackmon went pro after their coach was fired. Archie didn't or couldn't convince any to stay. That still left four-star recruits Robert Johnson, Curtis Jones, Juwan Morgan and De'Ron Davis, with Justin Smith coming in. Hell even Clifton Moore was a high three star, like most of Archie's recruits, with skills that got him some draft buzz.

Some of those names might get a goofy face from you now, knowing how their careers turned out, but those careers happened under Archie's coaching. Was the cupboard actually bare, or did Archie squander the talent he had on hand? It's a poor defense of a coach if the best you can say is the fired guy didn't leave him any good players. It rings particlarly hollow knowing that on the 2020 team, Archie's high point at IU, the one that maybe probably would have made the Tournament, three of the top four scorers were still Crean recruits.

[Maedhros]

10 hours ago, BGleas said:

On the Archie thing, most things about the program are much, much better under Woodson. The enthusiasm around the program, enthusiasm from the players and how hard they play, our recruiting/talent, I think Woodson is much better at adjustments in-game. Obviously, we've also won some more, made 2 tournaments, have the 3 Purdue wins, etc., etc.

With all of that said, the comparisons are coming in because a lot of the improvements in terms of actual game performance are marginal. 

We still suffer from largely the exact same issues on the court as we did under Archie. The roster construction is bad, we lack talent and depth at the guard spot, we lack athleticism and shooting at the wing. We're a "big centric" team. 

We don't shoot nearly enough 3's, the offense is mostly 2 bigs clogging the lane, the offense is often stagnant. We can't rebound, we can't defend the 3, we overhelp on drives leaving shooters open, etc., etc.

Again, a lot is better. Most things are better. But the on the court things that plague this program from winning big on the court are largely the same. 

Getting back on topic, this unfortunately sums up where I am at. The individual play is better under Woodson than Archie, and Woodson certainly understands and fits the role of Indiana Basketball Head Coach better than Archie ever did. But what I'm seeing run on the court looks frighteningly similar. Trayce was brilliant last year. JHS had big games. Malik has flashes of brilliance this year, but if we don't have someone cooking then there isn't a Plan B or anything else we do particularly well to fall back on. Defense has been steadily and significantly worse each season.

On top of that, and everything said above, I'm not in love with our recruiting philosophy. We seem to be going five stars or bust, like Kentucky under Calipari, but with only 1 or 2 per class and not 4 or 5. Even Calipari's approach is 10-15 years old at this point, and not really up to date with what wins in college basketball. Indiana doesn't feel like a forward looking program under Mike Woodson.

[IUFLA]

29 minutes ago, Maedhros said:

We seem to be going five stars or bust, like Kentucky under Calipari, but with only 1 or 2 per class and not 4 or 5.

Omitting the 5 stars, here are our classes in Woody's tenure...

2021 class

Tamar Bates 4 star

Logan Duncomb 4 star (committed under Archie but stayed)

2022 class 

Caleb Banks 4 star

CJ Gunn 4 star

2023 Class 

Jakai Newton 4 star

Gabe Cupps 4 star

We seem to be in good shape with 4 star Daquan Davis...We already have McNeely and Queen looks promising...

I'm just not sure I get the reason for the angst...We have no idea at this point how many scholarships we'll have open next year...

I get the gnashing of teeth over 19 turnovers and our adventures on defense, but as fluid as rosters are these days, and the way the portal works, I don't get the concern over recruiting...

[KDB]

I have very little concerns on recruiting. IU is and will continue to be in big time recruiting battles with Woodson at the helm. Like others have said, it is the product on the court that I have the most frustration with. That said, I don't understand why every single season after pretty much every loss the sky is falling for so many people. We were 2-0 in the conference going into this game. We are going to lose games, some of them will be ugly.. It happens every season. We weren't supposed to win in Ann Arbor - we did. There will be ups and downs. Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of concerns about this year's team, but I am not throwing in the towel after our first Big Ten loss. This team can 100% be a tournament team, don't care what any projections think.