It’s time... Fire Archie Miller

[FW_Hoosier]

14 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Considering it is used by the selection committee it definitely means something. 

If the goal is to win national championships, KenPom which is used to determine who gets into the tournament and what your seed is matters more than your overall record which doesn't. 

Can someone remind me what our goals are around here? 

This logic truly shows just how low the program has sunk.

When Archie was hired, the prevailing sentiment was that “IU just needs to be consistently competing for conference championships.  If you finish toward the top of the conference year in and year out, the tournament success will come.”

Now that we’re headed toward a fourth straight year of finishing in the bottom half of the conference, it’s “Kenpom rankings matter more than actual wins and losses.”

Hilarious.

Edit: Make that third straight year of finishing in the bottom half of the conference — Crean’s players finished 6th in 2017.

[KoB2011]

2 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

Maybe or maybe I am just not intelligent enough to know the difference.  Lost that emotionally wrapped up in IU basketball 2 years ago unfortunately. I evaluate the product on the floor and it is inconsistent. Shades of greatest followed with too many shades of poor basketball. I call it how I see it with or without my crimson colored glasses. Anyone that thinks this program is on the rise is either in denial, on the staff with CAM or just does not understand what a successful basketball program looks like.  I better step back because I just might be getting too close to make a fair evaluation. For those that love where the program is or see progress I wish I could join you because I don't enjoy being in the place that this program has been for so long. 

I can almost guarantee you based on your posts your more emotionally wrapped up about the state of the IU program than I am; so do you think I'm in denial or I don't know basketball? 

[KoB2011]

2 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

This logic truly shows just how low the program has sunk.

When Archie was hired, the prevailing sentiment was that “IU just needs to be consistently competing for conference championships.  If you finish toward the top of the conference year in and year out, the tournament success will come.”

Now that we’re headed toward a fourth straight year of finishing in the bottom half of the conference, it’s “Kenpom rankings matter more than actual wins and losses.”

Hilarious.

I think that's a bit of twisting of what I said, but cool. I responded to someone saying KenPom doesn't matter, when clearly it does.

If you're consistently getting better in KenPom, BPI, or any other metric every year the results will follow. That should be an easy thing for anyone that understands anything about analytics to understand. Maybe math is hard for a lot of ya'll. 

[Billingsley99]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I can almost guarantee you based on your posts your more emotionally wrapped up about the state of the IU program than I am; so do you think I'm in denial or I don't know basketball? 

Probably neither you seem to come across as perfectly flawless

[Hoosierhoopster]

It's entirely fair on the one hand to say IU has been finishing lower in conference than expected/demanded for IU, over the first 3-4 years of CAM's tenure, and that that needs to change.

On the other hand, it's also clearly fair -- and accurate -- to say that the team has improved each year under CAM (this year still a question mark).

People drawing lines in the sand based on conference standing are ignoring the latter. That's not intended as a dig at anyone, please don't take it that way. But it is true. The team has gotten better every year, anyone being fair and not disingenuous about it will recognize we were clearly in the tourney last season but for COVID, because we were.

But yes, CAM has to get IU back into that top group in conference, consistently, that is I think everyone agrees both the goal and expectation, it's just that, imo, it's still premature to say that's not going to happen. End of the day, it's back to whether, right now, it's fair to say CAM should be fired. I completely disagree with that idea. I agree though (fwiw), DEPENDING ON HOW THIS SEASON GOES, he'll get another season or two (most likely 2, if not 3, that's reality people) to demonstrate he is right for IU long-term. The social media/fan demands for firing CAM at this point are just premature. 

[FW_Hoosier]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I think that's a bit of twisting of what I said, but cool. I responded to someone saying KenPom doesn't matter, when clearly it does.

If you're consistently getting better in KenPom, BPI, or any other metric every year the results will follow. That should be an easy thing for anyone that understands anything about analytics to understand. Maybe math is hard for a lot of ya'll. 

The results we’ve obtained over the last three seasons, as we’ve “consistently got better in KenPom” every year, directly refute your point.  But please continue enlightening the dumb dumbs who just can’t understand math that IU is ACKCHYUALLY good while they continue to lose.

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The results we’ve obtained over the last three seasons, as we’ve “consistently got better in KenPom” every year, directly refute your point.  But please continue enlightening the dumb dumbs who just can’t understand math that IU is ACKCHYUALLY good while they continue to lose.

Happy to continue enlightening the dumb dumbs.

Year 1: Missed postseason

Year 2: Bubble team that went to the NIT

Year 3: Consensus was we were in, we'll never now how far we could have gone

Year 4: We look to be in with a chance to have a better seed than we'd have likely had last year.

 

Hard to argue that isn't improving YoY. Is it as fast as we all want? Hell no. But if you keep getting better each year and don't take a step back, you do eventually get to where you want to be and stay there. 

[IU Scott]

38 minutes ago, Indykev said:

Listened to a radio show yesterday that said 3 was the longest. IU has never won 4 in a row under Archie in 4 years.

Was that conference or that 3 is the longest including non conference

[IU Scott]

40 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

For many I think the goals are to have 4 or 5 moral victories, win 1 or 2 we should not win and continue to finish in the bottom 3rd of the BIG. Everything else is gravy 

I think every fan on here wants to win the the big ten and make deep runs in the tournament.  Most people are not going to lose it if they don't exceed expectations.  I get upset with losses but get over it quickly because an out come of a game played by 18-22 is not that important.  Do I think Archie is the right guy, probably not but I do hope he turns it around and gets us to where we all want to be.  I think it would be best for the program for Archie to turn it around and not have to go through another coaching change.  We have had 5 coaches in 20 years so making changes have not worked so there is no guarantee if we fire Archie it will turn things around

[FW_Hoosier]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Happy to continue enlightening the dumb dumbs.

Year 1: Missed postseason

Year 2: Bubble team that went to the NIT

Year 3: Consensus was we were in, we'll never now how far we could have gone

Year 4: We look to be in with a chance to have a better seed than we'd have likely had last year.

 

Hard to argue that isn't improving YoY. Is it as fast as we all want? Hell no. But if you keep getting better each year and don't take a step back, you do eventually get to where you want to be and stay there. 

So this post is entirely based on the completely subjective tournament selection process.  And your conclusion is completely speculative and relies on circular logic — of course if you keep getting better each year and never get worse, you’re going to... keep getting better and never get worse.

Coming to the conclusion that that will happen for IU under Archie isn’t unreasonable, but it also isn’t at all based on “math.”  So take a step off the high horse.

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, FW_Hoosier said:

So this post is entirely based on the completely subjective tournament selection process.  And your conclusion is completely speculative and relies on circular logic — of course if you keep getting better each year and never get worse, you’re going to... keep getting better and never get worse.

Coming to the conclusion that that will happen for IU under Archie isn’t unreasonable, but it also isn’t at all based on “math.”  So take a step off the high horse.

The tournament selection isn't completely selective, though. It's a subjective analysis of objective information. 

I'm not concluding IU will never stall out or take a step back under Archie, I've even said if that happens I'm fine with moving on. But until that happens I'm going to have the approach of, "we're improving slower than I like, but we are improving every year."

[Billingsley99]

Crean was let go for results far better than what CAM has obtained.  I was a big CTC supporter and did not want him to go because I was not confident in who we could hire. Maybe I am biased but I felt that we could beat any team at any time. Roster construction was the main issue. The sign of a good team is stringing victories together and we have not done that under CAM and the program was much better off when CAM started than when CTC did.  No one can argue that. Are we better now than when CAM arrived? Maybe but not to the point that its obvious to most. At this rate we will win the conference in about 200 years. 

 

 

[Billingsley99]

17 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Happy to continue enlightening the dumb dumbs.

Year 1: Missed postseason

Year 2: Bubble team that went to the NIT

Year 3: Consensus was we were in, we'll never now how far we could have gone

Year 4: We look to be in with a chance to have a better seed than we'd have likely had last year.

 

Hard to argue that isn't improving YoY. Is it as fast as we all want? Hell no. But if you keep getting better each year and don't take a step back, you do eventually get to where you want to be and stay there. 

What makes you feel that we are poised for a better seeding? 9-7 and 4-5 in BIG. We have defeated 1 team higher in the BIG standings than us and 3 below us. 

[KoB2011]

2 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

What makes you feel that we are poised for a better seeding? 9-7 and 4-5 in BIG. We have defeated 1 team higher in the BIG standings than us and 3 below us. 

Because when you look at the selection criteria we are better than last year almost across the board and when you look at projections many have us higher than they had us last year.

The next 6 weeks will obviously be a big factor there....

[Billingsley99]

NEXT 9 games my predictions

VS Illinois (LOSS)

VS Iowa(LOSS)

@ NW (WIN)

@OSU (LOSS)

vs Minny(WIN)

VS MSU (WIN) Since we own them

@Rutgers(WIN)

Vs MU (LOSS)

@PU (LOSS)

 

4-5 over that stretch would put us at 13-12 and 8-10 BIG Not sure how 13-12 is better than 20-12 

[Leathernecks]

4 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

when you look at projections many have us higher than they had us last year.

Not going to go through every bracket and break it down based on who people think is the most/least accurate bracketologist, but in general, that doesn't appear to be true.

2020 brackets - average seed of 10.17

2021 brackets - average seed of 10.23

There are quite a few missing from the 2021 brackets, but only 15 of the 77 people have us as better than a 10 seed.

Edit: not sure how updated each site is, but the bracket matrix site updates daily.  I would guess these are the ones that update frequently, so I would assume they have the Iowa win and Rutgers loss included?

[NCHoosier32]

1 minute ago, Billingsley99 said:

NEXT 9 games my predictions

VS Illinois (LOSS)

VS Iowa(LOSS)

@ NW (WIN)

@OSU (LOSS)

vs Minny(WIN)

VS MSU (WIN) Since we own them

@Rutgers(WIN)

Vs MU (LOSS)

@PU (LOSS)

 

4-5 over that stretch would put us at 13-12 and 8-10 BIG Not sure how 13-12 is better than 20-12 

I totally agree as a best case scenario.  Of course if there's anything we learned about this team, it's that they are nearly impossible to predict.  However, if you were a betting man, those would be the absolute most you'd pick us to win.  If we manage to win all of those, I still think if we lose the 1st round of BTT it's hard to see us in at 13-13.  If we win all 4 of those (which won't be easy at NW or at Rutgers, and win at least 1 in the BTT, then I think we deserve it, but I'm not betting on that happening.  

[KoB2011]

2 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

NEXT 9 games my predictions

VS Illinois (LOSS)

VS Iowa(LOSS)

@ NW (WIN)

@OSU (LOSS)

vs Minny(WIN)

VS MSU (WIN) Since we own them

@Rutgers(WIN)

Vs MU (LOSS)

@PU (LOSS)

 

4-5 over that stretch would put us at 13-12 and 8-10 BIG Not sure how 13-12 is better than 20-12 

If that's how things end up it's probably fair to have a conversation about how that and all the metrics the committee looks at compare to last season. 

But in our current reality, we are better almost across the board in terms of what the selection committee looks at. We could go 9-0, we could go 0-9, or anything in between; obviously a lot can change in 6 weeks. Let's cross that bridge when we get there. 

[Hippopotamo]

I actually think we’re in a better spot now than Crean’s last year. Even if Archie gets fired after year 5 I think the roster would be in a better position than Archie’s first year. 

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, Leathernecks said:

Not going to go through every bracket and break it down based on who people think is the most/least accurate bracketologist, but in general, that doesn't appear to be true.

2020 brackets - average seed of 10.17

2021 brackets - average seed of 10.23

There are quite a few missing from the 2021 brackets, but only 15 of the 77 people have us as better than a 10 seed.

Interesting - so we appear to be treading water at this point. It'll be interesting to see how things play out the rest of the season. 

[Bowhunter]

7 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

NEXT 9 games my predictions

VS Illinois (LOSS)

VS Iowa(LOSS)

@ NW (WIN)

@OSU (LOSS)

vs Minny(WIN)

VS MSU (WIN) Since we own them

@Rutgers(WIN)

Vs MU (LOSS)

@PU (LOSS)

 

4-5 over that stretch would put us at 13-12 and 8-10 BIG Not sure how 13-12 is better than 20-12 

I think you are spot on with your predictions, but I would add that part of the difference is no cupcakes at the beginning of season to inflate win totals and give Freshman class a growing experience.

[Feathery]

43 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

It's entirely fair on the one hand to say IU has been finishing lower in conference than expected/demanded for IU, over the first 3-4 years of CAM's tenure, and that that needs to change.

On the other hand, it's also clearly fair -- and accurate -- to say that the team has improved each year under CAM (this year still a question mark).

People drawing lines in the sand based on conference standing are ignoring the latter. That's not intended as a dig at anyone, please don't take it that way. But it is true. The team has gotten better every year, anyone being fair and not disingenuous about it will recognize we were clearly in the tourney last season but for COVID, because we were.

But yes, CAM has to get IU back into that top group in conference, consistently, that is I think everyone agrees both the goal and expectation, it's just that, imo, it's still premature to say that's not going to happen. End of the day, it's back to whether, right now, it's fair to say CAM should be fired. I completely disagree with that idea. I agree though (fwiw), DEPENDING ON HOW THIS SEASON GOES, he'll get another season or two (most likely 2, if not 3, that's reality people) to demonstrate he is right for IU long-term. The social media/fan demands for firing CAM at this point are just premature. 

No way he gets 2 or 3 more years to prove it. He will get next season and then his contract length will dictate action. He will either get fired at a $3 mil buyout or he will get an extension. If we miss the NCAA’s this year then next year is a hot seat for sure. If he makes it this year and again next year, then an extension is likely. 
 

 

[cybergates]

32 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Was that conference or that 3 is the longest including non conference

Neither

Year-Win Streak-Conf Win Streak

2018-4-4

2019-7-4

2020-8-2

2021-2-2

[Hippopotamo]

2 minutes ago, Feathery said:

No way he gets 2 or 3 more years to prove it. He will get next season and then his contract length will dictate action. He will either get fired at a $3 mil buyout or he will get an extension. If we miss the NCAA’s this year then next year is a hot seat for sure. If he makes it this year and again next year, then an extension is likely. 
 

 

I think he could get a short extension after year 5 if the team isn’t great but does show some improvement. But we’ll see. I have a hard time speculating based on assumptions. 

[Feathery]

14 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Because when you look at the selection criteria we are better than last year almost across the board and when you look at projections many have us higher than they had us last year.

The next 6 weeks will obviously be a big factor there....

Not responding to this post specifically but in my mind IU isn’t paying Archie to improve in Kenpom. I love Kenpom, check it regularly, and understand it’s value. What we pay Archie for is competing for Big Ten titles, making the NCAA, and having a run every few years. So far he hasn’t done any of that. I can appreciate the improvement, but he was brought it to be a to get the team to a standard that he hasn’t been close to yet. The Big Ten is tough, then Archie needs to recruit and coach to a level to be towards the top of the conference. It’s been 4 years and there are no more excuses. He will get next year, and that’s going to be the make or break season IMO.