The 10 biggest disappointments thus far.

[Proud2BAHoosier]

Wow, that last paragraph sounds pretty strong

[Reacher]

Anyone have any insight as to how Race is faring in practice? Will he be able to provide some quality backup minutes next year or be passed up by Clifton Moore on the Depth Chart?

[StLHoosier]

10 hours ago, dbmhoosier said:

The coach at IU should have no trouble landing guys in that 50-125 range all day long. 

This is where people lose me.  I understand the “this is Indiana” thing, but the kids in high school right now don’t even remember when Indiana was consistently relevant on the national scene.  We had two years under Crean where we were ranked tops in the country, but we haven’t made it past the sweet 16 since we made it to the final.  Kids do not remember that, versus the Kansas’, UNC’s, UK’s etc of the world which are consistently good and making deep runs. I think our crimson colored glasses can hinder our sight of the program’s national relevance sometimes.  We’re not going to gets kids right now just because we’re Indiana, unless kids grew up a fan or were molded by their parents.  They’re either going to come because they like CAM, we’re consistently winning, or they think they can be the piece to get us over the top.  We can’t just show up and get recruits, but if we start winning consistently, then that can change in the future.

[Proud2BAHoosier]

4 minutes ago, StLHoosier said:

This is where people lose me.  I understand the “this is Indiana” thing, but the kids in high school right now don’t even remember when Indiana was consistently relevant on the national scene.  We had two years under Crean where we were ranked tops in the country, but we haven’t made it past the sweet 16 since we made it to the final.  Kids do not remember that, versus the Kansas’, UNC’s, UK’s etc of the world which are consistently good and making deep runs. I think our crimson colored glasses can hinder our sight of the program’s national relevance sometimes.  We’re not going to gets kids right now just because we’re Indiana, unless kids grew up a fan or were molded by their parents.  They’re either going to come because they like CAM, we’re consistently winning, or they think they can be the piece to get us over the top.  We can’t just show up and get recruits, but if we start winning consistently, then that can change in the future.

This is what I'm hoping a kid like Romeo is thinking

[FW_Hoosier]

4 minutes ago, StLHoosier said:

This is where people lose me.  I understand the “this is Indiana” thing, but the kids in high school right now don’t even remember when Indiana was consistently relevant on the national scene.  We had two years under Crean where we were ranked tops in the country, but we haven’t made it past the sweet 16 since we made it to the final.  Kids do not remember that, versus the Kansas’, UNC’s, UK’s etc of the world which are consistently good and making deep runs. I think our crimson colored glasses can hinder our sight of the program’s national relevance sometimes.  We’re not going to gets kids right now just because we’re Indiana, unless kids grew up a fan or were molded by their parents.  They’re either going to come because they like CAM, we’re consistently winning, or they think they can be the piece to get us over the top.  We can’t just show up and get recruits, but if we start winning consistently, then that can change in the future.

I think DBM’s point was that history has shown that any coach can just show up at IU and land recruits in the 50-125 range.  Every IU coach since Knight has been able to do that.  The difference is being able to land elite recruits on a consistent basis, which IU has struggled to do recently.  Being able to land that elite talent regularly will be what makes or breaks Archie.  He has to be able to get more top-end talent than Crean did to make IU nationally relevant again.

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

1 minute ago, FW_Hoosier said:

I think DBM’s point was that history has shown that any coach can just show up at IU and land recruits in the 50-125 range.  Every IU coach since Knight has been able to do that.  The difference is being able to land elite recruits on a consistent basis, which IU has struggled to do recently.  Being able to land that elite talent regularly will be what makes or breaks Archie.  He has to be able to get more top-end talent than Crean did to make IU nationally relevant again.

There’s also the possibility that Archie is a better coach than Crean, and he can recruit the same level kids and take them further. 

[FW_Hoosier]

10 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

There’s also the possibility that Archie is a better coach than Crean, and he can recruit the same level kids and take them further. 

True, but I wouldn’t bet on Archie being the guy if he can’t land 5 star talent regularly.  Good coaching is essential, but players win championships.  The best way to have a shot to do that year in and year out is to put the most talent on the floor.

[StLHoosier]

29 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

There’s also the possibility that Archie is a better coach than Crean, and he can recruit the same level kids and take them further. 

This.  Anyone that knows basketball can already see the improvement in the offensive sets we run, we just haven’t had very good execution using certain games.  I attribute this to it being CAM’s first year and everyone not being on th same comfort level with the schemes.  IMO, we have the right coach when it comes to X’s and O’s, and I believe winning can cure any short comings in the recruitment department.  Not that he’s a bad recruiter, as the jury’s still out in that regard, but he does have a pretty respected coaching/recruitment staff from what I’ve read and heard.  It’s just going to take some time, but I truly believe we will get there.

[Leathernecks]

39 minutes ago, StLHoosier said:

This is where people lose me.  I understand the “this is Indiana” thing, but the kids in high school right now don’t even remember when Indiana was consistently relevant on the national scene.  We had two years under Crean where we were ranked tops in the country, but we haven’t made it past the sweet 16 since we made it to the final.  Kids do not remember that, versus the Kansas’, UNC’s, UK’s etc of the world which are consistently good and making deep runs. I think our crimson colored glasses can hinder our sight of the program’s national relevance sometimes.  We’re not going to gets kids right now just because we’re Indiana, unless kids grew up a fan or were molded by their parents.  They’re either going to come because they like CAM, we’re consistently winning, or they think they can be the piece to get us over the top.  We can’t just show up and get recruits, but if we start winning consistently, then that can change in the future.

It isn't like we're talking about the top 10 kids.  There are 25-30 each year depending on the site.  That is more than enough to go around.  There is no reason we shouldn't start getting 5* players in the next 2 classes.  Hell, freaking Illinois has one with a new coach and a worse situation than we were in.  Not condemning Miller for not having one yet, but there's a reason Duke, UK, KU, and UNC have won 6 of the last 10 championships.  They have high end talent on their team.  Coaching is obviously important, but each of those teams had big time talent.  If that's what we want to get to, we need top recruits.

Of the top 30 kids (24/7 composite), there are kids going to

Blue bloods

Duke (3)

Kansas (3)

Kentucky (2)

UNC (2)

Non-blue bloods

Oregon (2)

Vanderbilt (2)

LSU (1)

Maryland (1)

Wake Forest (1)

Mississippi State (1)

Arizona State (1)

Illinois (1)

 

[Guest]

48 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

It isn't like we're talking about the top 10 kids.  There are 25-30 each year depending on the site.  That is more than enough to go around.  There is no reason we shouldn't start getting 5* players in the next 2 classes.  Hell, freaking Illinois has one with a new coach and a worse situation than we were in.  Not condemning Miller for not having one yet, but there's a reason Duke, UK, KU, and UNC have won 6 of the last 10 championships.  They have high end talent on their team.  Coaching is obviously important, but each of those teams had big time talent.  If that's what we want to get to, we need top recruits.

Of the top 30 kids (24/7 composite), there are kids going to

Blue bloods

Duke (3)

Kansas (3)

Kentucky (2)

UNC (2)

Non-blue bloods

Oregon (2)

Vanderbilt (2)

LSU (1)

Maryland (1)

Wake Forest (1)

Mississippi State (1)

Arizona State (1)

Illinois (1)

 

Just to compare, I looked back at the last 4 recruiting classes, 2013-2016 and where the 5 star kids went.

Clearly UK, Duke and KU lead the way. But some interesting other schools stand out:

Arizona-8 five stars, zero Final Fours

UCLA- 4 five stars, zero Final Fours

UNLV-3 five stars-I think that they made the tournament once

Florida- 3 five stars, zero Final Fours

IU- 3 five stars, hah!

Interesting that recent Final Four participants Gonzaga, Wisconsin and Syracuse had zero 5 star recruits during this time frame.

Talent does matter, but without high level coaching, teams are limited-- AZ and UK being prime examples. Conversely, excellent coaching can take less than elite talent a long way-as much as I hate to say it, Wisconsin is a great example, Gonzaga as well. Elite talent and elite x and o coaching is rare, which makes Duke the exemplar.

All the star rating stuff goes out the window once the ball rolls out on the floor, anyway. I want Archie to build a roster that makes sense vs accumulating "talent " that doesn't know how to play together. We saw how that worked out the last few years. 

Hope we get some of these top ranked kids, if for no other reason so the fan base stops spazzing out. Much rather that we get quality kids who fit together asa team 

[Leathernecks]

1 hour ago, Jerry Lundergaard said:

Clearly UK, Duke and KU lead the way. But some interesting other schools stand out

I don't really disagree with anything you said.  I think the point that some people are trying to make is your quote I left in.  I don't think anyone is saying we should demand that we're just as good as those schools and want to fire a coach if we're not, but I think we can all agree that's the goal that we're trying to reach.  A consistently high level school with results at or approaching Duke, UK, KU, and UNC, and all of those schools recruit at a very, very high level.