Coach Mike Woodson Megathread

[IU Scott]

2 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

I'm going to say it and I'm sure I'll get beat up for it.  I know a lot of you disagree with me, and that's okay, but I'm right about this, and you're wrong.

Indiana needs to get back to having a roster that is 50%-60% Indiana kids, with another 20%-30% coming from our border states. 

We've gotten so far away from that, it seems playing/winning at Assembly Hall means more to the opposing team than it does Indiana.

Setting aside Purdue for a moment, just look at other Big Ten schools, and their rosters are dotted with Indiana players that would help IU be a better team. 

Perkins at Iowa, Goode at Illinois, Barnhizer at Northwestern, Essegian at Wisconsin, etc.  None of them are flashy 5 stars, but they are good enough to be major contributors on conference teams that are beating us. 

You don't need all 4 of them, but even if you have only 2 of them, it's a better team.  Caleb Furst would be our first Big off the bench and he's getting minimal time off the bench for Purdue.

We're trying to be Kansas, Duke, and Arizona.  We're not.  We should be trying to be like Purdue, Wisconsin, and even Michigan State. 

Build the foundation of the program from what's in your backyard, and then add the pieces from outside (like Edey) that put you over the top.  

I somewhat agree but there are certain years that Indiana doesn't produce power 5 level talent.

There was a time where I looked back and we could have won a championship with only Indiana kids. It was around the time in the late 2000's and if kids stayed more than one year our team could have been elite.

PG Mike Conley

SG Eric Gordon

SF Robbie Hummel 

PF Dujuan Johnson

C Greg Oden

[IU Scott]

1 minute ago, 5fouls said:

What happened 20 years ago occurred under a different administration than the one today.

In the past 25 years we have went through 5 or more AD's so it can't just be about the administration. Probably had at least 4 presidents as well

[Proud2BAHoosier]

19 hours ago, NotIThatLives said:

Would Bruce Pearl?  He's probably a top 15 coach with experience and has been consistently forming top 15 teams, and is top 10 in pay.  Regardless how you feel about him. Would he come to IU?

I would hope so...

But that's my biased opinion. 🤷‍♂️

[IowaHoosierFan]

Just now, 5fouls said:

What happened 20 years ago occurred under a different administration than the one today.

Doesn't matter, same as business.  If you have 10 failing years, the Board and the Shareholders don't care who the CEO is, they only care if the CEO is winning and profits are high.  Same with fans.  Same administration/coaches or 20 different version of it.  Winning/losing is all that matters, they are the same if the produce/results are the same.  Its why Coach Woodson and Dolson are catching so much flack.  They are just an extension of the last 20 years.  Change the results and you change the opinion.  Its simple.

[IndyResident16]

2 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

What happened 20 years ago occurred under a different administration than the one today.

This current athletic administration gave Tom Allen a $30 million extension and buyout (fully guaranteed) and hired and already extended Mike Woodson. It's been a constant problem for 20+ years and it's because we keep hiring people to leadership roles who don't know what they're doing. 

[IU Scott]

Just now, IowaHoosierFan said:

Doesn't matter, same as business.  If you have 10 failing years, the Board and the Shareholders don't care who the CEO is, they only care if the CEO is winning and profits are high.  Same with fans.  Same administration/coaches or 20 different version of it.  Winning/losing is all that matters, they are the same if the produce/results are the same.  Its why Coach Woodson and Dolson are catching so much flack.  They are just an extension of the last 20 years.  Change the results and you change the opinion.  Its simple.

With all the changes in the administration it should show people there is more to the problem than just administration 

[IowaHoosierFan]

Just now, IU Scott said:

With all the changes in the administration it should show people there is more to the problem than just administration 

Agreed, but it could also mean the BoT did a poor job of replacing the administration also.  They (BoT) could be the issue.  Could be bad luck.  Could be deliberate.  Could be many things.  Doesn't matter though.  Bad results are bad results.  And basketball is king at IU.  Soccer, Swimming, Lacrosse, etc.. can all be great. But if the Basketball and/or Football teams are trash, that is the lens everyone looks through.

We've only changed administration once i think since the firing of Coach Knight.  So there isn't alot of data around that other than the last 2 administrations have failed to find the Next long term coach in both Basketball and Football.  Cig could be the answer for Football, but basketball has the focused lens right now and every single flaw is going to be brought to light like no other.  It is what it is for IU basketball.  Until we start winning again at a higher clip, every flaw will be talked about by everyone.  Tough job for both the President, AD, and Coaching staff.  There is cutting bait to early and losing out on a good coach (although with CMW age, i doubt he goes off and coaches anywhere else) and waiting to long and damaging your program even more (see Coach Crean).  This is what Dolson makes the money he does, he needs to figure this out at the right time.  

Depending on how the season ends, hard questions will need to be asked about the state of the basketball program.  My opinion is this.  If you have a proven in the bag candidate and the season ends very poorly for Coach Woodson, you move on, but you better be right,  It better be the home run hire.  Otherwise you're better off riding this storm out a couple years until Coach Woodson is ready to retire or the home run hire is ready to take over.  Our next coach HAS to be a HUGE name with proven winning or is someone like Donnovan or Stevens.  The fans would give them a longer leash due to proven history and fan love.  

Sorry Scott for the long repsonse.

[5fouls]

11 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

 My question.  Do Indiana kids want to play for Indiana anymore?  Could be a culture thing.  All of those schools you mentioned have been winning in the last 15 years and we have not.  

While i agree we need more instate kids, can we get them?

I think they do.  You show a kid from Indiana those 5 banners in the rafters, regardless of their age, and you have an edge.

And, the more Indiana kids on the roster, the better. Sure, Braden Smith benefits from having Edey.  But, he also gets significant benefit from having so many teammates with a similar prep background.  Loyer, TKR, Gilles, Furst, etc. have a  very similar basketball foundation as Smith.

[BankShot]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

A lot of blame being tossed directed towards the athletic department.  I would venture to say that most of us have no earthly clue as to what it takes to be a strong AD.

Hire Bob Knight.  You're brilliant?

Hire Archie Miller.  You're clueless?

It's not that simple.  And, there is more than one athletic program at the university to judge an AD by.

 

 

I would agree. The job of a major AD is probably very difficult. Which is exactly why you should only hire proven, ADs who’ve actually done the job and done it well. Something IU did not do the last two times at least.

[MSHoosier]

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

I think it’s okay to accept statements of former players at face value. If TJD credits Woody then Woody should get credit. I don’t think you need to look beyond the statements of two former players now playing pro ball to see Woodson is good at developing bigs and not good with wings/guards. 

I can agree, coach should get credit for developing bigs. They have played well (on offense). However, the other criticisms of Coach are equally valid and very troubling. Not only has he not developed wings, he can't defend wings, can't stop wings or guards scoring from the 3-point line, and can't take advantage when his bigs get doubled. Finally, I think we can all agree that even the bigs who are playing well on offense (malik, MM) haven't helped us enough defensively. Ware is the exception to this on defense, I think.

[13th&Jackson]

20 minutes ago, BankShot said:

I would agree. The job of a major AD is probably very difficult. Which is exactly why you should only hire proven, ADs who’ve actually done the job and done it well. Something IU did not do the last two times at least.

We had an opportunity to hire Chris Reynolds. I have no doubt Dolson would have stayed on in his fundraising capacity. 

[IU Scott]

1 hour ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Agreed, but it could also mean the BoT did a poor job of replacing the administration also.  They (BoT) could be the issue.  Could be bad luck.  Could be deliberate.  Could be many things.  Doesn't matter though.  Bad results are bad results.  And basketball is king at IU.  Soccer, Swimming, Lacrosse, etc.. can all be great. But if the Basketball and/or Football teams are trash, that is the lens everyone looks through.

We've only changed administration once i think since the firing of Coach Knight.  So there isn't alot of data around that other than the last 2 administrations have failed to find the Next long term coach in both Basketball and Football.  Cig could be the answer for Football, but basketball has the focused lens right now and every single flaw is going to be brought to light like no other.  It is what it is for IU basketball.  Until we start winning again at a higher clip, every flaw will be talked about by everyone.  Tough job for both the President, AD, and Coaching staff.  There is cutting bait to early and losing out on a good coach (although with CMW age, i doubt he goes off and coaches anywhere else) and waiting to long and damaging your program even more (see Coach Crean).  This is what Dolson makes the money he does, he needs to figure this out at the right time.  

Depending on how the season ends, hard questions will need to be asked about the state of the basketball program.  My opinion is this.  If you have a proven in the bag candidate and the season ends very poorly for Coach Woodson, you move on, but you better be right,  It better be the home run hire.  Otherwise you're better off riding this storm out a couple years until Coach Woodson is ready to retire or the home run hire is ready to take over.  Our next coach HAS to be a HUGE name with proven winning or is someone like Donnovan or Stevens.  The fans would give them a longer leash due to proven history and fan love.  

Sorry Scott for the long repsonse.

Very well said and I totally agree with you

[Hoosier4Life53]

Like it or not, there’s zero chance CMW gets fired this year unless we go winless for the rest of the season, and that’s not happening.

[IowaHoosierFan]

1 hour ago, Hoosier4Life53 said:

Like it or not, there’s zero chance CMW gets fired this year unless we go winless for the rest of the season, and that’s not happening.

Its never zero.  Its unlikely I will be killed by a giraffe, but its never zero lol 

[IUDan93]

4 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I think it’s okay to accept statements of former players at face value. If TJD credits Woody then Woody should get credit. I don’t think you need to look beyond the statements of two former players now playing pro ball to see Woodson is good at developing bigs and not good with wings/guards. 

If I wanted to know if a coach is going to get me to the NBA, I sure as heck would listen to fans on a forum before I listen to former/current players. That's just me, though.

[MoyeCowbell]

13 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Its never zero.  Its unlikely I will be killed by a giraffe, but its never zero lol 

COUNT YA DAYS

[IUskim]

https://www.thedailyhoosier.com/radio-voice-don-fischer-clarifies-viral-remarks-during-wisconsin-game/

[ephul]

My issue with these Woodson led teams is a lack of identity. What are we going to hang our hat on? Defense? Nope. Low turnovers? Nope. Shooting? Nope. Tenacity and hustle? Nope.

I thought having a Bob Knight player, especially an older one, would mean not putting up with a lack of hustle. Not putting up with awful defense. Basics. Things you'd expect from an Indiana team.

Couple that with a continued lack of recruiting to needs. We've needed shooters for a long time. We never get them. It's frustrating.

[KoB2011]

1 hour ago, IUDan93 said:

If I wanted to know if a coach is going to get me to the NBA, I sure as heck would listen to fans on a forum before I listen to former/current players. That's just me, though.

I agree, and that’s why Miller Kopp is so damning for our staff. 

[NCHoosier32]

7 hours ago, DC2345 said:

The only players that you can truly say have gotten better under Woodson have been bigs. Ware is just playing harder. He's always been talented and Woodson plays him while Altman didn't. Reneau has gotten better however I believe a lot of that has to do with him getting in better physical shape and a higher usage rate. As for TJD sure he got better at handling the ball and passing out of double teams. A lot of that is just a coach putting you in a position to do those things. 

you and i agree on this.  i'm still not willing to give him a ton of credit for developing the bigs either.  Ware is allowed to play through his lazy games and consistently get the ball more regardless.  he is still not consistent with his effort.  i like him.  like to watch him and glad we have him.  still feel like TJD and Reneau made expected improvements year to year.  

[NCHoosier32]

14 minutes ago, ephul said:

My issue with these Woodson led teams is a lack of identity. What are we going to hang our hat on? Defense? Nope. Low turnovers? Nope. Shooting? Nope. Tenacity and hustle? Nope.

I thought having a Bob Knight player, especially an older one, would mean not putting up with a lack of hustle. Not putting up with awful defense. Basics. Things you'd expect from an Indiana team.

Couple that with a continued lack of recruiting to needs. We've needed shooters for a long time. We never get them. It's frustrating.

this is what i said.  even Crean you knew we'd be flashy on offense.  play uptempo, etc.  we have no identity.  

[Hoosier4Life53]

1 hour ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Its never zero.  Its unlikely I will be killed by a giraffe, but its never zero lol 

I hope you’re not killed by a giraffe….that would be a terrible way to go. 😂

[NCHoosier32]

5 hours ago, 5fouls said:

I'm going to say it and I'm sure I'll get beat up for it.  I know a lot of you disagree with me, and that's okay, but I'm right about this, and you're wrong.

Indiana needs to get back to having a roster that is 50%-60% Indiana kids, with another 20%-30% coming from our border states. 

We've gotten so far away from that, it seems playing/winning at Assembly Hall means more to the opposing team than it does Indiana.

Setting aside Purdue for a moment, just look at other Big Ten schools, and their rosters are dotted with Indiana players that would help IU be a better team. 

Perkins at Iowa, Goode at Illinois, Barnhizer at Northwestern, Essegian at Wisconsin, Booker from MSU, etc.  None of them are flashy 5 stars, but they are good enough to be major contributors on conference teams that are beating us. 

You don't need all 4 of them, but even if you have only 2 of them, it's a better team.  Caleb Furst would be our first Big off the bench and he's getting minimal time off the bench for Purdue.

We're trying to be Kansas, Duke, and Arizona.  We're not.  We should be trying to be like Purdue, Wisconsin, and even Michigan State. 

Build the foundation of the program from what's in your backyard, and then add the pieces from outside (like Edey) that put you over the top.  

i don't disagree with you.  i'm not super concerned with getting Indiana kids, but see where you're coming from.  more important than Indiana kids though are the type of kids and right fit.  i mentioned this before though...who on here is confident that Woodson would mold a top team out of lesser talent than what we currently have?  people like to say stars don't matter, etc.  okay, but would Woodson take a bunch of 3 star and some 4 star kids like Painter and make them tough, play great defense, rebound exceptionally, play smart, unselfish, etc.?  as much as i hate Purdue, doesn't Painter do that every year?

[OGIUAndy]

1 minute ago, NCHoosier32 said:

i don't disagree with you.  i'm not super concerned with getting Indiana kids, but see where you're coming from.  more important than Indiana kids though are the type of kids and right fit.  i mentioned this before though...who on here is confident that Woodson would mold a top team out of lesser talent than what we currently have?  people like to say stars don't matter, etc.  okay, but would Woodson take a bunch of 3 star and some 4 star kids like Painter and make them tough, play great defense, rebound exceptionally, play smart, unselfish, etc.?  as much as i hate Purdue, doesn't Painter do that every year?

IU seems to have a lot of roster turnover. That's why I am not a big proponent of going after guys who want to be one and done.

[NCHoosier32]

19 minutes ago, OGIUAndy said:

IU seems to have a lot of roster turnover. That's why I am not a big proponent of going after guys who want to be one and done.

it's so tricky these days!  i can't imagine not wanting some one and done's, but you have to have the right guys around them and mid tier guys who will stay and develop as well.  i am genuinely curious if people think they'd be more optimistic if Woodson had guys with less stars though.  i can't imagine that would be the case, right?