Coach Mike Woodson Megathread

[IUskim]

12 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

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?

I don’t think I’d be happy with that no matter who the coach was. You have to have a nice blend of it all for it to work. 

[Hoosier4Life53]

36 minutes ago, IUskim said:

I don’t think I’d be happy with that no matter who the coach was. You have to have a nice blend of it all for it to work. 

In today’s crazy world of college sports the right/nice blend is possible, but really a crap shoot when you have to recreate a roster every year. It happens, but very difficult to do, and some coaches are better at it than others.

 

 

Edited January 22 by Hoosier4Life53

[kyhoosier29]

4 hours 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.

The crazy thing is outside of at Illinois and at Purdue, every other game the rest of the way is winnable. Speaks to how bad the Big10 is this year. Certainly not saying we should win them all, and definitely not saying I think we will, because we’ve been bad and they’ve given us no reason to believe they can. But purely looking at the strength of what we have left on our schedule along with where they are….. CMW has a chance to somewhat salvage this miserable season to the point where they could have some confidence going into the Big10 tournament. 

[IU Scott]

2 hours 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.

Get use to it because this is what college basketball is today. Between true one and dones and now the portal you will have a lot of roster turnover ever year

[IU Scott]

1 hour ago, NCHoosier32 said:

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?

The state of Indiana does produce players that are more than just 3 stars. Next year I think the state has a few top 100 players with Harrelson being a top 10 player

Edited January 23 by IU Scott

[IU Scott]

20 minutes ago, kyhoosier29 said:

The crazy thing is outside of at Illinois and at Purdue, every other game the rest of the way is winnable. Speaks to how bad the Big10 is this year. Certainly not saying we should win them all, and definitely not saying I think we will, because we’ve been bad and they’ve given us no reason to believe they can. But purely looking at the strength of what we have left on our schedule along with where they are….. CMW has a chance to somewhat salvage this miserable season to the point where they could have some confidence going into the Big10 tournament. 

We all having been hard on this team but we are still tied for 5th. That says more about the big ten than our team

 

[KoB2011]

1 hour ago, kyhoosier29 said:

The crazy thing is outside of at Illinois and at Purdue, every other game the rest of the way is winnable. Speaks to how bad the Big10 is this year. Certainly not saying we should win them all, and definitely not saying I think we will, because we’ve been bad and they’ve given us no reason to believe they can. But purely looking at the strength of what we have left on our schedule along with where they are….. CMW has a chance to somewhat salvage this miserable season to the point where they could have some confidence going into the Big10 tournament. 

There’s no reason we shouldn’t be able to reel off a healthy number of wins and make noise down the stretch.

I just have zero confidence that will happen. 

[Lurker]

3 hours 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?

I think beyond the right type of kid and right fit, there needs to be assistants that can coach to their system. I don't like that coach Hunter is still on staff. He's been a voice in the players ears since the CAM days. I can see retaining him in the first year for recruiting/retention if need be but he should have been replaced by now. As several people have posted on HSN, there is data showing lineups that have been effective and should be exploited and I think there needs to be someone on staff that can communicate that to CMW.  If he can't or won't see that, then perhaps he is too stuck in his ways to get the maximum from the roster. As someone over 60, I can understand CMW wanting the work environment to be as pleasant for him as possible but I don't think that will allow him to be as successful as he needs to be. I think he needs assistants that can teach the game and get guys better, much like Painter has done. I could be wrong but i thought at one time he had Shrewsberry working offense and Lusk defense. Purdue seems to pretty good at inserting guys like Braden Smith, that aren't highly rated, and getting results immediately. I just fear at this stage in his life CMW can't or won't do what needs to be done.

[BankShot]

Here’s a different way to come at it…

How does one rationally and realistically explain the difference between HOW we are playing, and how well we OUGHT to be able to play?

Sure, there are roster and talent problems, but this group should not be this dysfunctional. This team has too much talent to be this bad.

So, why?

- coaching?

- effort?

- leadership?

- softness?

What is the problem?
 

(It’s hard for me to not think it’s coaching.)

[KoB2011]

There have been a lot of complaints about our defense, rightfully so. Even last year with a veteran group that was almost all in their second year in the system, and a lot of guys now playing pro ball it barely cracked the top 50. This is what Woodson said on his radio show:

I’d love for someone to defend the scheme in light of this quote. I’m not even debating how well it might work if it was run exactly how he intends, but if it’s so hard to execute properly it’s a scheme issue. He admits it’s hard to execute for this group but he hasn’t adjusted it.

Things like this, and the guard issues are just massive misses that can’t be put on anyone other than the staff. The seeming lack of accountability or willingness to change is what leads me to thinking we need to move on. I desperately want to see some ownership from the staff and adjustments. 

[Basketball Junkie]

9 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.  

There is considerable talk on another board , mostly from a guy considered to have inside sources that a lot of high school players, particularly in state ones are not happy that Painter and Izzo are in constant contact and going to their games while Woodson is not heard from or seen.

[13th&Jackson]

10 hours ago, Basketball Junkie said:

There is considerable talk on another board , mostly from a guy considered to have inside sources that a lot of high school players, particularly in state ones are not happy that Painter and Izzo are in constant contact and going to their games while Woodson is not heard from or seen.

We don’t have any scholly players from Indiana who were  recruited out of HS by this coaching staff. CJ, Leal & Gallo were all CAM recruits. Sparks was a transfer who dreamed of playing for IU.

[IUCrazy2]

11 hours ago, Lurker said:

I think beyond the right type of kid and right fit, there needs to be assistants that can coach to their system. I don't like that coach Hunter is still on staff. He's been a voice in the players ears since the CAM days. I can see retaining him in the first year for recruiting/retention if need be but he should have been replaced by now. As several people have posted on HSN, there is data showing lineups that have been effective and should be exploited and I think there needs to be someone on staff that can communicate that to CMW.  If he can't or won't see that, then perhaps he is too stuck in his ways to get the maximum from the roster. As someone over 60, I can understand CMW wanting the work environment to be as pleasant for him as possible but I don't think that will allow him to be as successful as he needs to be. I think he needs assistants that can teach the game and get guys better, much like Painter has done. I could be wrong but i thought at one time he had Shrewsberry working offense and Lusk defense. Purdue seems to pretty good at inserting guys like Braden Smith, that aren't highly rated, and getting results immediately. I just fear at this stage in his life CMW can't or won't do what needs to be done.

All of this.  I think at least Hunter needs to go (who was the last guy he was the lead recruiter for that we actually got?) and I would almost send Rosemond packing as well.  Walsh has been the main recruiter for the majority of the guys we have actually landed lately.  Mgbako fell in our lap.  Not sure who was on Ware.  However, it was my understanding that Hulls was the person identifying who we should be talking to in the portal last year (he didn't do the talking though).

Woodson will be here next year.  I am 100% convinced of that.  I still don't think he is the solution but he can be the bridge still.  We need him to put together 1-3 more good years after this and then step aside.  I think in order to do that, he is going to have to shake up his staff and bring in some assistants who actually coach to the college game.  At least 1 of the 3 assistants he has now has to go IMO.

Edited January 23 by IUCrazy2

[IUCrazy2]

30 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

We don’t have any scholly players from Indiana who were  recruited out of HS by this coaching staff. CJ, Leal & Gallo were all CAM recruits. Sparks was a transfer who dreamed of playing for IU.

We are going to be upset if he piddles away the in state 2025 class....

[Maedhros]

11 hours ago, Basketball Junkie said:

There is considerable talk on another board , mostly from a guy considered to have inside sources that a lot of high school players, particularly in state ones are not happy that Painter and Izzo are in constant contact and going to their games while Woodson is not heard from or seen.

I don't know the context around this discussion, but Woodson has shown to be picky in his recruiting, almost to a fault. Without knowing more, I'd surmise our top targets like Haralson, Sisley and Mullins are hearing from Woodson, and plenty more in-state guys who *want* to be recruited by Indiana probably aren't.

Woodson got a lot of criticism for not efforting enough with Xavier Booker. Given what Booker has shown this season - or not shown - Woodson's disinterest is looking more intentional than lazy.

[ledies22]

12 hours ago, BankShot said:

Here’s a different way to come at it…

How does one rationally and realistically explain the difference between HOW we are playing, and how well we OUGHT to be able to play?

Sure, there are roster and talent problems, but this group should not be this dysfunctional. This team has too much talent to be this bad.

So, why?

- coaching?

- effort?

- leadership?

- softness?

What is the problem?
 

(It’s hard for me to not think it’s coaching.)

when it's this bad, its hard for me to dogpile on one aspect. there is plenty of blame to go around. 

[IUaic]

15 hours ago, Hoosier4Life53 said:

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

He won't. It will be an ex-wife sniper shot or funded professional hit.

[IowaHoosierFan]

1 minute ago, IUaic said:

He won't. It will be an ex-wife sniper shot or funded professional hit.

quite likely

[OGIUAndy]

17 hours ago, IU Scott said:

Get use to it because this is what college basketball is today. Between true one and dones and now the portal you will have a lot of roster turnover ever year

I don't disagree and I also didn't say I am 100% against getting one and "dones", I just wouldn't focus on those guys until we have some stability in making the tourney year in year out, meaning I think we need a more consistent roster especially with guards. That being said, I think IU fans have to come to grips with the fact that we might have some down years or stretches during a season that might not be up to snuff. I definitely don't think Woody has done a good job this year (especially by not getting a guard in the portal), and though this is frustrating (we do deserve a winner), calling for his head in the middle of the season or ripping players on social media isn't doing the program any favors. At least wait until the off season to light the torches. Part of this weird cycle IU has been in is because of the lack of consistent guard play for many years. Part of that has to do with guards being recruited out of position or not being very good (recruiting them purely because they are from Indiana or have a lot of stars) or transferring. This program will only turn this around when the guard play improves across the board. Cupps is a very good start. 

Edited January 23 by OGIUAndy

[tdhoosier]

13 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

There have been a lot of complaints about our defense, rightfully so. Even last year with a veteran group that was almost all in their second year in the system, and a lot of guys now playing pro ball it barely cracked the top 50. This is what Woodson said on his radio show:

I’d love for someone to defend the scheme in light of this quote. I’m not even debating how well it might work if it was run exactly how he intends, but if it’s so hard to execute properly it’s a scheme issue. He admits it’s hard to execute for this group but he hasn’t adjusted it.

Things like this, and the guard issues are just massive misses that can’t be put on anyone other than the staff. The seeming lack of accountability or willingness to change is what leads me to thinking we need to move on. I desperately want to see some ownership from the staff and adjustments. 

This is interesting to me. Not surprising, but interesting. 

In Woody's first year the team looking great defensively. What was it about that team that grasped his scheme? I know Archie seemed to recruit 'defense first' players....so maybe the personnel had a better awareness to what was going on.

The thing that doesn't make sense to me is why we started slipping defensively in year 2. Sure X was injured for half of the year, but the collection of players didn't change that drastically. And our vets were even older. 

And currently, the problems we had last year are even more magnified this year. Even the players who have been in the system for 2 years look out of sorts. Every time our opponents reverse the ball we are out of position.

I fear that with the way CBB has changed - with the transfer portal - we won't have the luxury of keeping players in the program to learn the system in the way Woody needs for it to be effective. We will be in a perpetual state of learning and competitive teams will eat us up.

So where does Woody go from here? 

[BGleas]

1 minute ago, tdhoosier said:

This is interesting to me. Not surprising, but interesting. 

In Woody's first year the team looking great defensively. What was it about that team that grasped his scheme? I know Archie seemed to recruit 'defense first' players....so maybe the personnel had a better awareness to what was going on.

The thing that doesn't make sense to me is why we started slipping defensively in year 2. Sure X was injured for half of the year, but the collection of players didn't change that drastically. And our vets were even older. 

And currently, the problems we had last year are even more magnified this year. Even the players who have been in the system for 2 years look out of sorts. Every time our opponents reverse the ball we are out of position.

I fear that with the way CBB has changed - with the transfer portal - we won't have the luxury of keeping players in the program to learn the system in the way Woody needs for it to be effective. We will be in a perpetual state of learning and competitive teams will eat us up.

So where does Woody go from here? 

I think we had better defensive players in Year 1. XJ, Stewart, Kopp, Phinisee and Galloway was a pretty good defensive backcourt/wing group. 

Phinisee came with offensive flaws, but he was an excellent defender. 

Stewart and Kopp caught a lot of heat that season, but I always thought they were pretty strong defenders. Certainly from a defensive IQ standpoint. 

The scheme is pretty much the same. I think it's been a steady decline in the jimmy's/Joe's in terms of perimeter defense. 

[MoyeCowbell]

I would love to see -- just as an experiment for one game -- what our defense would look like if our guards didn't sag and double the post.

Just humor me and let the bigs play it straight up, 1v1, and make the guards stay on their men.

Just one game. See what happens.

[tdhoosier]

2 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I think we had better defensive players in Year 1. XJ, Stewart, Kopp, Phinisee and Galloway was a pretty good defensive backcourt/wing group. 

Phinisee came with offensive flaws, but he was an excellent defender. 

Stewart and Kopp caught a lot of heat that season, but I always thought they were pretty strong defenders. Certainly from a defensive IQ standpoint. 

The scheme is pretty much the same. I think it's been a steady decline in the jimmy's/Joe's in terms of perimeter defense. 

So did Archie have a better eye for identifying defensive talent? 

Not suggesting he's a better overall coach because his offense was horrid. 

But I do have to wonder, is not getting the players to successfully implement Woody's defense a matter of missing on transfers/recruits, or not identifying tranfers/recruits that will be able to come in and pick up his scheme?

Or can they not successfully teach it as quickly as they need to?

In Woody's words: 'they're supposed to understand', but why aren't they understanding it?

At least he's admitting the obvious, but I'd like to have confidence that he will adapt to avoid this in the future. 

 

[MoyeCowbell]

12 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

So did Archie have a better eye for identifying defensive talent? 

Not suggesting he's a better overall coach because his offense was horrid. 

But I do have to wonder, is not getting the players to successfully implement Woody's defense a matter of missing on transfers/recruits, or not identifying tranfers/recruits that will be able to come in and pick up his scheme?

Or can they not successfully teach it as quickly as they need to?

In Woody's words: 'they're supposed to understand', but why aren't they understanding it?

At least he's admitting the obvious, but I'd like to have confidence that he will adapt to avoid this in the future. 

 

I think the big nuance that many outside observers fail to recognize is the way things get communicated and the way those communications get received. 

There are brilliant people that understand concepts and are able to implement them themselves (players that can play at an elite level) but are unable to transfer that knowledge to others in a constructive way.

Style, fit, personality... so much goes into that connection between coach and player. It's why some coach/player relationships 'click' while others don't. It doesn't necessarily mean one coach is better than the other (of course, there are many other factors that DO play into this comparison), but it can suggest why some concepts stick, while others don't.

I believe it was last year, but when IU was playing OSU, Jimmy Jackson was on the call and he was talking about RMK. Said that he was being recruited to IU, but he had no desire to come to Bloomington because of Knight's style and personality. Jackson was a damn-fine player, but he knew that he wouldn't vibe with Coach's approach.

Now, all that to say: it's not an exact science to know how those relationships will work out. They do take time. What can be projected in the recruiting stage doesn't always play out in the playing stage.

And yet, CMW does need to figure out how to adjust his messaging, so that his players understand. He is the constant -- regardless how long they're at IU, the players are fluid and he needs to adapt.

[13th&Jackson]

38 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

Or can they not successfully teach it as quickly as they need to?

In Woody's words: 'they're supposed to understand', but why aren't they understanding it?

At least he's admitting the obvious, but I'd like to have confidence that he will adapt to avoid this in the future. 

 

Mick Cronin recently questioned his team’s aptitude 

“The most important thing for a teacher is for his students to have aptitude or they can’t learn, they can’t apply, so your rate of progress and development is way too slow,” Cronin said. “So if a team makes adjustments, we struggle to adjust to instruction on the fly.”

As evidence of his players’ poor decisions, Cronin pointed to sixth-year senior Kenneth Nwuba committing two fouls and a turnover in less than a minute in the first half and freshman forward Berke Buyuktuncel giving up two straight layups and throwing a cross-court pass for a turnover, defying instructions.