lillurk

Right...Cooley says he got the offer. Local media (mgoblog, Brendan Quinn of the Athletic, UMhoops) would differ. I’ll let you sort out who has a vested (literally, $, vested) interest in that claim.

Cooley didn’t get offered the UM job and I’m pretty sure they weren’t very interested; they got their guy. The Cooley/UM chatter succeeded at his intended goal: getting him a raise

I would imagine he’d like to prove he’s capable ASAP given age, health, etc.

Yeah, a good coach with Armaan, the freshmen, and a couple impact transfers could be a tournament team.

Yeah if Oats is available/interested then he’d be my preference

Among the realistic options here, I like Shrewsberry and Beilein. (I’d include Oats but his recent extension makes me think he’s unlikely.) Just a hunch but I would bet high-major experience might be on the “must” list based on how the Archie experiment went — it’s one of the reasons I thought Holtmann was a better get in ‘17. Anyway, that would eliminate Shrewsberry, unfortunately. Beilein turned the defense over to assistants (first Billy Donlon then Luke Yaklich) and generally seemed to empower assistants. It makes me think he could bridge well to a succession plan/head-coach-in-waiting at the end of his career. You’d have to gauge his rep after the Cavs debacle among the team and maybe current high schoolers, but I think HM experience, no buyout, clean as can be w/NCAAs...it’s easy to imagine. Anyway, if high major or head coaching experience is a must this cycle, I get it. We could do much worse than Beilein. But Shrewsberry could be great.

A note on rebuild speed: 4 of UM’s top 6 contributors have arrived in Juwan Howard’s two years. Wagner committed to him (though the relationship began earlier), Dickinson is a frosh, Smith and Brown are immediately eligible transfers. They get almost nothing from the sophomore and junior classes he inherited. The defense is at least as complicated as the packline and they’re a top team in defensive efficiency. Don’t make excuses the next coach doesn’t need.

This is more than fair, and I also worry I undersold how bad I think the Hanner threat was.

Yeah I could absolutely get behind this. The recruiting issues have been minor. The Hanner/Jurkin thing was in poor taste but doesn’t seem to be a pattern. He’s hopefully learned. Baylor has dudes but he’s done great with transfers who aren’t necessarily headline guys. That bodes well for him as a talent evaluator. They’re good on both sides of the ball. He’s adapted over time. I would not worry about postseason success in hiring: the trick is getting there with a good seed regularly. If you do that, you’ll have some years where you underperform but also some years where you hit it big.

Exactly — to be clear, circumstances have changed. I’ve been vocal that it’s time to move on but (as Stuhoo said elsewhere), making the tournament and winning a game or two would’ve made that look foolish this year. Dolson should’ve been praying for Arch to make the tourney for the obvious reasons but ALSO because it makes it obvious what to do: ride with him one more year unless a miracle happens this offseason, like Stevens and the Celts parting ways. Finishing poorly takes the cover away: it’s basically unanimous the program is DOA under Archie, even to the most ardent supporters. In sum: assuming IU misses the dance, I think you’ve gotta move on now rather than later.

A couple weeks ago I assumed IU would scrape into the tournament and it would be enough to get Miller another year. Sounds like that still might happen, per @Chris007 and others in the know. I wonder if the collapse down the stretch here is enough to change the calculus, though. I’m glad it’s not my call.

This team is going to finish about where a good coach would’ve had them if you told the good coach he couldn’t play TJD a single minute

The guy who transferred took a lot more heat from fans than he deserved. Flawed player but he’s helping a better team win. In fact, IU was clearly better last year with a couple guys who took lots of flak.

Yes, being 100% sincere here: best chance for a shoot-the-moon hire of a name we’d all love probably means rooting against the Celtics

538 currently projects the Celtics to the fifth seed, 39-33, between the Raptors and Heat. Almost no chance they miss the playoffs. I do wonder if, now that their rise has plateaued and even fallen off, ownership, Ainge, Stevens etc. may think the team would benefit from a shake-up if they continue to underwhelm, flame out in the playoffs, seem to be going the wrong way. It can’t hurt IU’s chances that the timing seems nice.

Two guys who would know on the Celtics situation here: In sum, they don’t really thing Stevens is in any hot water with Ainge and ownership. But they acknowledge the Celtics have some real problems and they’re curious how they respond going forward. Some of the problems, like injuries, are outside anyone’s control. Others are coaching-adjacent: not enough shots at the rim, an issue they mention has been consistent through Stevens’ time in Boston. In sum, probably nothing to get excited about as an IU fan. They mention this is really the first time there have been some cracks in the armor for Stevens, though. As some of us have speculated, if it doesn’t get fixed or there are internal issues, you could imagine they “need a new voice” after a first round playoff exit.

lol no idea how seriously to take this

Much as I would like a change soon, surely we can agree that the increased possibility of Stevens is potentially worth not having an answer by Easter 2021

It’s not just Xs and Os, it’s Ws and Ls.

No reason to think this would happen but if Tatum/Brown feel their run under Stevens is over, maybe there’s some movement

Actually it might be funnier to get one of Rutgers/UM, beat MSU, and drop the PU and tourney opener

Stating the obvious here but if Stevens gets a pink slip you have to make a godfather offer. Top 5 salary, huge pool for assistants, whatever he asks. The buyout would be a bigger pill but you don’t get many chances like that.

It’s going to down in the funniest/worst way. IU will lose both games this week, beat MSU, inevitably lose to PU, then split two conference tournament games to finish 14-14 (8-11). After they flame out on the second day of the conference tournament, the coach will say they deserve to make the NCAAs and they played a hard schedule. They won’t even make the NIT.

Not necessarily the worst four-year W/L record, by the way. But you can’t find a Knight/Davis/Sampson/Crean single-coach stretch where they missed three tournaments except Crean’s rebuild, the fourth year of which was a sweet sixteen run.

Two notes on recent tributaries in this discussion: 1. As mentioned previously, I can see the arguments for Matta but I worry that health, recruiting would hold him back. So a general reminder: you hire coaches for their future, not their pasts. 2. I think all of the following can be true at the same time: - Miller was a fine choice when hired (I’ve registered my preferences elsewhere but this is still true) -Miller has caught some bad breaks outside his control with injuries and recruiting. However, -EVERYONE deals with injuries and recruiting disappointments. I don’t really believe IU has had it worse in this regard than anyone. Plus recruiting is his job, having a team deep enough to withstand injuries is his job. IU has kept at least one scholarship open the last two years, so that excuse rings especially hollow. -IU has underperformed every year under Archie. Even if you say year 1 showed some promise, year 3 was not terrible...sure. Collectively a significant underperformance. If IU misses the tournament this year it will be the worst four-year run under a single coach since Knight took the job. -Finally, coaches only leave the starting blocks at a school one time. You can start slow and build — that’s what Arch tried to do — but you have to eventually get up to speed. That hasn’t happened.