BGleas

Yes to Spring sports, but not Winter. There is a trickle down effect. Does everyone currently in college get a 5th season or just the seniors? What about the sophomore coming off the bench that is anticipating a larger role his last two seasons, but now the senior he’s played behind is coming back for a 5th season? Does that player get an added year of eligibility? Look at MSU, Rocket Watts has been waiting behind Cassius Winston, does Watts get an extra year because now Winston is coming back and he has to wait another year? I just think this is one of those things that stinks for everyone, but is what it is.

Yes, certainly not important at the moment given the grand scheme of what’s going on, but with that said if the college basketball season is over I will consider this team a tournament team on Archie’s resume.

That's probably the difference, I'm under no illusion that we're going to actually win the entire BTT. I think a semi's appearance would be an homerun of a performance for IU, and IMO the best path for that is the 11 seed. Your last sentence is also why I don't mind the 11 seed. While a win over NW/Neb in of itself doesn't mean much, any win that gets IU to 20 or 21 wins is a huge win regardless of the opponent. Just getting to either of those win totals is huge for locking the Tournament bid and seeding. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to lose tomorrow and get the 11 seed, I want IU to get to 10-10 and then at that point I think the 11 seed is the better path for this team.

I actually like the 11 seed draw much better, so I'm good with that.

Completely agree on all fronts. I'm a youth travel and AAU coach as well, and I don't really have any plays and actually do very few drills in practice. The majority of what we do in practice are game-based play or small-sided games to teach the kids how to play the game. Then we run various forms of motion, etc. Agree on the talent too. You hit on this all of the time and I agree with you, but IU needs "guys". TJD is really the only guy this roster has that does much that actually stands out. He's our only legit, elite guy. The best teams need 2-3 of those guys and then you surround them with your Phinisee's, Race Thompson's, Armaan Franklin's, etc. IU's problem is too many of the latter and not enough of the former. I don't know how much of an impact a reclassified Lander can have as a freshman, and I know there are some mixed reviews on his play this season, but I also know in watching his highlights (yes, I know you have to take highlight reels with a grain of salt) that from the guard position he brings moves, quickness and finishing at the rim that nobody on the roster currently has. Not saying he's remotely as talented as these guys, but he has those NBA type moves off the ball screen that Westbrook, Irving, Morant, etc. have. Those hesitation dribbles, inside/out dribbles, glide dribble into a stepback, etc. Again (crystal clear), I'm not saying he's as talented as those guys, but he has those moves from what I've seen, and if they translate to college quickly, we'll then have 2 legit, elite guys. But yes, IU does need a talent upgrade. I believe it's happening with Lander, TJD, hopefully Kauffman, and you still have Hunter's development and finally getting a full summer to focus on basketball, a wildcard like Geronimo, etc. While I still think Archie can improve the recruiting, I also believe long gone will be the days of guys like Devonte Green, Al Durham, Clifton Moore, etc. etc. Not to bash those guys, but IU needs and should be recruiting better than those guys, and I believe Archie is.

I think some of that is a Romeo issue too though. Watch the Celtics sometime, he basically does the same exact thing. He runs right to the corner and just stands there for most possessions, rarely ever getting involved in the offense or even touching the ball. You could argue that that is what his role is with the Celtics, but when Jevonte Green plays (same role/position as Romeo) the dude is flying all over the court and getting himself involved. As far as the offense in general, again IMO it's a personnel issue largely. Want to hang that on Archie? Sure, I have no problem with that and somewhat agree (though I do agree with Old Friend on the upperclassmen issue), but I'm not worried the scheme at all. We need Hunter to develop, more guards like Lander and we need bigs that can space the floor. Our offense is clunky because we don't have great shooters and we don't have a single big that can stretch the floor. Outside of personnel additions, the biggest thing that can happen for IU heading into next season is Race specifically, and TJD as well, developing outside shots. Late in that Illinois game, Race had the ball at the top of the key numerous times and his man didn't even come outside of the free throw line. He just stood in the middle of the paint. The offense looks completely different if Race can confidently knock down that shot, same with TJD. All of the sudden the driving lanes are wide open for Phinisee, Durham, Lander, Leal, Galloway, Franklin, etc.

Completely agree. I could be wrong, but I think the best case scenario for IU is to finish 10-10 in the conference (that's really the huge key obviously) but be in that 11 seed game. While beating Neb/NW specifically doesn't exactly help IU, getting to 21 wins certainly would, and then as you said you're in the better side of the bracket.

I'll agree and disagree. I agree that IU needs more talent and it needs more veteran talent. To Old Friend's point, our veterans are average-to-below average Big Ten players and that has really hurt IU. Fleek has said the same thing, we need more "guys". We need more TJD's, more Lander's, etc. But with that said, you act like Archie designs an offense to purposely have the defense pack the paint? It's not like Archie is saying, "hey guys, here's what we'll do offensively, we'll pack the paint ourselves so that we close off all of our own driving lanes!" We need shooters and talent to open up the offense. We need good, talented upperclassmen. Those things are coming.

I thought it over. You’re wrong, I’m right.

This is one of the more confusing threads I’ve ever seen. I don’t understand the dispute? Yes, you need a good coach, you need a good team system, and you need good and great players.

Pulling for Colgate. A kid from my town in PA is a freshmen on their team.

So, we all agree that we like good players? Is that what we're arguing about?

It’s actually 3 of the last 4. IU played very well in the Iowa game too.

Just my opinion, but I think this season is way more about building trust in the fan base and building program momentum going forward, as opposed to what happens in the tournament. This is one year where I want IU to finish the regular season and BTT as strongly as they possibly can and get as high a seed as possible, even if that means being an 8-seed in that 8/9 matchup and potentially facing a 1 seed in the second round. IMO, an 11 seed means IU stumbled over these last 4 games and in the BTT. We need program momentum right now more than anything else.

It also still doesn't answer why we keep playing Smith out of position? College coaches break promises all the time. They lie during recruiting all the time. Why would Archie feel like this one promise has to be kept while the house burns down around him? Tell Smith it was a fun experiment, but it hasn't worked out and that he's going back to the 4 because that's where the team needs him. Simple as that.

I mean, it makes sense to want to keep him. I get that. But none of the rest of it makes any sense.

To be clear, I'm not questioning you whatsoever and I really appreciate what you bring to the board. Just, none of this makes any sense to me. It's like two groups that don't like each other and are both negotiating for things that actively make themselves look worse. If Smith wants to be showcased, then the best way to do that is to be put in a position where he can succeed, play well, and impact winning. Playing out of position, and looking bad doing it, is not in his best interest whatsoever. For Archie, agreeing to play Smith out of position to appease him not only sets a horrible precedent for the rest of the team and the program and makes him look extremely weak, but it gives him a greater chance for another season that goes poorly, and not adjusting at all to move Smith back to where he could thrive just makes Archie look bad. They both end up looking terrible.

I guess what I don't understand is, what leverage did Justin Smith have to demand these things? He's not draftable. He's not good enough to demand what position he should play. What was his leverage? "Play me on the wing and at the 2 or I'll sabotage your team?" If this is all true, then Archie has set a horrible, horrible precedent that I'm not sure how he recovers from it.

I think he knows it. He may not like it, but I think he knows it. If he didn't know it he would be bombing shots all those times he's wide open on the perimeter. But at the end of the day, it's not my job, it's Archie's job to put him in the right position.

This. I'm not a huge Smith fan and I've been really hard on him, but the guy has been playing out of position all season offensively, and defensively while yes he's not always locked in, at least he has a "locked in" and when it's there he's one of the top defenders in the conference. That's more than most guys on this team can say defensively. Smith doesn't need to be benched, though I wouldn't mind him playing a few less minutes, but he needs to play the correct position. I've been saying it since last offseason, but Smith is a not wing, he's just not. He can't dribble, pass or shoot reliably, but he is a good slashing 4 and he can thrive there, especially when also locked in defensively. I'd love to see a Phinisee, pick your poison at the 2, Hunter, Smith, TJD lineup get extended run.

I think there’s a bigger story there, if it continues. His shots vs. Iowa were different than the FSU game. Against FSU he just got hot. He threw up some crazy shots that went in. IMO against Iowa, while he certainly was hot and I don’t expect him to go 7-for-11 from 3 again, his shots were much better shots. He was dribbling much, much less, moving the ball much, much more, and taking open, in rhythm 3’s. I guess if what I was seeing was real and continues, the result should be the consistency that’s been lacking. Taking FSU type of shots results in one good game, 4 bad games, an ok, game, another bad, and then a random good. Playing like he did Thursday, off the ballcand less dribbling with more spot-up 3’s, will result in a much more consistent Green. Not 7-for-11 again, but maybe more 3-for-5’s from 3 with far fewer bad shots and turnovers. Or, maybe Sunday he goes back to pounding the ball, bad shots and bad turnovers. I don’t know, but what I saw Thursday was different, I hope it continues.

Maybe, maybe not. Do win if he hits 2 of those 4? Do we get offensive rebound put backs if some of Green’s 3’s don’t drop? Who knows. My larger point is that Green’s shots came differently in this game. For the most part, It wasn’t dribbling for 12 seconds and then jacking up a step back. I don’t expect him to go 7-for-11 from 3 again, but I do hope he plays well if he continues to play off the ball and get his shots in rhythm. I expect him to play well if he doesn’t dribble much, looks to get the ball to Phinisee, and moves the ball crisply if he’s not open.

I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it was a purposeful thing we’ll see going forward. IU has a chance to be a much better and more efficient team if Green is just knocking down open shots in rhythm, as opposed to handling the ball a ton and being a decision maker. To me it just felt like, at least in that one game, that Green was really looking to get rid of the ball if he wasn’t open immediately. I like that Devonte for this team.

I thought it was pretty clear watching the Iowa game that while Green going off certainly was a huge aspect, this game was about more than just that. The team played well as a whole. The energy and passion was there. TJD was great, Smith played fantastic defense on Wieskamp. Thompson gave great energy and minutes. The team played with much improved pace, and we had 4 different guys hit a 3, along with both Phinisee and Green hitting multiple 3’s. I also think Green’s performance was much more than just getting hot. I’m going with eye test here, so not sure what the actual stats hear out, but it felt to me like Phinisee and Green played much more together. It felt like down the stretch last season when Phinisee got healthy and Green thrived playing off the ball with Phinisee. Pin the Iowa game, more of Green’s shots were catch/shoot vs, off the dribble. Green looked to get the ball in Phinisee’s hands once he didn’t have a shot, and Green was pounding the ball much, much less. Green also looked almost immediately to get the ball to Phinisee if a fast break wasn’t there. I don’t know if this was a purposeful thing, but it felt more like the end of last season to me when those two played so well together. I hope it continues down the stretch.

So, do you want an offensive specialist or a player development coach? I thought Schilling was one of the best player development guys? May be this is on the players. All during Crean’s tenure everyone wanted to say he had nothing to do with guys getting better, it was all the players work ethic, now many of those same people want to blame Archie for guys like Green, Smith and Durham not getting better (which isn’t really true, as much as Green and Durham frustrate me, they have improved). This loss was 100% on the players. Their effort was good and we played hard, but at some point a power 5 basketball player has to sack up and make a shot. The offense, while definitely limited because of our personnel, got a ton of wide open shots tonight. At some point guys have to make them, Archie can’t shoot them for them.