BGleas

I’d also say For the most part Archie manages minutes/subs really good. He did a great job tonight managing Morgan’s foul situation in the second half, and getting him quick rests around the media timeouts. Crean never did that stuff.

Newkirk had 4 turnovers in 12 minutes. I’m not saying Green was good down the stretch, but he had 2 turnovers in 27 minutes. Not sure it was that bad a coaching move, Newkirk was awful tonight.

Really? Up until tonight we’re something like 4 or 5-0 in games decided by 5 points or less. We actually play defense. Tonight was bad, but we take much better care of the ball. We consistently have great scoring plays coming out of timeouts. A huge reason we were even in the Duke game was because of Archie. I think people are way overestimating how bad this roster is. I don’t care what the stars are next to their high school ranking, this is a bad roster. The guards are terrible, absolutely atrocious. We have very little length, inaccurate shooters, and so on and so on. Morgan is a stud, but after that it’s a crapshoot. I give Archie a ton of credit for having this team 5-3 in conference coming into the game.

Depends on how EJ's 1 year would have ended under typical circumstances. Obviously that's not a question we can answer, but that was a legit top 10 team that had conference title and final four aspirations before Sampson ruined it. I love Yogi, I'm a big fan and still follow him in the NBA, but as time passes we tend to sometimes forget that his sophomore year through the first half of his senior year were pretty underwhelming from a team perspective. On the overall topic though I'm with Wayne and Old Friend, an IU program that is performing as it should, shouldn't have to pick. I'd expect Archie at some point soon to be able to land both types of players on a regular basis.

Not necessarily asking you specifically, just using your post as a jumping off point. Why is it so hard for him to say no to Garland, yet everyone thinks saying no to Indiana (fans, program, homestate kid, etc.) is so easy? We've seen brothers play at different schools at the same time, I just don't understand this overwhelming pull everyone thinks Garland has over Langford?

This is why I don’t understand the uproar in the Langford thread when many of us bring up Drew being dirty. In this day and age if you co,e out of absolutely nowhere and start landing multiple 5*’s and are in it with other 5*’s, especially at a school that doesn’t normally compete like that, I just assume you’re cheating.

Let me preface this with, who am I to tell a kid I've never met and know nothing about (other than he's good at basketball) where he should go to school. Langford should do this on whatever timeline suits him and choose wherever he wants. With that said, and through my IU-colored glasses, I don't see why IU shouldn't be the obvious choice? Vandy is Vandy. I just don't get it. They have two other 5*'s which is appealing and apparently Garland and Langford are friends of some sort, but I just don't see the appeal beyond that. Bad arena, no fan support, terrible team, no tradition, unproven coach, etc., etc. Kansas is clearly really appealing. They're a blue blood with a successful coach, great facilities, an amazing fan base, the program has experience with 1 and 2 and done players, etc. But, they also have tons of talent to compete with for time/opportunity, and the big red flag is that the Langord's seem to want to avoid NCAA impropriety and while Kansas hasn't been accused of anything in the FBI case, they had a top ranked player suspended because of an investigation into the fact that he claims to own a Lamborghini. It's also not the first time they've had top recruits have to miss time because of NCAA issues. Self even had to skip a meeting with Langford to attend to Preston/investigation issue. Then you have IU. The clear negatives are a new coach who he's had to build a new relationship with, and a poor start to this season (though that should be expected to an extent with a new coach). Outside of that, you have tradition, potential for legendary, hometown status, a glaring hole at his position and for what his talent brings (wing/backcourt scorer), amazing facilities, amazing fanbase, a really strong recruiting class coming in, and potentially (if Morgan is back) a really strong, experienced returning cast with a leader (again Morgan) at a different position. It just seems so clear to me that the fit is perfect. Caveat though, I am leaving out a lot of personal preference things like major he wants, preference over the type of school (country, city, etc.) he prefers, and those types of things which come into play.

Completely agree. The only reason it would happen would be something like a school offering him $7 million and IU won’t poney up. If Archie has IU rolling, the only reason to leave would be money.

Imagine Archie coaching JBJ and Thomas Bryant on this team? I’d throw OG in there, but he was a clear first rounder.

Cheating can be a lot more sophisticated in this day and age than simply handing a wad of cash over to a player and his parents. With shoe companies, agents, AAU coaches, etc., a player can essentially be "delivered" to a school without the player and family even knowing it. So yes, it is possible for Drew to be dirty without Langford and his family being involved in it. I just find it very, very difficult to believe that a young coach with absolutely zero track record for it, at a school with absolutely zero track record for it, is all of the sudden landing 3-4 (if they get the Auburn kid now too) top 10-15 players in one class. Maybe it's on the up and up, which is possible, but given the school/coach, it would literally be the greatest recruiting haul of all-time.

Huh?!?! I didn't implicate Langford in anything. A coach being dirty doesn't mean a player is.

^^^^^ You're lumping the player being dirty with the coach being dirty. They're separate things. People thinking Drew/Vandy are dirty doesn't mean they think Langford is. Of course people are going to speculate when a coach that has never even been in a recruitment for a 5* all of the sudden lands two top 10 players and is in the final 3 three for another one, at a school that hardly ever lands these types of kids if at all. If they land Langford you're looking at a class that rivals Duke and is probably better than UK'...at Vanderbilt. It's not like Drew came in an took them on some magical run and is now capitalizing on it. This is completely out of nowhere for both the coahc and school.

They're allowed to give tickets to prospects regardless of the type of visit.

Good call. Yeah, they had the play-by-play guy in his regular spot and then Dakich and Greenberg were sitting at the scorers table on the last seats next to each bench.

Yeah, he’s good. I can’t decide if I’d like this for an IU game. Maybe once.

Thanks for the tip. Just turned it on, really interesting to watch.

So much fun! I coached my daughter's 4th grade team Wednesday, coaching my 2nd grade son's team tonight, then taking all 3 kids to our high school game, then coaching my son's other team Saturday morning. I'll say this though, thank god for the invention of the DVR. Don't know how my parents did it without that.

Especially with Maryland and Minnesota missing guys for the year, that 5th spot is really up for grabs. I think Michigan will hold tight for 4th, but man after that it's for the taking.

This is kind of off-topic but I wanted to comment on Dakich's narrative he throws out a few times a year (mentioned it several times during the Minny game) about coaches being stripped of all power when it comes to academics, off-court discipline, etc. I'm not disagreeing with the premise that they have been stripped of power, but he fails to add in that the reason they've been stripped of those powers is because for decades upon decades coaches have been cheating and breaking rules, and then lying about doing those things when they get caught. If coaches could keep their hands out of the cookie jar, and then not lie their faces off when they're caught in the cookie jar, they'd probably still have those powers.

Absolutely.

Holtman is doing a great job, no doubt, but if we’re comparing the situations he’s aided by the fact that his returning upperclassmen (Bates-Diop, Williams, Tate, Jackson) are playing like upperclassmen and leaders should. Bates-Diop is a Big Ten POY candidate.

This is a great post!

I would go Smith. Newkirk, Johnson, McRoberts (or Hartman), Smith, Morgan. Play 1in/4out. Play a little more up-tempo while trying to maintain the defensive principles and not let it turn into a turnover fest. But, you can never have any 2 or 3 of McSwain, McRoberts or Durham on the floor together. Just not enough offense for a team that already struggles to score.

I'm not into naming names on topics like this, but since it's in the vein of hoping he stays, I'll say I really hope Justin Smith finishes the year strong and stays. I think Archie should be playing him more as is, and I hope it happens really soon. But as I look ahead, and Smith hasn't really shown wing skills yet but I think he will develop them, we would have quite an athletic, long and skilled wing trio with Smith, Anderson and Hunter. They'll need to work hard and develop, but those three, especially if you then are able to add Langford, remind of the OSU teams when Matta had things rolling. He always had a roster full of interchangable, skilled, athletic guys with length on the wings. A bunch of guys 6'6'-6'8" that could defend 1-4, finish at the rim and knock down shots.

I didn't post in this thread, but did post in similar threads in other places. I was never high on this team. I'd be lying if I said I thought we would lose to ISU and FW, but I also never thought this team would be very good. I was hopeful Archie could get them competing by the end of the year (still can happen) and see improvement, but never thought we'd be that good. IMO, as I felt coming into the season, the talent just wasn't there as a collective group. There are clearly some talented kids, but the pieces simply don't fit. I felt our guard play was too erratic, and that we had no shooters capable of consistently knocking down shots. There is/was zero length on the perimeter or wing, and our interior lacked depth. There are no athletes on this team, and nobody that can just flat get buckets when you need it. It's hard to win with no length on the perimeter or wing, nobody that can consistently hit 3's and/or nobody that can get to the rim. Again, clearly we have talent. Morgan is an emerging player, RoJo is a 1,000 point scorer, etc., etc., but the pieces fit horribly in terms of the guards and wings especially. In terms of big, again Morgan has been really good, but matched with Davis we have two bigs that need to operate on the block and neither can shoot, and neither are great athletes, and then match that with a backcourt that struggles to shoot and lacks athletes, and it's a bad mix. I'm not trying to act like we should just fold up for the season and there's nothing Archie can do, but I never thought the talent was there too be all that good. Again though, I also never thought we'd love to ISU and FW, especially not by 20 at home. There is a clear disconnect with the players and staff right now, and Archie needs to fix it ASAP or things could go bad. He can't lose momentum to the point where the local recruits (Langford, Brooks, TJD) don't want to come here. A new coach should bring enthusiasm and optimism. I'm also a bit puzzled as to why he hasn't developed Smith more in game action. I think he could really be helping this team with his length and athleticism. Now, I have seen coaching moves from Archie that have me very encouraged. I'm not worried about the X's and O's with him. IU has carved up some zones this year. When was the last time we saw that? There have been adjustments to the lineup (sitting Davis for much of the ND game, starting McRoberts the second half against Youngstown) and strategy (doubling Bagley against Duke & Colson against ND, and other things) that have impacted games. The defense, while still not great, is clearly better. We've run some flex action and other sets that we never ran under Crean in the halfcourt. I can still see the vision, and I think it will be benefited greatly by having a real point guard (Phinisee) and I think Archie's system will look a lot better with size and length (Anderson, Hunter, Smith) on the perimeter and wings. But unfortunately we may have to wait for those guys to develop. The momentum being slowed stinks though, because Romeo could greatly impact the timeline.