BGleas

Who are all of these guys that are worse shooters? Newkirk has always been an average, streaky shooter. Green has always been a streaky shooter. Morgan has always struggled from the perimeter. McRoberts has never been a shooter. Durham was billed as a bad shooter coming out of college. Our supposed big-time shooter Hartman, has always been a slightly above average shooter, not great, and he’s coming off his 2nd ACL. RoJo has always been a streaky shooter and was awful the second half of last season. I didn’t think we’d be this bad collectively, but I always thought we’d be a poor shooting team this year.

Or maybe it means our team stinks?

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.