Vauxhall and IU

I keep seeing folks ponder whether Turdue winning a championship would somehow "light a fire" under IU but this idea is laughable. At this point, whether or not they hang a banner is of purely symbolic/psychological significance, for both their fanbase and for ours. Even if we get lucky and they don't win it all this year, it won't change the fact that they've clearly been the superior program in the state for years now. The only difference if they win is that their fans will just be that much more insufferable, if such a thing is even possible. Them winning or losing the championship this year won't prove or disprove anything, and it won't make a whit of difference to anyone with any power at IU. Our program is in the shape that it's in today because TPTB are perfectly fine with the results we've seen for the past 20+ years. There's not really any more to be said other than that this is just a really, really crappy time to be an IU fan. There's no joy in the present and there's no hope for the future. In the words of Simon and Garfunkel "preserve your memories, they're all that's left you."

Gonzaga just looking lost out there. Eerily reminiscent of any number of our blowout losses. Surprising to see it from a team of this caliber. I was expecting this to be another thriller.

I'm starting to get a spidey sense that Texas is gonna win it all.

Some serious grit from SDSU in that game. Kinda also feel like the refs let some things play out in that game that wouldn't have flown in other games in this tourney. Curious to see how they'll fare in the EE.

Never dreamed I'd ever be rooting for UNC, but it actually kinda makes sense. As IU fans, we're primed to root for an African-American coach named Davis who speaks with a southern accent and was a former assistant who took over from a legendary white-haired Hall of Fame coach and subsequently took the team to the national championship game in his first year or two on the job. I'm betting there are others I'm forgetting but that's a pretty surprising number of parallels just off the top of my head.

I think the real takeaway here is that Dane Fife was one bad cat. I mean he had a completely different bag from Woodson. I mean, he just couldn't groove. And when two cats can't groove to the same tune...one of them gets fired and the "Facebook dad" contingent of the IU fanbase gets real, real mad.

I'm kinda shocked how many people seem to think this somehow reflects poorly on Woodson. Look, let's be honest: a LOT of us (not all, clearly, but a lot) assumed, consciously or subconsciously, that Fife was in line to be our next coach. It's only after a rupture like this that it becomes clear just how dysfunctional and problematic it would be to even have that idea floating around. It's not hard to envision a scenario in which Fife internalizes that idea and starts sending signals that he thinks it's already his program. Woodson can't allow the perception that he's not in charge, nor should he have to. I'm sure that's an especially sensitive issue considering the perception among *some* fans that IU "settled" for Woodson after the Stevens debacle. So it's completely fair for Woodson to make moves to make it crystal clear who's in charge if he gets the sense that someone in the program doesn't fully understand or respect that. That's not the same as being a prima donna or demanding obsequiousness from the assistants. Again, I don't have any inside info, this is all just pure speculation and my gut feeling about what kind of dysfunction there may have been between Woodson and Fife.

IUBB social media touting this, as they always do with this sort of thing. I get it, but it kinda feels ominous, like the committee is going to start going out of its way to pick the biggest names possible for the First Four regardless of whether the teams deserved better. Since we never get the respect we deserve to begin with, this gives me a sinking feeling we're an easy mark in that regard. Probably won't be the last time we see IU in a play-in game.

Definitely the end of an era at AH. If you never got to experience this man saying the name "Hanner Mosquera-Perea," you never experienced true joy. Hats off to an IUBB legend.

I just took that as CMW acknowledging the shadow Knight still casts over the program, which has been kind of an elephant in the room for the last few coaches. Just the optics of seeing the new IU coach talk so much Knight right at the top of his introductory press conference was extraordinary. That would've been unimaginable with the last few hires. I'm not saying it's better one way or the other, but it is a signal that there's some sort of weight that's lifted, and that the way the program connects its past and present is going to be different going forward.

Any schmoe can make a fluke EE or FF run, as we've learned from our last two coaches. But you're not going become a consistent FF/NC threat without being the caliber of team that routinely wins conference championships. If Woodson has us near the top of the B1G every year, I don't care if he hangs another banner. This isn't just about instant gratification, this is a long term investment in the health of the program.

Early in the week we were saying how this coaching search had entered "silly season" because Woodson's name had started popping up. It's now Saturday and we're having academic debates on whether it's wrong to steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving family. I trust the process and all, but I'm kinda starting to think we need to hire a coach sometime soon. Before we're all led away in straitjackets.

It is the primary driver, but it's compounded by the fact that he's also a mediocre coach. If he was a great coach, I could understand there might be fans with the "win at all costs" mentality, even if I wasn't one of them. But he's not even very good! To me, he'll always be the guy whose team scored 7 points in a half against pUKe. On top of that, it would conform to every single accusation of our fanbase being stuck in the past and not being able to move on from Knight. He has literally less than zero upside. But none of that would bother me THAT much if not for the Pierce stuff. That's beyond the pale. I'll get behind a mediocre coach, if that's our coach, but I won't get behind someone who does something like that.

It's all right here: https://www.crimsonquarry.com/2017/3/18/14966490/steve-alfords-pierre-pierce-iowa-sexual-assault If I knew anything about coding, I'd create a bot that just auto-replies that link to anyone who so much as dips their toes into Alford talk. Most people with strong opinions on Alford know about this, but it hasn't stuck to him nearly as much as it should (i.e. he's still apparently viewed as employable by other schools).

Yes, absolutely we still would. The Alford "haters" contingent (of which I am proudly a member) oppose him for reasons that have nothing to do with basketball. I don't care if his style is fast Oats style or slow Bennett style, I don't care if it's modern NBA style or a literal peach basket, I will never, ever in a million years accept Alford as coach of IU. In fact, part of the reason I experience such visceral revulsion at all the "IU Guy" talk is that I know that for a lot of the Facebook grandpa type fans, "IU Guy" is code for "Alford." #NeverAlford

1) Has no history of horrifically botching, lying about, or interfering in the handling of sexual assault cases involving his players; 2) is relatively clean at least within reason. Doesn't have to be a boy scout, but no Pitino types either; 3) is not just a mid-major flavor of the week. That doesn't necessarily mean no mid-major guys, just that they need to have had success deeper than just a fluke tourney run; 4) appreciates what this job is. That does NOT have to mean an IU Guy™, but just someone who sees this as a destination job and appreciates the challenge and privilege of coaching for this fanbase rather than seeing it as a burden. They don't have to publicly relish their job 24/7 as demonstrably as Tom Allen, but you should get a sense from hearing them speak that they're awed by what it means to coach here. EDITED TO ADD: 5) as far as on-court product, I'm not real hung up on style, as long as they can do one thing: actually MAKE ADJUSTMENTS. If something's not working, do what literally any other basketball coach on the planet would do and CHANGE what's not working. Flexibility, adaptability, and not letting pride cloud their judgement about what needs adjusting.

This thread has officially started to resemble this scene. "So you want a young coach who could be here 25 years, but who's already had years of tournament success at a major P5 program, who runs a clean program and graduates players but is also willing to play in the gray area, who has NBA connections but also knows every Indiana high school coach, but doesn't JUST recruit Indiana, and who also - and this is crucial - somehow both is and isn't a former IU player?" Us: "Yeah!"

My brain is starting to turn to mush reading these threads. Here's what I know: four years ago I was following our coaching search just as intently as I am now, and I didn't learn about the hire from here or Twitter or anywhere else. I learned about it from this post ⬇️ on the official IU Basketball Facebook page. My hunch is we'll probably hear about the new hire the same way. I might need a break from this.

I'll be honest, I don't follow much of what goes on out west and I had no idea about the history with Oregon players and sexual assault, and Altman lying about what he knew in multiple instances. Holy **** that was bad, like, almost Alford bad. Disqualifying.

100% on all this. Like I said, all candidates have potential downsides. Beilein's unique downside is his age, so it's definitely something to consider. What I'm confused by is the number of people I see saying that hiring Beilein would end their IU fandom, etc. That's just bizarre to me. I don't relish the idea of another coaching search in 5 years but I'm genuinely curious why this would be such a deal breaker for so many people. Alford is like that for me, I wouldn't support this program with him as coach, but there's a perfectly good moral reason for that. Beilein's downsides are real but I can't imagine them being prohibitive to being an IU fan.

I understand why people might not be completely jazzed about him but I'm kinda shocked there are so many people who are so vehemently opposed to Beilein. Every coach has downsides, and he seems to have way fewer than a lot of candidates. And yet I'm seeing him get Alford levels of vitriol on here. I'm kinda confused what it is I'm not seeing.

I'm not saying that we SHOULD hire her, or that she's my top choice or anything. I'm just saying if we do wind up taking a gamble, we might as well do one that's at least gonna guarantee us lots of national exposure. And before you say we shouldn't be gambling on this hire, well, of course we shouldn't. But you know and I know that it *could* come to that, whether we think it should or not.

I'm not wild about Hammon's whole Russia thing, but it's whatever. I'd be delighted if we hired her, just for the pure boldness the move would show. It would be an incredible boost to our national brand - we'd instantly be part of at least some kind of national conversation, and would put the program in the national spotlight in a really unique way, which would be attractive for recruits (as would her NBA experience). Would it work from the standpoint of on-court results? I dunno, but I know a) no hire comes without risks and b) it can't possibly be any worse than it's been.

I've warmed up to Beard a lot. I was originally cooler on him, not because I don't think he's a good coach, but because I thought it was ridiculously far-fetched to think he'd leave his situation to come here when he has no midwest ties and seems so at home in the south. But the way he's shown such glowing respect to Indiana this week - I won't lie, it's made me a little tingly, especially after the Dunkin Donuts fiasco. When oddsmakers start calling Beard a realistic pick, it's got the wheels turning in my head and I'm now definitely on board. I think I'm alone here but I have zero interest in Drew. He has kind of a checkered past and seems like an awkward cultural fit. I wouldn't be so outraged that I wouldn't watch or anything (Alford is the only one who would make me stop following IUBB) but I wouldn't be enthused at all. Each have their caveats, but I like Matta and Beilein a lot too.