BottomLine

Thomas graduated with a masters of education from the University of California at Berkeley, tweeting his cap and gown and retweeting congratulations to other UC Berkeley graduates. He said in a recent Huffington Post story that he has "studied the connections between education and sports. Looked it up before anybody had a hissy fit.

So why is this even a topic? School coaches have degrees. School coaches teach a few classes. Whether anyone agrees or disagrees with this, it has no impact on the search for a new coach at IU. That is just the way it is, but it has no impact on what is going on in Bloomington. So let's just move on. We are arguing over nothing.

The NBA teams are professional sports franchises. Colleges are SCHOOLS. Each have their own standards for hiring.

Stackhouse recently completed an executive education program at the Harvard centered on sports business. Turner has a law degree and MBA from Harvard. Stackhouse also graduated from the University of North Carolina, which is where Turner completed his undergraduate degree.Apr 1, 2019

All coached on the professional level. We are talking college coaches.

O'Leary was hired to be head football coach at Notre Dame and then was fired five days later for not having a degree.

Wasn't there a major football coach fired a few years ago because he didn't have a degree and lied about it on his employment application?

Name one

What difference does it make? Every coach we are interested in have at least a bachelors degree.

Know that Knight taught classes, usually how to be a coach or Xs and Os type classes. Know this is dating me be when I was at IU I had a PE class taught by Lou Watson, who was the IU coach at the time. It is all part of being part of the faculty.

I believe that the head coach at IU and other institutions are expected to teach a few courses. That would require a degree.

Looks to me like everyone needs to take a chill pill. IU is going to get a good coach. Will it be the right coach? Guys hires like this don't come with guarantees. What is it they say about investing - past performance doesn't necessarily mean future success or something like this. We don't know who is being interviews. We don't know what questions are being asked. We don't know what the potential coach is answering. Only the AD and whoever he chooses to involve in the process know those things. We, as fans, are well over our pay grade if we are trying to make those decisions for the program - based on what? This is going to be a chemistry hire, at least I hope. Lack of experience can be overcome. Look at Howard at Michigan, A GREAT HIRE. Sometimes it takes a coach time to get his act together. Look at Poser at Loyola. He has the chemistry going there but will it translate to elsewhere? I don't know and you don't either. Based on his record Archie looked like a good hire. He wasn't. As I said there are plenty of good coaches out there that know the Xs and Os but do they fit the IU culture? Do they have the thick skin and confidence that will allow them the resist the unique pressure at IU? sit tight folks this is going to work out. It is just going to take some time. Last thought on Brad Stevens. IF he agreed to come before Archie was fired and then changed his mind, I think he blew any chance to ever get the IU job. Relationships are built on trust and that is gone. IF the rumors are true. I now return you to the debate over the arrival of our next savior.

Have no idea why this popped up here and now.

After watching Arkansas - Texas Tech, I'd take either coach in a heartbeat just because they can get their players to play that hard. Haven't seen that from the Hoosiers in quite some time. Getting tired of hearing the coach say how hard we are playing when they don't pass the eye test. Another thought. Justin Smith sure makes me wonder if IU is where players go to die. Smarts and ability and the coach spent three years trying to cram a square peg in a round hole instead of figuring out how to use that ability. No wonder Smith had a "bad" attitude.

After watching Arkansas - Texas Tech, I'd take either coach in a heartbeat just because they can get their players to play that hard. Haven't seen that from the Hoosiers in quite some time. Getting tired of hearing the coach say how hard we are playing when they don't pass the eye test. Another thought. Justin Smith sure makes me wonder if IU is where players go to die. Smarts and ability and the coach spent three years trying to cram a square peg in a round hole instead of figuring out how to use that ability. No wonder Smith had a "bad" attitude.

Agree

Tom Crean record: 21 years at Marquette, Indiana and Georgia. 16 winning seasons, 4 losing seasons (includes the first 3 at Indiana), one even season. Record 397 - 280 for a .586 winning percentage. Very good coach, not great, but not good enough for what Indiana was looking for.

Don't agree with you on Crean. He won at Marquette (not a mid-major), won at Indiana, and is winning at Georgia. Problem is that he didn't win enough and what he had his teams do on the court was not a good fit for the fan base. Water under the bridge now but I agree he wasn't the guy to bring the Hoosiers all the way back. Just don't think he was as bad as you remember. Anyway, on to the future. I think IUs AD had an idea of who he wanted when he fired Archie and it was probably Stevens. That didn't work. What I'm wondering now is who has contacted the school since Miller's dismissal. To all intents and purposes the Miller firing was a surprise. Most thought he would get another year because of the buyout. In a situation like this I'm sure that there have been feelers toward IU to see if there is any interest. Wonder if there is a dark horse out there that nobody has thought of. Maybe someone that everyone thinks is happy but is really itching to take on the IU challenge. I have absolutely no inside information and I don't have any coaches in mind. Just thinking a bit outside the box.

There is no reason in the world why IU should not end up with an excellent experienced coach. I know that IU has been in a slump for the last 20 years, blah, blah, blah. The bottom line is the potential that programs have. Don't judge IU by where we are now. If we were at the top of the heap we would have coaches pounding down the ADs door. That may not be the case but IU is far from being a lost cause. This is a school with 5 national championships. We rank 10th in the history of the college basketball in wins. We are 6th in number if invites to the NCAA tourney. We are 7th in all time NCAA tourney wins. In short IU is a school that has produced in the past and certainly has the potential to produce again in the future. We have been there and got the job done in the past. So where do we rank in the pecking order for coaches? Kentucky, Kansas, North Carolina and Duke are holy grail schools. The coaches there either retire or get carried out feet first. EVERYONE wants one of those four jobs. Twenty years ago Indiana and UCLA would have probably been listed in that group of bluebloods. Beneath that bunch are the destination schools which have proven in the past that they are capable of producing champions. All have at least two NCAA titles, or have many tourney bids, or many tourney wins, or rank highly on the all time wins list. Most have a combo of those characteristics. These schools, while not all successful at present, have the track record to be dominate schools. All are looking for successful winning coaches that can hold or bring back the glory. The list includes Syracuse, Temple, UCLA, Notre Dame, St Johns, Indiana, Cincinnati, Villanova, NC State, Louisville, Michigan State, Connecticut and probably Ohio State. If you want to throw in a few more or subtract a couple be my guest. My point is that the coaches from these schools never volunteer to leave for another school unless they are fired or are hired by a "holy grail" school. That is what makes them destination schools. IU is just looking for the right hire. since Knight we have had Davis (who had the job drop in his lap), Sampson (who could coach but was a cheat), Crean (who was better than a lot want to believe but couldn't do the job consistently) and Miller (who was obviously over his head). In every case it was a bad hire for various reasons. The right guy is out there. I just know it in my bones. I don't care who it is. I just want a kick @$$ hire that will come in and build this program back up to where it should be and then stay the course from there. I think we all want the same. I pray we get it right this time. I'm getting too old to wait forever. There are plenty of coaches out there that would die for a call from the IU AD. I just hope he picks the right one this time.

Wouldn't give a second thought to being second choice for a destination job. Indiana has the fan base, facilities, money, and tradition to be a top job. It is located in a state that is a hot bed for basketball. The University has been there and done that numerous times in the past and has the potential to do it all over again. All it is waiting for is the right person to wake up the sleeping tiger. Second choice? So what? If I were a coach and thought I had the gonads to take IU back to the top, I'd jump at the opportunity.

Pfau gave $12mil to renovate the IU golf course, which is now named the Pfau course. Probably doesn't have any trouble getting tee times.

Yes, but their lips move at the same time.

Instead of taking wild guesses and wishful thinking, maybe the best approach to figuring out the new coach is to apply a bit of logic and maybe read a bit between the lines. So let's look at a few of the facts. 1. The decision to let Archie go was probably made before the last two or three games. It takes so time to put the buyout together. Archie's job was toast before we lost to Purdue and Rutgers. 2. While the AD made the decision the odds are good that he may have been approached by alumni before the end of the season with an offer to help. It seems more likely that the offer of money would have been made before the school started scouting around to find money. 3. Whoever coughed up the money probably had input into the identity of the new coach. If I was giving up that kind of money I would certainly want a say on what happened. 4. Since there is no blue ribbon search committee, the AD knows who the coach is going to be. 5. If the new coach is not currently coaching an announcement should come sooner rather than later and negotiations are underway and have been underway for several weeks. There is little to be gained by protecting the identity of the party. 6. If the new coach is currently employed he probably has a team in the NCAA tourney. Thus, the announcement would not come while his team is still playing. He would not want to upset team chemistry while they are still playing. The longer it takes to make an announcement the better the possibility that this is the case. 7. One big advantage of having donors pay for Archie's severance is that it makes it possible for the university to buy out a contract for a coach who is currently under contract. Paying both a severance and a buyout both would probably be prohibitive. 8. After four unsuccessful tries since Knight was fired, the AD doesn't want to get it wrong yet again. I'm not expecting another mid-major coach. The AD is talking to someone with a proven winning track record. I'm leaning toward someone that is in the Big Dance this year. I won't believe anything that any coach says while their team is still competing. Anyone that has picked up on any other clues please chime in. I'm all ears.

I'm still waiting for the mail in ballots from the large urban districts to be counted. Figure I can still win this thing - NOT! Don't think I've every given up on an IU team like this year.

Been there all year, I've reached the spot where I expect to lose and calculate my score based on 75 points. Then I give myself a 50 point bonus if I picked the winner. Picking the winner is so much more important than picking the score and this team is so unpredictable, to me, that they are breaking my back. I figure they owe me about 300 points.