Old Friend

I doubt very much the development pieces were all being done by Archie (most of that is done by grad assistants, if you want to know the truth. That's true nation wide and always has been), and a whole lot other than "bad coach" can affect details in sports i.e. shooting. Baseball slumps are 99% mental. Hitting got guys to the majors, and shooting got kids to college. Durham's jumper looked exactly the same as it did when he got to IU. No form was changed. Come on, fellas. The truth is a disconne3cted team with no confidence will shoot like sh*t. That's on coaching as much as anything, but kids didn't become bad shooters because they were coached "badly." Poor offense? Yes. But then again, Crean never so much as set a screen for Jordan Hulls; and there's awful offense (especially off the ball) all over the place.

He is more than "holding out hope."

Unless you were acting in the best interest of the kid and not burning a year of eligibility for him to play for a very mediocre team.

UCLA built its brand with one long run which was accomplished in large part because a booster funded the players' career there. When Indiana has that as their legacy, we can make that comparison. Today's UCLA is not the 1960's UCLA. Not even close. John Wooden's fingerprints are long gone from that program. Bob Knight's are still very much on Indiana's program. I don't think the two are really comparable. But...... Indiana made a conscious decision as a university to de-emphasize basketball and every president through McRobbie upheld that standard until 2 weeks ago when McRobbie finally got out of the way and allowed Scott to do what he needed to do. Indiana turned down Rick Pitino TWICE. Indiana never contacted one of its own until recently. Indiana ran from its roots and we got what we got. That was a decision made by academes who preferred to be known for the Kinsey Institute or Kelly School; and had no interest in sports nor any care that men's basketball was their proud university's most visible and marketable entity. We now have : A former Indiana player with significant NBA pedigree as the head coach (understanding the role is critical and I've said so for 2 decades) A high level college coach (who boasts a 74% win percentage in a 17 year career) with strong ties to Indiana who has 15 conference or conference tournament championships on his resume, and elite 8's with 2 schools plus a final four. He also recruited the most sought after duo in the history of our state - with the possible exception of Edwards/Jones - OUT of Indiana. Next, it's rumored we'll have a very old hall of fame guy who's won championships at every level of basketball serving as a consultant. Larry Brown is one of the top basketball minds of all time Nobody knows yet what the results will be, but that's the resume of an entity treating itself like a top tier college basketball program, not some dying dinosaur. Oh, and UCLA is in the final four. =)

Yep. Absolutely if the weather's good. Others for you, Hornsby... Iaria's for Italian. It's a "joint." (south College Ave) Was Rick Majerus' favorite spot and exceptional. Revolucion in Fountain Square is killer if you like tacos. If you find yourself north, Miracle sushi in Carmel on old Meridian Street is by far the best i've ever had, and I've had it in San Diego. Noah Grant's or the Salty Cowboy in Zionsville are great....Salty Cowboy very casual. Can't go wrong with Ambrosia in "mid town." Corner of Kessler and College.

I agree with you. That was my point. Exactly, as a matter of fact.

I still believe the culture at IU is unique and it matters. I think the fact that former player support of MW is unanimous matters and I think IU is a different place. Can someone else win at IU? Yep. I think Sampson would have. But do we want that? I think Scott Drew could. But do we want a guy who lies to kids and families? I think Brad Stevens could. But obviously Archie couldn't. Crean couldn't consistently, Davis was a train wreck. Indiana has tried to move away from its past and the culture which built it. I guess I don't see any reason not to try the way myself and many others have supported. I've had enough of de-emphazsizing IU's most visible and marketable entity. Indiana is NOT "just like everybody else," and to me it's time to act like it. I like the set up, too.

Hey, Bow. At the risk of someone changing my answer spending 4 years blabbing about things I didn't say just so he can follow me around like a child and criticize me like he has nothing better to do.... I like it. I talked to a friend last night who is very close to Butch Carter and by proxy Mike Woodson, and I know the IU basketball "family" is behind it. That matters to me. Woodson wants the job and won''t listen to any of the exterior BS. He's not afraid of the task at hand, believes in player development and local recruiting. I like all of that. Archie wasn't willing to work a room or really change anything. Woodson will be. If you take the names off the resumes, I love Matta and would stack his resume against, say Matt Painter's. Woodson has 20+ years of NBA experience with teams that got better when he was the head coach. Players respect him and like him. That matters. A reality? I wanted Brad Stevens. He was the holy grail. But on second thought and looking at it after stepping back, he really hasn't done anything Woodson hasn't done save coach in college successfully for a short time. Woodson played at Broad Ripple, played at Indiana, and played in the NBA for 10 years. That will resonate w kids whether they have heard of him or not. He may be the most under-rated player in the history of the Big Ten. He was a 2000 point scorer in only 114 games at Indiana. He was Big Ten player of the year having played just FIVE Big Ten games his senior year. As Dakich said today, Woodson has dealt with the egos of Carmelo Anthony and Blake Griffin. He can handle players' mommies. The minutiae won't bother him. Matta will help him with the ins and outs of running a college basketball program; and I think that combo will really be fun. My opinion? I think Indiana - shown by Matta w Woodson, are getting back to their own culture (no longer running it like a mid major), and at the same time, running IU men's basketball like a top tier basketball program for the first time in 21 years. I see a whole lot of questioning and doubt above; and I had it too at first reaction. Having had some time to think about it, I really like it and think he deserves this shot. The "family" will now be united and that can do nothing but help. Edit : Bob Kravitz doesn't like it which means I love it. He and so many others are so damned unable to look beneath the surface. Why journalism guys like he and Zac Osterman (whose experience is playing Madden and NCAA Basketball on XBox) are asked for their input on sports. I digress..

The second fact doesn't take them down from blue blood status. Just like it hasn't for the Knicks. Just like it hasn't for the Montreal Canadiens. Both blue blood programs. Same as IU. Recent success / failure doesn't affect that.

180* wrong. Blue blood means historic. Foundational. All time championships both national and conference. Programs that built and shaped what we have now in every sport (the Knicks, for example are a blue blood NBA team). There is no "momentary" blue blood status; nor is a team "still" a blue blood. You either are or you aren't. In college basketball, it's Indiana, North Carolina, Kansas, Kentucky, probably Duke and probably UCLA. For example, what will it mean for college basketball as a whole if Purdue becomes a national powerhouse? Not a whole hell of a lot. What will it mean when Indiana does so again? You know the answer as well as I do. Reason? College basketball's better when Indiana's good. Same as college football's better when Notre Dame's good. Why? Blue bloods have that kind of clout. And they always will. It's not a temporary condition. There's a reason IU is RIGHT NOW the #3 revenue generating college basketball program even as bad as they've been. You're making up your own definition and then arguing against it.

You aren't alone at all. Guys who are dead set against him aren't watching how he beats people. He just punished Illinois and his team put on a clinic doing it with inferior athletes. He is doing this with an entirely new group than went to the Final Four; but somehow he wouldn't succeed here? He does everything Brad Stevens does. I think he'd be terrific. He's a basketball coach. Not just a recruiter.

Best news I could have asked for. Hope everyone is well.

You know as well as I do you're in part referring to me, and given what another guy said last month, I thought I'd make an appearance for no other reason than you two still seem obsessed. You've always done exactly what you did here. (and if "stalker" is name calling, then yep. It fits a couple guys, and I'll stand behind that as long as I need to) It's cheap and it's a narrative....not reality. THIS is why I left and only rarely post anymore. Making some claim that I can't "take it" is laughable. Who "took" more than me over the years? I'll wait. I did so because I knew damned good and well my first point below was accurate and the ease of narrative vs. truth is time tested. 1) I'll give you a week. A month. As long as you want to find a single time when I insulted someone without being personally insulted first - and I don't always mean in a single post. I mean given history. I'll wait on THAT, too. Same question re: condescending. I'm condescending toward YOU simply in response to the way you always treated ME. Something about not being able to take it?? When have I done that without it having been done to me, first? You included and don't lie to everyone and give it the "who, ME?" BS. You know better and so do I. Stop it. You're civil to me, I'm civil to you; and I promise there are only a handful of people where condescension has entered the fray. I'll call a spade a spade. You can either take it or you can't. 2) My story on Archie was consistently that we needed to wait until he had his own players to judge him. I never - as far as I know - claimed anything. He's very obviously a good coach. Is he the right coach? I know I never claimed that. And he's got about 3 weeks to make some changes because his team is awful to watch, and I know a whole lot of influential people, including one woman whose name is on the building where he coaches, have had enough. I also know the support from administration has been sub-par, and all of the blame isn't on his shoulders. That's for another thread. 3) In response to your bunk mate a couple of weeks ago, who also claimed I said Tom Crean would be great at IU, that's another laughable narrative and a flat assed lie, just like my saying anything but the above re: Archie. "I can teach a fat kid in flip flops to stand still." "You can't win the conference and then finish 10th." "Tom Crean can get kids to say yes, but he can't build a program." Any of that sound familiar? THAT's what I said, among myriad other things. Since his first season when I watched his offense stand still; and for his entire tenure we could only score consistently in transition.

1) Jump 2) I said from the beginning it wasn't a good idea to judge Archie until he had his own players to fit his system. He has his own kids and plenty of talent. You can see the results as easily as I can; and the "why" is equally obvious. 3) One of the reasons this board became impossible to stay with is the foolish notion that someone's ego or style somehow makes him wrong. Dan Dakich has been spot on, dead on the head of the nail 100% right about this program for years, and I have said as much for a long time. The body of evidence from the masses who don't want to hear it from him is massive and should at some point be eye opening because he's spot on and has BEEN spot on. Go to 1070 the Fan and listen to the podcast from today (Jan 15th). He sums it up perfectly with support from former players and I completely agree. I promise so many people will listen to how he says it and call him an idiot. Like Groundhog Day. But he's right. He's 100% right. And....I've been telling you all he's been right for YEARS. Style points are for losers. Where are we now? 4) The other primary reason this board became impossible is I promise the same couple of gutless trolls will quote this (or they'll at the very least start typing before they realize I'm talking about THEM and stop) and come with some lame personal attack because for whatever reason think they have to quote, rebut, and criticize everything I say - regardless of how true it is - because of some snowflake personal agenda. They can't help themselves because it's their theater and their only act. You know who I'm talking about and so do they (one in particular who I never saw add one damned thing to this board. I didn't post for several months and THERE he was nitpicking and trolling as soon as I did. Literally within minutes. Same cast of a few characters bobbing their figurative heads in agreement and reveling in themselves. Still with the same pathetic material as if this board and personal attacks is what gives them their juice. After 4 months. No thanks. I have no time for moronic idiocy like that. Get a life, clowns). You all can keep him. His normal 4 word posts are riveting. I hope the rest of you have an incredible 2021 that's far better than 2020 was. Archie's not the guy. I know it just like you know it, bleed....Jump.

Armaan deserves credit for that, but thank you.

Whatever. Semantics, and certainly not with any volume. See : "same guys bitching about the same sh*t." You and Josh. What a shock. Return to your miserably negative and vindictive life and keep congratulating yourself on how smart you are. Same guys. Same sh*t. Predictable as the sunrise. Laters.

Gone for almost a year and it's the same guys bitching about the same sh*t, (it's seriously like Groundhog day) with the same complete lack of understanding about the bigger picture. We'll know a lot more about things when we hire a new president. Hint to the same cast of characters. McRobbie is the problem. Not Archie. We can keep up the carousel of coaches if you guys want to. That will never matter without the right support, and boys.....we don't have it under McRobbie. Think bigger. See you in a year.

It wouldn't surprise me one bit if it weren't. Kevin Warren is not close to qualified to run an athletic conference. I don't care how many law degrees he has, the personal and competition elements of it are incredibly beyond his realm of leadership. I know he was the COO of the Vikings, but he shows about as much understanding of how to run the Big Ten as sportswriters do about covering sports. It's really sad what the Big Ten has become. It's now a politically correct, err on the side of extreme and over-caution, let's try to please everyone, kumbaya, over-thinking, over-assume their position of leadership in college sports bastion of ignorance and "everyone gets a trophy." God, I miss John Ryan, Ralph Floyd, and Wayne Duke.

The leadership of the Big Ten conference is an incredible joke. Commissioner Warren is as far over his head and out of his element as a man can be. The Big Ten's in trouble.

Your last indicates the problem with this site, our country, and Americans as a whole right now as far as I'm concerned. It's as if democrats are supposed to, by some unwritten law disagree or oppose everything republicans do and vice versa. There's no room for dialogue, no room for civil disagreement. Politics used to be two political parties basically wanting the same things, just taking two different roads to get there. Ideas were discussed and debated. Americans chose party sometimes in duality in the same election based on who might be a better leader locally, nationally, etc. Today? Everything is political. Everything seems divided along political lines, and the incivility/crudeness of disagreement is disgusting. Politics has become a cesspool. Republicans aren't evil people. Democrats aren't evil people. There are loose cannons and morons on each side; and it's as if we've let those people define an entire party to the point of people acting flat out vile toward one another. Why is it you feel as a democrat it's an exception to compliment someone on the other side of the aisle? Do you feel as if supposed to "swipe left" every time regardless of circumstances? Compelled to align with democrats along the party line simply because you generally agree with the democrat platform? Serious question. If "yes," I hope you can see the problem with that and the division it's causing. I generally lean the other way, but I'm pretty liberal socially. I don't have a problem complimenting a democrat. For example, I think Mayor Hogsett has done some really sound things here in Indianapolis. I wonder why it seems so difficult for some to give any credit to a political opponent?

Back to basketball and the explosive discussion.... Here's his record at IU and KenPom ratings year over year. It is certainly not where any of us want it yet, but to deny the progress and trend in the right direction is intellectually dishonest. Here you go : https://twitter.com/cdrummond97/status/1242224608352153602?s=20

I know. Idiotic. I just knew what was coming. I'm with you, believe it or not.

Fixed it for you. You're as blind and biased as I think you are if you truly believe Trump is at fault for that. Seriously, man. Do some homework and just be objective. How anyone can blame DJT in total blows my mind beyond words. The abject ignorance and blindness of that.... Obama used divisive rhetoric on a regular basis, starting with "cynical voters cling to their guns and religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them." He said "anti-immigrant sentiment or anti trade sentiment" is a way to explain their frustrations. Obama called all opposed to same sex marriage "bigots." Obama called the pro-life movement a "war on women." He called immigration enforcement "racist." Obama called the GOP "the enemy of Hispanics." Then...Obama was the one who claimed Trump was somehow capitalizing on America's traditional resentments. Obama was the president who ran with the narratives in Ferguson, MO in 2014; never offering an apology once facts came out, eye-witnesses testified, and the officer was acquitted because Brown had in fact reached for his (officer's) gun. Obama has selective memory, just as the media seems to. He is not detached from the division as he seems to think he is, and in fact was the main culprit. Trump took the opposite side, so it's HIS fault? No. Sorry. Facts : Unemployment under Trump...lower for black people, lower for Hispanic people, lower for women than under Obama. GDP growth up from Obama. Wages up from Obama. But sure. Blame Trump. Other than rhetoric, what action or policy has led to the "end of American hegemony?" If you don't or won't see the division in Obama's presidency (hell, it's why Trump WON), you're either blind, ignorant, or in denial. There is no other explanation. Not much of the above is my opinion, so don't give me yours.

Perhaps I accidentally added a zero like you forgot one (see how easy that is?). If you stopped reading over a typo, or something that simple? That's absolutely your prerogative but doesn't change the point. It always baffles me that so many people come here to attack, argue, and nitpick instead of just talk and have dialogue. What's so wrong in your world that you'd make a comment like that in favor of the guts and meaning of an entire post? I mean you took time to post a wise @$$ comment. Why?

Nothing would make less sense than to cancel because of players getting the virus. I drove for about 8 hours today and listened to sports radio almost the entire time. It's hard to get away from the two big news items (race relations and COVID), so I just listened to several people and heard lots of viewpoints. Dan Patrick, Doug Gottlieb, Wingo and Golic, Dakich, Rickard and Staysniak, and all of their guests. One point came up time and again, and it was nice to hear : The only stat that's up in the US is positive test results. Everything else is way down. Deaths/death rate, hospitalizations, ICU visits, etc. Also heard this and looked it up : In Indiana, only 4% of ventilators are currently being used for COVID patients, according to IN.gov. According to the CDC, (copy paste) The overall cumulative COVID-19 associated hospitalization rate is 94.5 per 100,000 which is 0.00094%. Larger point? Hospitalizations, also according to the CDC, the cumulative hospitalization rate for people 17-22 years old is ~ 10 per 100,000 people. There are about 5200 D1 college basketball players, so the odds of even 1 (1 of the ~ 5200 total) player being hospitalized w COVID are about 2:1. (Odds of a player being hospitalized with mono - according to University of Michigan microbiology dept) are ~ 0.9:1 and odds of a player being hospitalized with the flu about 1.3:1 based on historical data) Another stat discussed today was ~ 10% of COVID deaths were attributed to patients without a "severe 2nd co-morbidity." Our immune systems can largely handle COVID like anything else . Mononucleosis has - over time - a far greater hospitalization % than COVID does among college aged kids, and to be very honest people need to get sick so immune systems stay strong. "Getting" COVID doesn't appear per the numbers to be any worse for the young or healthy than getting the flu. As long as kids are kept on campus and with team mates, tested frequently and the proper precautions are taken, there is no justifiable reason to cancel any sports season. That was the general consensus among talk show hosts and guests as well. We are much better equipped to handle it than we were, we know who's truly vulnerable and young athletes generally are not, so getting it isn't a significant risk; so as long as those athletes are quarantined and tracking is monitored, sports should be just fine. (Queue.....well, I'll wait and see......)