Old Friend

What a great call.

What he needs to do is sign with a guy who can teach him decent footwork so he can play with his back to the basket. He does not currently have a single skill that translates well into the NBA game. He has a ton of work to do.

ESPN has become an unrecognizable "embrace debate" and let's make this as controversial as possible network I can no longer tolerate unless they're showing a game I want to see. The 6:00 SportsCenter is an abysmal piece of television, and the two idiots they've chosen to host it couldn't hold their own in a real sports conversation if their lives depended on it. Give me Fox Sports, Charles Barkley, and David Feherty.

Not my point. Whether or not I've seen a kid and base my opinion off of that isn't good enough for Boot. He wants "support," and he stalks me about it. I watched Heyward for 4 years and in fact chastised IU (Sampson in particular) for not recruiting him harder. I absolutely agree with you. I'm not the one you need to ask.

I agree; but I don't think I'd go to Purdue if I wanted to be a 4-year point guard. He comes to Indiana, he has a chance to be an icon because I think he'll be surrounded by talent for 4 years. At Purdue? You just never know. I was incredibly frustrated by Crean and Davis because they never nailed down any part of Indiana. Langford should be hard to pry away from Indiana for the same reason you state Phinisee should be tough to pry away from Purdue.

Hasn't been good enough for him. Watching a kid and giving your opinion based on that is unsupported.

Romeo is a great player, and I've seen him multiple times. This really isn't about him. I'd love him, and I think he's an important get.

Rankings are based almost solely on ball skills and athletic ability. They translate to those attributes alone. They say nothing of how a kid makes others better or not. Whether he understands angles, spacing, defensive positioning, etc. Can he set or use a screen? Is he a good team mate? I don't care one bit if you agree with me or not. I'm not here to please you nor anyone else; and the same 3-4 guys are the ones who agree with you. You're telling me absolutely that a player who's more highly ranked nationally should be recruited more heavily than another kid? Noah Vonleh..Hanner Parea....come on down. Speaking of credibility. Is "rankings are absolutely relevant" a hardline stance? It would seem so. You need to spend more time doing something other than stalking me waiting to find something to disagree with. Talk to me about kids like Daniel Orton, Marcus Lee, DeJuan Coleman, DeQuan Jones, Kieth Gallon, Magnum Rolle, Milton Jennings, Josh Selby, and on and on and on and on. All 5-star recruits who did nothing; and there are plenty more. My hard line stances are based on history and reality. You can do your homework and look it up....or you can tell me how wrong I am. Where was Oladipo ranked? Gordon Heyward? How many kids can you name ranked lower than others who turned out better? Let me guess....you don't think that supports anything, right? Yet your saying what you say "Garland and Langford are smart players who make players around them better" is supported. By....what?

I figured someone would do this. I did not compare the two, and I think it's impossible to know another player would be "more like" another at this point. Phinisee is a terrific player - a 4-star kid right now, for what it's worth. What he will be in college and beyond isn't something anyone can know; but my comment had nothing to do with where kids were ranked (Bracey Wright and Andre Patterson were highly ranked. Victor Oladipo was not - lower than Phinisee is. It's 100% irrelevant and predictor of nothing). Indiana needs a point guard; needs a player who will make others better; and yeah....needs smart players who know how to play the game and not just the sport. Phinisee is such a player; and I personally love that he's an Indiana kid. 21 points, 7 assists, 6 rebounds, 3 steals per game last season. 52% shooter from the floor. Not bad. Yogi was better? Yogi played against far inferior competition in high school. So..better? Yogi had a better 4 year career than Phinnisee will have? Nobody knows that at this point.

Phinisee is an important get for Miller. Whatever it takes to land him; he needs to do that. This is a 4-year point guard. This is akin to Yogi. I don't think others are not as important to the next 4-5 years as he is.

Priller needs to go.

I've said for a long time this is an important get for Indiana and Miller. He is a kid who makes others better, gets the ball to the right spot all the time, and he's as tough as a $2 steak. As much as I'd love to get Romeo Langford, this kid may be more important for the program because he'll be here 4 years in all likelihood, and I love me some senior point guards.

Did you see his defensive effort last season? Next to zero. Ironic given your last comment; and if you paid attention at all, it's more than "defensible." Like I said...many fans defend their own...just because. I rest my case.

I'm not a fan of kicking kids off, asking them to leave, etc. But, for the sake of the discussion,.... I want 13 kids who want to play basketball at Indiana and for Coach Miller. Blackmon is playing for Blackmon. That's just who he is. Johnson's the same way. Neither of them showed even a slight interest in playing defense this season. I put part of that on Crean, but most on the kids. Gelon is a kid who was recruited to help as an upper classman if anything. I have no idea why Priller is here. None. Last year's team proved it could go 18-16. People always fall in love with their own teams....how will we ever succeed without James Blackmon? The reality is, this next season is important for one reason and one reason only..... To establish a new culture. James Blackmon is not the kind of kid - and he's proven it over 3 years - who fits the culture of what Miller wants to do. He is anything but a "nasty defender." Yes, he can score; but he does not help his team win. Great scorers frequently play for bad teams. Blackmon makes nobody else better. He looks for his own opportunities first. He has a negative Assist : TO ratio.Yes...a very capable scorer and an efficient offensive player. Doesn't mean he fits. I'd rather have a kid like Durham who has committed now to a coaching staff he understands and has gotten to know, A clean slate may be best for the program. Keeping and playing guys like Blackmon or Johnson may benefit the team next season, but I'm not sure I think it would be good for the program long term. Maybe that's unpopular; but Miller would score a lot of points with me if he started next season without those two guys for the sake of his long term vision. I know some will say he can get Blackmon and Johnson to play defense or do thing differently; but personally, I would rather start with a clean slate.

I agree with you, but considering the last 9 years, this is a rhetorical question. =) (For what it's worth, I don't think Crean was good at either)

I honestly think you don't get it. No offense, but you don't. You were probably one of those guys 100% behind Mike Davis, too. Until he proved you wrong. And Sampson. And Crean. We're all behind him. We all want to win. But I think there's a formula, and I think Indiana's coaches have deviated from it to their detriment. I honestly think Indiana is a unique and special place with expectations and aspirations which should be far higher than they've been for 17+ seasons. Mike Davis said in his first year that we "should go 3-3 through this 6 game stretch." Is that okay here? He recruited south. He avoided what Indiana had always been. And lost his job quickly once he had "his own players." Help is on the way. Yeah. Sure it is. Sampson did what Sampson did, and they had to bring in an IU guy to clean it up because the program had become unrecognizable. I think Dakich was the perfect temporary hire for that reason alone. Crean, about year 5, focused east, kept looking for that kid everyone missed (while missing on countless local kids), hired a #1 assistant from New Jersey, and avoided many local kids and coaches. (Elston was someone for whom he did a favor. Elston had no experience) He had a team that couldn't guard or get consistent shots offensively. He lost his job. What is it you think? We're just like everyone else, and can do it like....Illinois does it? Like Iowa State? Like Colorado? No. We can't. Not if we have high expectations. I couldn't care less what 15-17 year old kids think. I care what a coach can make them believe. What a coach can sell to that kid....'you're coming to a place where you will be held to the highest of standards, and you'll be expected to win, be an example, go to class, play defense, and make your team better." That's Indiana. Well, it's now Butler. Without enough size to win nationally. If Indiana simply gets back to playing that way, with the talent you can go get around here, Indiana will be in the conversation every year. And yeah. I think a former player can sell the culture better than anyone. We're either Indiana or we're Illinois. Which is it?

I mean "Indiana guy" as someone who understands the culture and can sell it to kids. There are a bunch of former players very qualified to do that. There were NOT very many qualified to be the head coach.

See my post above. I have no interest in educating anyone. I see it a certain way many do not. I get it. Doesn't make me wrong.

It's not nonsense at all. I agree with Archie as an 'Indiana guy,' but I don't understand why you would make that comment (assuming you agree with it) if you think it's nonsense. We sure don't need a .500 coach from the east coast if we don't need a guy who gets the culture and can help sell it. I will never understand how or why people want to get rid of the past. The past built the culture and expectations here. Why just toss that aside for the sake of wanting something different? Cultures are built over time, and the teams/programs that stick with it are highly successful across the board. Look at the top seeds in this year's NCAA tournament. 4 deep, they were pretty familiar. Look at the top college football programs. Even true in the NFL and MLB in some ways. There are teams you always expect to do well because they have a certain way of doing things. Wisconsin figured it out. Butler is developing it in basketball, and they're in better shape than what Crean left Indiana. I love Miller. LOVE him. But I disagree about casting aside those with ties to a very successful culture for no other reason than "it's time to move on." From what? Consistent success? What's wrong with having guys on the bench who understand specific expectations?

You and I see things differently, and I don't feel like I need to explain it again. 100 times is enough. Indiana is a unique place, and there needs to be some tie to the culture. Yes. I know you don't understand or agree with it, but 17 years later....

Max Bielfelt would be terrific. He's the one who tutored Bryant, anyway. We do need someone like Lewis or Cheaney on the bench, though. Bruiser Flint? Yawn.

Apologies....It was CSN Sports.

Flint is official according to ESPN. Eh. Hoping for better on other hires.

Blackmon will never be amazing unless he decides - as you say - to make someone on his team better or play defense even a little bit. He may be an amazing AAU player, but not an amazing BIG player.

If Penn State football can hang on to that tradition with all their football program has been through, Indiana Basketball can. They had them for a while; but realized their roots; and took them off again. I could live without candy stripes and I get that...young kids pay attention to fashion. But you play for the name on the front, right?