Old Friend

When Indiana was good in the mid-late 1980's, people showed up and the place was full.  If Indiana wins consistently and they do something about the Godawful traffic coming down from and getting back to Indianapolis, they can consistently get 50K in there.  

An advantage of marrying into this family.   Nice to see we may have some fans in Baltimore.  Crean's very first comment is...um...interesting.   https://www.facebook.com/IndianaMensBasketball/videos/893589204058993/

Troy has really good instincts, too.  He's not close to as good a ballplayer as Alan Henderson was, but he has the same ability to be at the right place at the right time.  He is around the ball all the time and he anticipates well.   He's very good at getting the ball on a break and playing 94 feet; and he can do that while seeing the floor.  He hits cutters as well as anybody we have, save Yogi.  He needs a ton of work with his fundamentals and especially his footwork and shooting; but he's a solid basketball player in that he absolutely understands how to play the game.   The differentiator there is the "sport" of basketball, which would relate to his athletic ability vs. the game, which relates to his understanding of how to do things below the rim, without the ball, etc.

Why do we keep running the ball sideways?  Why do our coaches keep getting penalties called on them (is that two or three this season)?   Why do we seem to find ways to give the other team points?  (Penalty on Latham in the first half)   Why is Diamont so inept 90% of the time?   Why are both Sudfeld and Howard dressed if they're not going to play?   Why don't they (seemingly - it seems every time he gets beat he has no help) ever help Fant with a safety?  Why was our first half 1st down play calling so completely inept?   We are the Chicago Cubs of the Big Ten.      We're developing depth, but don't have depth yet.  Cameron looks like a much better college QB than Diamont.   There's some hope, but damn....Indiana looks awful, and all it took was taking away two players.  PSU was without their top 2 RB's today, and Ohio State won a national title with a #3 QB who looked terrific.  Difference between a program and a team trying to build one.

And...once again.  It is "a" problem.  It is not his only problem.   He does not have just one problem.  He has many.   His ability to build a "team" and also his ability to recruit so he doesn't have significant peaks and valleys are problems.   So is his coaching ability.

I don't care one bit who agrees with me; but for what it's worth, I was focused on his strategy 5 years ago and got crushed for pointing out his shortcomings.   Nobody agreed with me then...and they didn't agree with me in 2012-2013 when talent covered him, but they sure do now.    You and others see now what I was saying when I watched Verdell Jones stand on offense for 20 seconds every possession and I saw no movement away from the ball, etc.  I get it.  Crean's not a great or even a good coach sometimes.   That said, my point is simply his recruiting of great players covered up his deficiencies as a coach for a couple of seasons.   That's wrong?    Really?   I agreed with the statement in bold you made above; so if I'm wrong....you are also.    The 2013-2014 team was a bad team.  We had one ball handler and no shooters.   We had a decent collection of talent, but a bad team.   Better coaching would have helped, but a better job putting together a team would have, also.   Had he done a better job recruiting, yes, that team could have done better.  Talent covers up for a lot.  I've made that argument several times....that team could have been better on its own, and would have been were Crean a better coach.  No question, and I agree with everything you said (in fact, you could have copy/pasted things I said at the time and since.  Look that up...I couldn't agree more).   But when you recruit kids like Hanner Parea, for example, you get a highly ranked kid who didn't deserve the ranking and had not one skill set that could help your team; you get called a great recruiter, but you've really done nothing but take a team backward.  Had he done a better job recruiting and building rosters that fit his style and understood the game a little better than Parea did (for example), his teams would likely have achieved better results.  I'd love an explanation for why you think that's wrong.

Disagree.  I think his recruiting, had it been better, could have covered up a lot of his deficiencies.   It did in 2012 and 2013.   He recruits with a shotgun and just hopes enough kids say yes.  He has done nothing to build successful teams, nothing to build rosters that can turn over year after year and sustain even respectability by our standards; let alone excellence.  He's not a good coach.  I know.   But...he's also not a good recruiter; and that's a huge problem.

It's not his only problem, but to say it's not a problem isn't accurate in my opinion.   Getting enough kids to say yes so you can put a team on the floor does not make you a good recruiter.  He took Indiana from the bottom of nowhere to the top; and immediately back down to an 8th place season followed by a 7th place season.    I can accept one year as a rebuild when you lose what we lost, but two is inexcusable, especially since we had no size last year, no alternative to handling the ball after Yogi, and we couldn't guard anyone or rebound consistently.   Getting kids to say "yes" doesn't make anyone an effective recruiter; and when Indiana is having to go get kids like Priller and April, I don't understand why anyone would say recruiting isn't a problem for Crean.

I don't think Wisconsin has to change one thing about the way they recruit if they hire a coach who has a system similar to Ryan's or one who focuses on Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Iowa like Ryan does.  Just like I don't think Indiana needed to change the way THEY recruited when they fired Knight.  And yeah, I know they hired the wrong coach, but he also screwed up the recruiting base in the local area.    You're the one that told me my argument is out dated and that doing things like Knight did won't work.  Except Ryan and Izzo both do things exactly like Knight did.   Honestly?  The more I read what you're writing, the more you agree with me.  You just don't know you do.   You seem to think I mean we never need kids from anywhere else; which is why I said you are creating an argument.    Like I said....stop.  Step back, and breathe for a second.  We're not that far apart.

I will never disagree with anyone who says Crean can't get it done.  If I wasn't first on that bandwagon, I had a good seat.   But...when he got here, he said he took the job "because it's Indiana."  Indiana Basketball is unique.  It's not just any other school, and shouldn't be.  People who live in the midwest understand the culture of Indiana Basketball because it's been around them for 100 years.  Same as football at Ohio State or baseball at Mississippi State.  It just is what it is.  Ohio State football, for example, has always prioritized getting the best players from the state of Ohio.  Yes, they go out and get others too; just as Indiana should.  But they don't hire a guy because he knows California and the recruits there, like Indiana hired a guy because he has east coast ties.     Crean made what almost amounted to a conscious decision to spread out and recruit nationally.  Davis did the same thing, and we lost out on a TON of great players close to home because we didn't prioritize them.  That's fact.  Conley and Oden, for example, said they were never recruited very hard by Mike Davis.  Think of that for a second...  Crean has a difficult job in some ways because of the culture of AAU basketball and shoe contracts, etc.  But the reality is, if he drew a circle with its epicenter in Bloomington and went 200 miles in every direction, keeping his focus (which is different than "getting every kid") there, Indiana would be just fine, and I promise could finish at least as well as we have while focusing on kids from the east coast.   Oladipo is a great example of a kid we should try to emulate with ANY recruit, no matter where they're from.

I explained that above, too.  Read.  Learn.  Understand.

Did you even read what I wrote before you posted this?   Step back from the keyboard....just for a minute.   I LOVE how you make arguments about how out-dated I am, then reference how Wisky will do without Bo.   Kind of like how Indiana has done without Knight?   Old, out-dated Knight?  (There is a long story about his demise, too....but my guess is you're not interested)

"Magically win?"   Is that what you're trying to do?  When you tell me I ignore Hollowell, for example, when the reality is I've referenced him specifically dozens of times....nothing magic is going to happen.  What you said was inaccurate.  You can choose whether or not you care; but you were wrong.

As impressive as this rant is, I never said we needed "only" local kids; and my point is there are plenty of great recruits within 200 miles of Bloomington with whom we can build a national champion.  I put my focus on being in position to win titles...winning Big ten championships first.  I didn't move the goalposts.  I gave you MY goalposts because yours are set to a level Indiana may never achieve again for myriad reasons.  Or..we may.   Of course I want NCAA titles; but I think that focus is foolish.  We all want to win titles.  But first, we have to consistently be in position to do that, and we're not close.  I felt the same way about the idiot Colts talking Super Bowl in June.  I want to win consistently.  I want to be a national power, which means I want Indiana to succeed year after year after year.  That will allow chances to win it all; and it'll happen organically.  If any coach focuses on solely that goal, he won't succeed.  You referenced Knight as if he's some basketball anti-Christ; but he had it right long before his time.  He focused on the Big Ten, and he focused on local kids who understood the culture and expectations at Indiana; and if you don't understand the importance of that, we may as well stop this whole debate.  Norman Dale had it right, too.  Focus only on the step in front of you.  If you look past it, you'll fail.  You know that, right?  It's true in business; it's true in sports, and it's true in every aspect of life.   So what if someone figured that out 100 years ago?   Should we stop using candles just because we now have lightbulbs?  Is it all or nothing?  Sustainability is a pretty important item.   We do not need to recruit the east coast in order to succeed.  You can spin it any way you want and use the IUPUI example as if it has any meaning; but the reality of my overall point, which has been the same for 7 years, is Indiana University has done itself a huge dis-service by moving away from a focus on local kids in favor of players from the southeast under Mike Davis and the east coast under Crean.     Tom Izzo focuses locally.  So does Bo Ryan.  So did Brad Stevens.  There are 3 schools which Indiana plays every season or every other season who have all had huge success very recently.  It doesn't have anything to do with Knight.  I just don't think the downfall of this program coincidentally coincided with a shift in geographical recruiting focus.  The overall point was, is, and will remain that despite how much we loved Oladipo and AJ Moye, Indiana can do just fine by NOT spending 10x as much on basketball recruiting as Wisconsin does, and it's embarrassing that we DO given where we are.  It's not like the shift in focus has produced results.   Edit :  Kentucky was simply an example of a team that has a strong basketball culture.  Outside of the midwest, there are two and only two schools that can claim anywhere close to a basketball culture similar to that of Indiana.  Duke and North Carolina.  Maybe Syracuse and an argument can be made for Arizona, although their success is relatively recent, and they recruit very locally in their own area, so I can put them in the same category as Michigan State or Wisconsin.   Kentucky has a grass roots basketball culture, which is what I meant, even if I didn't say it very well.   UCLA had a nice run with a cheating program for 10 years, and Floida's good every now and then; but apart from that?  I can't name others.   East coast kids have a "sport of basketball" mentality.  Everything is with the ball.  Everything off the dribble.  Everything's a highlight.  That's what you get in big cities where kids grow up on the streets because that's their place to grow and develop; and AAU ball is where they generally get their influencial coaching.  How many examples do you need?   You're right.  I know good and well Kentucky recruits nationally, and they stockpile a ton of talent which is why they win.  But even if that's a bad example, look at the 3 or 4 teams who seem to be in the Big Ten conversation each and every year : Wisconsin, Michigan State, Ohio State, Michigan.   Look at their rosters.  The midwest has a very different culture; and it wins consistently.  

You don't understand what I'm saying and have said consistently for years, and the irony of your last sentence is simply funny.     1)  I have frequently used Hollowell as THE example of a local kid who didn't get it.  In fact, I was very vocal (because I'd scouted and coached against him when he was in high school) that he was a bad fit before he ever set foot on campus.  Please get your facts straight.   What you said above is incorrect. 2)  JaQuan Lyle doesn't play for Indiana.  He's not a relevant example. 3)  What on Earth are you trying to say with this?   One has nothing to do with the other :  first you start out saying Yogi isn't a leader, then you say Crean needs local kids who get it.     Reminds me of a Homer Simpson quote : "First, you didn't want me to get the pony.  Now you want me to take it back!  Make up your mind, Marge!"   Huh??   Yogi ISN'T a leader.  And I DO think Crean needs to focus locally and bring kids in here who get it.   What's your point?   Or maybe you haven't noticed the decline of Indiana as a national program and a ton of off-court incidents under Crean's watch from kids who have never shown any regard for where they are?   I don't need to explain it in great detail to appease you or anyone, but what's amazing to me is you stopping short of using the entirety of what I said so you could make a point and then tell me I'm picking and choosing.   Yogi isn't a leader.  He's just not.  I've said so many times.  Yogi has thus far been a decent college point guard.  That's all.  Maybe he has a better season; but that won't make him a leader.     Being local (this is where meaning and the completeness of comments is important) doesn't make anybody a leader and it doesn't mean a kid "gets it."   You can watch Yogi Ferrell play and see him frequently try to do too much.  He's trying to force things with his own skills...which is fine if you can do it while making your team better.  He cannot.  He has not. If you're implying that "local focus" is all encompassing and if we focus locally, our problems will be solved, that's not at all what I'm saying and never what I've said.  Again, don't need to re-hash everything because there's a lot to it.   You've successfully taken snipits of what I said and scattered them to an unrecognizable mish-mash of words to which you've applied your own meaning.   There is a small group of you (and you all "like" each others' posts) who see it your own way; and that's fine; but please stay on topic and on meaning.   When you apply different meaning than me or any other poster and then tell me/us how foolish we look, it's....well, you can figure it out.  

Let's set the bar at "final fours" because the ball can bounce funny ways.  I don't think anyone believes, for example, that UConn was really the best team 2 years ago; or that teams like the 1983 NC State team were truly the best.  In a one-game scenario, lots can happen.   Let's start with the 2000 Michigan State team that did win it.  11 of their players (of 13) were from Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana.  (That's well inside 30 years) 7 kids on the 2008 Kansas team were midwestern kids.   Then, look at the two Butler teams in 2010 and 2011.  Both national runners up; both almost exclusively midwest kids who played basketball in a very fundamentally sound way, devoid of "and one" style players.  Michigan lost the 2013 final to Louisville with the lion's share of its team from the midwest, and 3 kids from Indiana.   The Louisville team that won it had 7 kids from Kentucky, Illinois, Indiana, or Ohio.   The Wisconsin team that lost the title game a year ago had 15 of its 16 total players from the midwest.     Starting simply in 2012 (we can go farther back if you'd like), the final four teams have been :     2012 :  Kentucky, Louisville, Ohio State, Kansas 2013 :  Louisville, Michigan, Wichita State, Syracuse 2014 :  Kentucky, Wisconsin, Florida, UConn 2015 :  Duke, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Michigan State   That's 11 of 16 teams in the last 4 years alone which are absolutely midwestern teams and I promise, without looking all of them up, they have a large percentage of midwestern kids, and I'd say the midwest is pretty well represented among teams that have done very well in high-level college basketball and in the tournament in particular.  Wanna' have the conversation about where kids are from who have won Big Ten championships consistently?  Hint : they ain't from the east coast.   Sorry, Martian...I don't agree with your assessment which seems to indicate you don't think a local recruiting focus is important.   You can't win national titles or get to final fours without being in the top 2 or 3 in your conference consistently.  I'd prefer to start there, and let the chips fall.  Sort of like the Colts yapping about multiple Super Bowls, I'd prefer they just focus on winning their division and take one step at a time.

Getting the right kids is more important than getting great athletes. Getting leaders is even more important.  Vic is and was a leader.  Yogi is not.   I think he believes he is, and I believe he sometimes tries; but you can't force it, and you have to lead by example.  He's just not done that very well...he's been in some trouble and his game is selfish sometimes.  He's the best we've got; but he's nowhere near Oladipo's level.   I've said it for years, with both positive and negative feedback; but culture is so critical; and it's where Tom Crean has failed.  I've probably beat the dead horse of recruiting focus to death; but I still believe a local focus on kids who understand what Indiana basketball is will pay far greater dividends than looking for kids like Oladipo.  Too often we end up with Stanford Robinson or Emmitt Holt.   Kids who couldn't care less where they go to school, and have no regard for the tradition or expectations of Indiana basketball players.  I'd love it if we went outside the area and only got kids like Oladipo.  Nobody would be happier.  But, the reality is, even kids from around here sometimes don't get it (see : Jeremy Hollowell); so the focus from the coaches needs to be laser-fine.     I, for one, don't believe Tom Crean has that in him because I don't think - despite what he said at his opening press conference - he truly understands the fishbowl and expectations that are "Indiana Basketball."  I have not one time heard him talk about prioritizing winning the Big Ten; and all of a sudden "making the NCAA tournament" is somehow viewed as a high accomplishment.  Good grief, even when people were b*tching that the game had passed Bob Knight by, he still made the NCAA every year.   This program has lowered the bar in many ways, and I really thought Crean was hired to re-raise it.   Get kids who understand where they are and can play under those expectations; focus on winning the Big Ten, and everything else will take care of itself.  The formula's been there for 45 years.  Mike Davis ignored it; Crean's not embracing it....and here we are.  

I should probably look those details up, huh?   You're right, though.   We play Iowa tough most of the time.

He's right.   We're better than Rutgers, Purdue, Maryland, and Penn State.  And we could steal another one.  Wisconsin didn't play well today, for example.

We had our chances, but that should propel the program a little.  We looked like a football team for all but 4 plays.   We don't over-pursue a couple of plays, and they don't break long runs, we beat #1 today.  It was that close.

Painfully so.   We have a bit of a depth problem.  Redding looks terrible and can't fall forward.  Diamont looks like a little kid.   And why in the holy h*ll do we keep running sideways to the short side of the field???   Mind numbing.

I don't know that the significance of 4-0 can be over stated.  I happen to know some high school kids in the Indy area because my sons are approaching that age, and players are noticing.  Players see the offense scoring points, the defense flying around, and the team playing, well, like a football team.   We're not going to the Rose Bowl or anything; and we may never.  But 6-8 wins is likely this season.  Heck, as akhosrof said above, we have Rutgers, Purdue, Penn State, and Maryland left on the schedule.   We can probably play with Iowa at home...as long as we're sound.  I don't think winning 3 of those is out of the question at all.  Ohio State is obviously the cream of the crop; but even they can have a letdown.  See Northern Illinois.  Indiana is right where it needs to be, and we've got kids who know how to win, now.  They should set a goal to win 8 and see what happens.

Not a bad comparison.  I see a little quicker and perhaps a better ball handling version of Blackmon.  Not sure he's quite the shooter Blackmon is (especially when Blackmon gets hot), but Crawford is a good call, too.   I like his vision....hope he can get the release on that shot up just a little higher.

The bigger picture though, says Indiana was without Scales, Dutra, Green, and Latham.  Those two guys up front would have made that game completely different.  Indiana just allowed 22 points to FIU.  They have allowed (if I heard this stat right) 22 points or less just 5 times since 2010.  Our defensive line is very good, as is our offensive line.   Among the top 5 in the Big Ten.   We lose some key players there, it changes things.   And it changed the game - especially against their running game - in the SIU game.  That just showed the lack of depth and slim margin for error.  When healthy, Indiana is a decent football team.  Like last year however, one key injury or playing without a key kid or two just kills them.

I know.  Sorry.