Old Friend

I think so also, but he has to want to. I just want someone who can sell and who understands the culture at Indiana. It's been missing too long and I think the administration made a huge mistake distancing the university from Bob Knight. Don't have to like the man, but like any leader, he should be and should have been evaluated and judged by the job he did, and that was undeniable.

Fair enough. If accurate....I get it.

Curious to know which part of that description you believe Calbert does not fill? He is a leader.....and I know that because I knew him in school a little, he is connected having played in the NbA for 15 years and done lots of coaching since, and he's an IU guy. Personally? I can't stand Bruiser Flint. I think he adds next to nothing. Why is Calbert a bad fit given your description? I'm at the Reds v Angel's game, so good 'tween innings conversation.

In my opinion, and this is only my opinion, if Calbert interviewed and won't get it, the person we hire will not be who we need unless it's Michael Lewis or someone like that. THIS fan wants an IU guy in that program playing a prominent role. There are a whole lot of qualified coaches. Doesn't mean they all fit here or anywhere else; and I think this is a unique place.

Exactly why I'm surprised he took the job.

I sort of meant with the background and DNA both Graves and Lickliter have, they're not going to learn much from him from a coaching standpoint. I've known the Lickliter family since I was a freshman in high school in the 1980's, Todd, while maybe not a great leader or communicator, has forgotten more basketball than McCarty knows. Walter McCarty is another coach who speaks in platitudes and cliche's. May be the nicest man on the planet...I'm just not sure I think Todd Lickliter in particular gains much from working under him except maybe he gets to stay in a good conference and in his home state.

I honestly can't believe either of those two guys took jobs to be on Walter McCarty's staff. Have heard him interviewed and speak publicly; and have been less than impressed.

His players have played exactly one season at Indiana. And he learned from that experience with a couple of them already gone. Last season, Indiana played with a freshman who really didn't have his game because of injuries and sights set to the next level (his not playing at all in the NIT was embarrassing); another freshman point guard who physically missed 6 games and probably played less than himself another 10, so Indiana was forced to play with guards incapable (until later) of running a team or guarding at the Big Ten level; an under-sized post player and no depth in the front court. I don't know about anyone else, but I saw effort improve late in the season. I saw an almost unbelievable to me metamorphosis of DeVonte Green. I saw a group of players who didn't fit here (and may have at Dayton) leave the program. I see a very successful focus on in state recruiting. I see the addition of Joey Brunk a HUGE positive. i see Jackson-Davis and Franklin as kids who will contribute immediately and likely stay for at least 3 seasons. (Get old and stay old....I'm all over that philosophy) And I see the departure of the 5* kid with the alternate agenda as addition by subtraction. Very good player and apparently a decent kid; bad fit. It happens. Still had to recruit him. I see Indiana as a program on the rise, and I believe this season will show dramatic improvement in many areas, and I do think we make the NCAA Tournament. I sincerely believe - using eyeball test only - I saw growth last season, I could almost see Archie learning. I do wish he'd hire Michael Lewis away and bring him to Bloomington, though. And in 2 years, bring Taylor Wayer back. That kid is going to be fantastic as a college coach if he wants to be.

I do feel he could do what Hulls did in 4A and wonder why you and others don't? In a much better AAU competitive environment, he's putting up 18-20 every game, plus 5 assists. Friend of mine coaches a team that played after him last week and said he scored 27 against a team with 3 D1 commits on it. He's bigger than he was as a freshman; and I see him as a very comparable player to Brody Boyd. Who was smaller. Just me, but the last thing I want to worry about is what other schools do. He wants to come to Indiana. What's the downside in saying "come on down?" Who cares if other big schools have offered or not? Calbert Cheaney didn't have many offers, either. Lots of stories about kids who did great despite having only an offer or two. It only takes one coach to believe in you. It's not a rush. It's an offer to a kid who can play. If he improves....what? He scores 35 a game. He gets 7 assists, 5 rebounds, and 2 steals a game. He'll get bigger and more physical with age and experience, so defense will come. He shoots almost 40%from behind the 3 point line....which has no bias 1A or 4A. What needs to improve except size and strength, which do and did for all of us as we matured? I think the Steve Nash comparisons are ridiculous, but then....not many if any big schools offered HIM, either. Santa Clara did, and every big school wished they had. I'm not making that comparison, but 35 a night is 35 a night.

I think this is too simplistic. First of all, Hulls averaged 16 PPG his senior year. Brown averaged almost 35. There have been a whole lot of 4A kids (Jeremy Hollowell, anyone?) who have succeeded in high school and done nothing in college; and there are plenty of 1A and 2A kids who have gone on to very successful college careers. You can either play or you can't. You either understand the game or you don't. This kid can play. You don't score 35 points a night against defense if you can't, and the 3 point line is no different for small schools than it is 4A schools. He shoots it like Hulls or even better, and I see a similar role being very attainable for Brown. To me, there's no downside to offering him. We have 2 open scholarships this season, so there's always room on a roster for a gym rat who needs polish. Would he come in and dominate as a freshman? Nope. Probably not. But there's no doubt in my mind Luke Brown will succeed as a basketball player regardless of where he goes. The small school/big school argument holds very little water in my opinion.

?? He had a low start to his shot. That's why I quoted what I did and put it in bold. What do you need clarified?

Yep. At a place like Indiana there is so much to sell and so much that can go right. We build our brand back and keep getting quality recruits who help sell the joint, culture comes back in a hurry. This is where Tom Crean missed the boat in my mind. As many good things as he did recruiting, he didn't build the culture like he could have with some of the players who could and I think would have helped him. But when you - for example, avoid Trevon Blueitt because you say you have Stanford Robinson (that happened), there's a problem. Galloway is at least the 3rd kid I know of who's expressed significant interest in re-building the culture at Indiana.

See : Brian Evans

3) Scoring will be: Jackson-Davis 14 ppg 10 PPG Hunter (if he is fully recovered) 13 ppg 11 PPG, and if he's truly healthy, this number can inflate in a hurry. Green 12.5 ppg 10 PPG Durham 10 PPG (You forgot him) Davis 10 ppg 7 PPG Phinisee 8 ppg 10 PPG Smith 8.5 ppg 7 PPG Franklin 8 PPG Thompson 2 PPG Brunk - 5-8 PPG Wild card and I think he will REALLY help. (Forgot him, too!) Think we'll be very balanced and a better defensive team. I'm going with a little optimism. 22-12, and a dangerous NCAA Tournament team.

Get basketball players. Kids who understand the game and the sport. Get old. Stay old. Recruit from the inside out. Be opportunistic. Guard people. Play with absolute passion and like you know where you are. Get and make good shots. That is indeed the formula at Indiana. I've said it before..I saw growth last season, both in players and in Coach Miller. My hope? People don't expect Galloway to come in and be great as a freshman. We'll have kids who are, but I want LOTS of kids who will be great as juniors and seniors to mix with the impact freshmen, and that's where Galloway fits for me.

Bring 'em on!

Absolutely. I completely get the fascination with 5* players, and if we get one here and there, it's probably a good thing; but I think we saw a year ago that having a 5* recruit on your team doesn't necessarily mean winning, and it can be disruptive if team chemistry is good. I've coached against some really good players who were 3* kids or even lower. Many have gone on to very successful college careers; and most of the rankings are based on athleticism and size, anyway. Indiana - especially under Archie - needs basketball players. If they're highly ranked basketball players, that's great. But give me a kid who understands the game and not just the sport. Give me a kid who understands angles, help positioning, body control, and a mofo who can absolutely shoot it!!

And getting any doesn't guarantee success. The pieces have to fit; and high school ranking or "stars" play zero role in that. I want kids who fit Archie's system and I want a group of them who can play together and keep building that formula year after year after year. I could not care less where a kid is ranked. If he's a top 25 kid, odds are his eyes are on a bigger prize than college, anyway. Get old and stay old. Indiana was its most successful that way, and several good programs are now.

That team had reliable shooters. They were completely out of position, and Syracuse took away our secondary break, too. Crean got man-handled that game.

This. THIS is what just infuriates me about the Tom Crean tenure. I hate this excuse. Tom Crean's Marquette teams were in the same conference as Syracuse for 3 seasons, and it looked like his offense was structured as if he'd never seen it. Butler beat it the year before. You're (the collective "you") telling me Butler was more athletic than Indiana was? Indiana had two of the NBA draft's top 4 players, for crying out loud! Butler showed the formula. You put a shooter at the FT line and make the defense collapse around him, which opens up other things. Crean? He put Zeller there. First possession of the game, he gets the ball at the foul line...WITH an available jump shot. Instead? He drives the ball, gets his shot blocked, and was timid for the next 39 minutes. Game. Over. We needed combinations of Sheehey or Oladipo there; Zeller in the short corners and on the block, Hulls, Oladipo, and Watford on the wings with Yogi running things. But alas, we allowed the defense to stay extended because we didn't have a shooter in the middle of the floor, and both Hulls and Yogi were scoreless. I lost all faith in Tom Crean after that game. I do agree that we need to be in the Sweet 16 on a regular basis. I personally think we need to be in the top 4 of the Big Ten year in and year out. Start with that, and everything else takes care of itself.

I don't think he is in a mental capacity to really feel as he did before. I don't think he's well, and when people get old, they tend to gravitate to their roots, and his roots are near Bloomington. I really don't think it's any more than that.

Very simple for me. The key to sustained success in college basketball unless you're Duke, is "get old and stay old." The 5* kids are great, but unless you can reel them in year after year, you won't win consistently. I want kids who want to be at Indiana and want to STAY at Indiana. Yes, an occasional 5* talent is great, and I have nothing against that. But.....a strategy that relies on getting enough of them every season to sustain success is a fool's errand. Get old and stay old. See : Virginia, Michigan State, Gonzaga, what Wisconsin used to be, etc. That's the formula. We're not Duke or Kentucky and I don't want to be. Our best teams at Indiana have ALL been experienced and full of upper classmen, and that strategy still works.

Sure. It's an opinion, right? Franklin is just as long as Romeo if not longer. He's just as athletic. He's just as strong. The reason I said that came from watching him against Lawrence North. LN had 2-3 D1 kids, and Franklin scored an easy 30 doing exactly what you mentioned Romeo did. Now, it boils down to opportunity and fit within a system. So.....Franklin CAN do those things, but I would agree he probably won't be asked to so the numbers won't be there. And if Hunter's healthy, Franklin won't get enough minutes to put up great numbers. I just believe he's an exceptionally talented scorer with the same general skill set as Romeo

I'm in this camp. We need to make the tournament and we need to compete for a top 3-4 spot in the Big Ten. There is no reason we can't do that. Every team loses scorers and leaders every season. I'll submit both Langford and Morgan had to play a little or a lot out of position a year ago, and both took a lot of shots. Phinisee getting hurt killed momentum and he wasn't right for a month when he got back. Thompson's injury set him and our front court back; and Hunter not being available at all hurt depth and played a role in Langford's mis and over use. So much of the negativity around here seems to come without taking the whole truth into consideration. There are a whole lot of truths from injury to a roster that didn't fit to some dead weight on the bench to a couple of guys being asked to play a role that was either too large or didn't fit.....on and on. Last season, we had significant dead weight on the roster. This year, we do not. Last year, we were small in the front court. This year, we are not. Last season was the first that any Miller recruit played a minute on this team. Not true this year. Last year, we relied on a freshman point guard and when he got hurt, a kid who was maddeningly selfish and kind of dumb until late February. If one stays healthy and the other just continues to progress; Al Durham and Armon Franklin will REALLY help. I believe we will see growth from the ever enigmatic Justin Smith, too. And if Hunter's healthy? I see no reason Indiana can't win 22-24 games next season.

For the first time in several seasons, I'm going to tell you I think you will be pleasantly surprised instead of let down.