Old Friend

My thoughts are I agree with you 100% on his treatment of Archie, and I don't have any clue what it's about. My guess? Indiana has not yet improved under Archie (I'm putting a lot of that on the players); players have been a mixed bag; and he believes (as I kinda' have also) that an IU guy needs to run this program because of how unique it is. Or, I think he believes - as I do - that a guy like Bruiser Flint has no business on IU's bench. That should be Michael Lewis or someone like AJ Moye. I don't think there are many other programs outside of Kentucky that have two completely different and equally vocal fan bases. IU alums and IU fans. The IU fans, like UK fans give the program a bad name. They're the ones chasing kids at recruiting camps and asking high school kids for autographs. They're the ones with inflated and unreasonable expectations. They're the dipsh*ts at games who make idiotic comments and who make stupid comments on Twitter. And sadly? They're the most vocal. I think it takes being in it to understand that. Archie looks like he got it later this season, but didn't at all a year ago. I know there are SOME alums that act like morons, but by and large...it's "fans." Archie is learning. I can see it. Crean never did and I don't know that Dakich believes Archie is learning....but I "guess" he is angry that IU hasn't done one thing to help itself by ignoring former players; and including Fife and Lewis right now; there have been many who were qualified to at least have a conversation. Dakich uses the word "arrogance" a lot, and I think he's right. Our administration is and has been completely arrogant thinking we don't need an IU guy. This is indeed a unique program and people who have played here or been part of it get that. Others like Crean, Davis, Sampson, and maybe Archie (although I truly believe based on what I have seen and heard; along with the transfers this week tell me he is either starting to get it or completely gets it. We'll see who comes in now. Joey Brunk would be a good one, IMO) do or have not. The last 20 years has proven that theory incorrect at least on the surface, as we've definitely lost the culture and "fans" continue to make excuses. Archie being the admin's guy, Dakich takes it out on him. That's a guess. Could be more to it, and I would LOVE for Archie to go on his show to talk. Would be the highest rated local radio show in history. Long answer, and I'm sorry....but that's what I think.

I was not at all referencing you, pilot. Just a general comment. I know the guy and I know people who know him well. There's an awful lot of "good dude" in him, despite his on air personality;' and believe me....he knows what he's talking about as it relates to IU. Far more than anyone here. I'm still just connected enough to have some working knowledge; and Dan's spot on with other things I've heard.

I do know him, and he's a complex dude; but not nearly so bad as some seem to believe. I think he is spot on...in fact I KNOW he is spot on with his feelings for Indiana University and its administration. I know he can't stand Bob Knight. I know he has gotten a couple of other friends of mine jobs; and I know he goes out of his way to help coaches. Especially young coaches. Think what you want of his radio personality; but much like Knight...if you listen to the meat of what he says and ignore how he says it; he's right more often than not; and his view of Indiana University and the way it treats and has treated "its own" matches mine almost 100% and I know most to be true. Believe this. He would have been a much better hire than Mike Davis. Yeah...I know. Davis' 2nd team went to the final four. Lot more to do with a hot shooting team and on-floor leadership at that time than it did Davis. That team finished the regular season 20-11 and went on a run. Personally, I like the guy despite his flaws, and I know he has them. But when I see people questioning his (or anyone I know) character, I'll defend him; and that's the case here.

A.M.E.N.

Jake was a horrible defender. And a freshman. Fitzner was not terrible defensively; rebounded okay, and could guard without fouling. Forrester could not do that and was frequently out of position. Lots of fans look at points and base their opinion solely on that statistic or maybe one or two more. Forrester averaged almost 11 fouls per 40 minutes. That's a pretty big number. He was also a freshman. Not long ago, it was common to redshirt freshmen because many aren't ready for college basketball. Especially in a physical league like the Big Ten. Now? Expectations of fans, and apparently parents are that players come in, play big minutes, and contribute right away. Some - Zion Williamson - are ready to do that. Most - Anderson, Forrester, Moore (even 2 years removed from high school) are not. If Forrester is a kid who thought he should be playing over a senior....who he did not out play; that's on him. Fitzner was what he was; but he did some things much better than Forrester did.

No one else! Not one kid! Nobody likes IU! Nobody! We might as well cancel the program forever. Take our ball and go home. Except....there are thousands of kids who love every school. There are thousands of kids at every home game who wear candy striped pants and seek every autograph they can get their hands on. That was true....12 years ago? When the recruits of today are being recruited. Every team has 13 scholarships. You seriously don't think we can build a really good team year after year with kids who want to be at Indiana?? USPS said it.....that's ridiculous.

I'm not sure, exactly. I know it's mostly a measure of how scholarship athletes perform academically; and I THINK it matters if the kids who leave are in academic trouble....meaning they were struggling. Lots of schools have kids leave for myriad reasons, so I don't believe it's an issue...but I truly don't know.

All Indiana has left on the block (except an incoming freshman) is Davis. Race is more of a high post guy, I think. I bet Brunk sees that as well.

I'd look for a couple more to exit. It sounded and often looked to me like Archie was learning this season. Learning about the kids on his team; learning about the kids he sort of blindly recruited (see : Anderson); and learning what kind of program he needs. Some don't/didn't fit. Without naming names, I don't think this is close to done / "cleaned up" yet, and I think there are a whole lot of new faces waiting to join the fray next season; many of them with experience elsewhere.

Tom Allen's recruiting classes are the highest ranked in Indiana history. We are hamstrung far more by our division than anything else. His back to back 5-7 seasons have been disappointing, but there have really only been 2-3 losses which have been what I'd call bad ones; two to Purdue, and that's really the problem. The bigger issue? They have an advantage in recruiting because they actually have a chance to play for a Big Ten championship and can sell that to recruits. Indiana really can't. And....Indiana has played with a very mediocre quarterback for 2 seasons. Allen is hardly the only problem. IU football (along with Maryland and Rutgers) has a ceiling and perhaps the most difficult climb in college sports. I don't think it's close. That's on Jim Delany; not Tom Allen or Fred Glass. Allen - when hired by Wilson - took IU's defense to dramatic improvement. He qualified himself. That happened in college. Not high school. Glass fired Crean. When was he reasonably supposed to do that before he did it? Crean always did "just enough,": and his Big Ten titles were spaced out just far enough. Seriously....when should Glass have been reasonably expected to fire Crean? No hindsight saying he should have hired Brad Stevens in 2012. Yep. He should. And so should have every big school in the country.

How does anyone know if he has been vocal with the NCAA about this or not?

1) Fine....keep barking up the wrong tree. Your choice. But the dismissal of Fred Glass will net exactly zero because he is merely the face of the problem. McRobbie would replace him with another puppet with whom you would be equally dis-satisfied. Why don't YOU get that? 2) Not the point.

Can we please....PLEASE turn this thread into what it should be, and that's "Get Rid of McRobbie" thread? Fred Glass reports to Michael McRobbie. All THAT man cares about is making money and staying out of the news for the wrong reasons, and guess what? IU does both. Fred Glass may be a puppet, but firing him does no good because we'd just get another puppet. Until McRobbie is gone, nothing will change. Fred Glass, according to McRobbie is doing his job. Winning would be great (and Glass is an alum and a fan like all of us); but that is NOT the barometer by which Fred Glass will be measured. Same guys complaining about him time and time and time again; and the story is still the same. The answer is still the same. Yes he is a lawyer. But he does know what he's doing. He just isn't "doing" what you want him to do. Or how you want him to do it. But he doesn't report to you. He reports to Michael McRobbie and the BOT. The athlete bill of rights was incredibly stupid. Yes...he thought it was trail-blazing. He was shocked nobody followed suit; and it hamstrings coaches. Archie will never yell at a kid the way Izzo yelled at Henry. That's not allowed at Indiana. But...that decree is more than Glass. It's way higher than that. So fellas...please stop bitching about Glass. Nobody we hire will be able to do any better than he has as long as Michael McRobbie is the president of Indiana University. This "fire Glass" thing is really getting old because doing so would accomplish nothing.

Yep. I'd like a few a bit more talented, but yes.

Here's the problem with rankings. They don't measure anything...not one thing that measures how a kid will fit into a college program or team; how hard he'll work; or how coachable he is. Rankings are based largely on AAU performance and on high school stats. Wanna' know how unreliable rankings are? In one rankings system, Zion Williamson was the #5 ranked player in the 2018 high school class. Romeo Langford was #6. There may be no bigger gap this side of the Grand Canyon than 5 to 6 in that system. Same system? Phinisee was unranked until March of last season and ended #131 or something. Texas Tech has not a single top 100 kid on the team. Not one 2018 top 100 kid will see minutes in this year's final four. But you know who will? Great team mates. Great defenders. Complete players. Champions. Auburn won the SEC tournament. MSU won the Big Ten tournament and regular season championship. Texas Tech won the regular season Big 12 Championship. Virginia won the ACC regular season championship. There are high profile recruits here and there; but the top ranked kids who were playing in last season's McD's all American game? Watching on TV. Rankings are also based on measurables. How high can a kid jump? How well he can shoot. His length. Not one thing measures how a kid will succeed as a college player outside of raw athletic ability; and I'm watching how the college game is played now? With screening and cutting at a premium and shooting even MORE at a premium; and team defense/taking away transition the most likely indicator of success? I just don't see the top rated players succeeding in a game that requires such a "team" concept. I want talent; but give me program kids who know how to play the game of basketball; not just the sport.

We need a different kind of player than him. Indiana needs tough guys. Competitors. Kick your a$$ and tell you about it kids. Shooters with no conscience. Kids who'll guard, take away transition, and attack like hell on the offensive end. We need culture guys. Blackmon is not a culture guy. I'd take 10 kids with the toughness and competitiveness of Carsen Edwards.

The best of the best....what? Players? Team mates? Athletes? Shooters? You cannot win by stockpiling talent unless that's what you do every season. That's not Indiana's culture. The best basketball players are generally the best team mates. Not necessarily the best athletes. If you want the best, most coachable players able to develop, Indiana is well served by staying close to home because there are more than enough kids around here who DO know what Indiana basketball is. Who gives a sh*t how old they are or what they can remember? None of them remember the last time Michigan State won a title, either. (using your words) Above, someone said "get old, stay old." That's the formula for consistency and if you think Indiana can just wave a wand and begin their new "Like Kentucky" culture, you're nuts.

Unless you believe we can get better players / results at Indiana than Wisconsin. Which I do. Even if we didn't? (The discussion I am referring to was when Bo Ryan was there, not now. So let's make sure we get the reference right.) Ryan coached at Wisconsin for 14 full seasons. Here's all he did there : * Never finished lower than 4th in the Big Ten * Won 4 conference titles in 14 seasons * Went to 7 Sweet 16's in 14 seasons * Went to 3 Elite 8's and 2 Final Fours in 14 seasons * Won 73% of his games while coaching at Wisconsin * Really didn't recruit players much further away than Chicago. Staying close to home and going further out for selected kids only has been a formula for success for MSU as well. They currently have one active player outside the states of Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to think most people here would "settle" for that. You can go root for Kentucky if you want to. That's not Indiana's culture, nor is it something Archie would do well; and I have no interest in it BEING Indiana's culture. Being in the conversation and being in position to win are all anyone can ask for. Kentucky won a couple under Pitino....with experienced teams. and has won one under Calipari. Yeah..they're in the conversation every year, which is exactly what I'm saying. Kansas won a bad conference for years and had plenty of success, but they too won just one title. They were "in the conversation" every season which again....is what I want for Indiana. Tell me how that's settling, again? I'm not sure I follow. If your bar is "winning the NCAA Tournament," that's ridiculous. Sorry..it is. Do you believe the best 4 teams made the Final Four this season? It takes so much to win a tournament like this... First, a team has to stay healthy; which as we've seen is no small feat. Then you line up everything else... Wisconsin, Kansas, Kentucky....they were under Ryan/are in the conversation every season. Indiana gets there? I think our fans would be just fine. And they would not think they were "settling."

Believe it or not. I know on the old board and I believe here... I have consistently commented that Indiana does not need to spend $600,000 a year to recruit basketball players (Crean did at the same time Bo Ryan was spending $65,000) because he was going after 5* kids from the east coast. Kids who didn't know who Indiana was, and didn't care. Only wanted a stepping stone to the NBA. Crean has players IN the NBA, so he can get them there; and he's now doing the same thing at Georgia. That can be exciting if the players in question turn out to be special; but that formula (adding single players that don't fit with the rest of the team..see : Noah Vonleh, Romeo Langford, etc) generally doesn't win championships. I got killed for saying Indiana should stay close to home and recruit 3-4 year kids because that's how you win consistently. And that's where I am...I want to win consistently. To be in the conversation for Big Ten titles every season. I have little interest in winning one year and finishing 10th the next, as Crean did. Many said "go get the best players you can, and it doesn't matter where they're from or how long they stay." I backed off a bit on where kids are from, but I still say midwestern kids are coached better in high school. Anyway, yeah. Lots of the "win now!" crowd wants the one year phenom's like Kentucky gets every season. We will never be Duke and I really don't want to be.

And THIS....is why I've been preaching about seniors...experience...4 year guys. Y'all are probably tired of it by now, but I also love to give evidence for why I think like I do, despite the arguments I've been hit with over the years. Exhibit A, your honor : https://sports.yahoo.com/one-for-the-aged-final-four-may-lack-starpower-but-its-bursting-at-the-seams-with-experience-025419225.html

It doesn't contradict anything and all depends on where your bar is. How you define "winning NOW." Win NOW, to me anyway, means win big. Win a championship. My standards as listed should be the baseline for Indiana, not a "win" standard. It's an expectation. "Winning" does not mean finishing 4th in the Big Ten, but doing do consistently does mean Indiana will be in or part of the conversation. Win NOW, to me, means win the Big Ten and go to the Final Four, NOW.

You've agreed with me a couple of times this week. Don't think I haven't noticed. Maybe Hell is freezing over.

He did fill a role. Not always well; but he was far better in the minutes he played - especially defensively - than Moore would have been. There were expectations of him doing more than he did. Nick Z was a guard and played in someone else's system. Much different player. Apples and oranges.

Winning consistently is more important than winning NOW. Indiana needs to be in the top 3-4 in the Big Ten next season; make the NCAA tournament, perhaps win a few games; and then do it again. And again. And again. That's far more important than a "NOW" one year solution.

Right. And he was. So why did everyone expect him to come to Indiana and do more than he did?