Old Friend

I'd support it for sure more than some other names I see all the time.

Had they? And if Mbako would even TRY to? And Carlyle could do.....anything positive? IU would be 22-5 instead of 16-11. Woodson finally benched kids who weren't playing hard and figured out who he can't play together. That second half was spectacular and I'm happy for all involved. I promise Leal and Galloway were very vocal at halftime. Last shot at these dudes....etc. It worked.

IU 79 PSU 67

Yeah, but you dropped some other names, too. I've made my comments about Buzz. Not one bit interested. He and platitudes are good friends. Calhoun is on same level as McCollum and Schertz to me and 3rd on that list Byington is only okay. Same w DeVries and Murray. Just "guys." Gates? You're more interested in a guy with an overall .570 winning % and who in year 2 at Missouri had a winless conference season over a guy who's won 81% of his games overall and won 24 games this season? Pitino, Jr. - over who? He's not even been "good." His record is very mediocre and we beat him regularly with very average teams. I like Brownell, too. Collins is interesting. I'd love to see what he can do with more and better resources. I don't see any of these guys as more sure things at IU than McCollum is. I like Schertz better and I think I'd be happy with Brownell; but Buzz is all Texas and doesn't fit here. His brand of basketball is solely "be more athletic." His offense is 100% ball centric and stands around way too much. Watched them yesterday. TJ Otz.... I'm not sure on him. I think he's okay....but I also think we've seen his ceiling. I'd support him but I question whether or not he can be a 20-year "great" coach. I think Schertz and McCollum offer that chance more than he does. The danger I see is fans judging next season because of the precedent set by the football program. Again, one man's opinion. I like Schertz.... and the only case against McCollum I've seen is "not enough experience yet." But....he wins. Like I said, I'd rather have the next great coach and give him a season or two if his next 20 will be great than watch him succeed elsewhere and have our ceiling be the Sweet 16 once in a while because we missed the timing again and settled for "someone with more experience" even if his record isn't nearly as good.

This is an argument that probably needs to stop. His current Drake team vs the current IU team isn't up for discussion unless you think he can only recruit Valley-level players to Indiana. He's a great basketball coach. He could and would, like ANY coach at Indiana, recruit and land FAR better players. With far better players and better coaching, Indiana beats Drake by 25 on most nights. That the game would be this close (5 points or so I'm reading) is a much worse indictment of Mike Woodson than McCollum. To me, that argument (this season's matchup between Drake and IU) is silly. (I love that word) Also, long term vs short term. Long term? Can anyone make a claim McCollum doesn't have a better than average chance to succeed at Indiana all things considered? The dude has won BIG for his entire career regardless of talent level. We're not going from making canned soup to making microchips for Gen 27 space suits, here. Bigger and more athletic players ain't THAT much different.

Who's your horse, and why? Maybe we should start there. I don't think Cignetti is a terrible example at all. McCollum was a head guy in his early 30's. Cignetti not until he was in his 50's. Your point (or at least the one to which I was responding) was the size of the entity for which the head coach, whoever he is, will be responsible. I don't think, given the environment and current set of rules, McCollum is much less qualified than anyone else and he can flat coach. Who's to say a few of Drake's players (they have 8 non-seniors including 3 of their top 5 scorers) don't come with him? That'd help the connectivity just like James Madison players helped in football. That team already beat Vanderbilt, Miami, and Kansas State, so they can play at the power 5 level. The argument against him in my opinion is he's never recruited at a level this high, nor has he recruited or coached with or against the size. Woodson was used to the size and is still abysmal, so there's no guarantee either way and I understand that. I'm just far more interested in him than I am someone like Buzz Williams or Mick Cronin. But....that's my opinion. I think I'm more interested in Schertz than McCollum.

No program will win consistently doing this.

Here's the thing. The guy is a great basketball coach and has proven it over time by succeeding at the highest level of wherever he was. Your analogy makes it sound like he's a huge gamble and he's just not. Why? Because he won't have to do all of this himself. Good assistant coaches, the support of an athletic department, and the hiring of a GM can and would help him. I'd FAR rather take a shot on a great coach (which he is, that part isn't arguable) and believe we have the next great high level coach rather than settle for a guy with experience who's never won anything. The example isn't Bob Knight. The example is Curt Cignetti. In 2023, James Madison generated $13.4 million in revenue. Same year? Indiana generated $31.4 million with pathetic crowds and a horrible team. SOLELY because of football, Indiana's athletics budget grew from $141 million in 2023 to $173.5 million in 2024. Granted, Cignetti had 5 seasons at James Madison to McCollum's one season at Drake, but McCollum won 4 national titles at D2. That matters a lot. Say we hire a retread like Mick Cronin. In 4 years when McCollum is winning somewhere else, for the THIRD time, I think we'd be saying we f*cked up the timing. Could have had Stevens in 2012....stayed w Crean. Could have had Dusty May last year...stuck with Woodson. Are we willing to play it safe AGAIN and miss out on a guy who has proven he wins? The business enterprise isn't just the head coach's responsibility and I promise McCollum could handle it FAR better than Woodson has, and he's a far better coach. I have zero interest in a more mediocre coach because whoever that is has more experience. The current environment is still < 2 years old. NOBODY has THAT much more experience and Scott Dolson has a history of setting coaches up for success. I don't always mean to be your counterpoint but I love the idea of getting "the next big thing" while he's coaching at Indiana far more than I want to hire a retread who isn't as good and wishing we'd hit the timing right for a change. In 1992, Ross Perot compared Bill Clinton the same way, saying it's like asking a McDonald's franchisee (governor of Arkansas) to become the CEO of Wal Mart. I don't care one bit for Bill Clinton personally, but he wasn't a bad president. McCollum has a GREAT chance to succeed at IU and I think he has a FAR better chance to succeed here long term than guys like Buzz Williams, Cronin, etc. Same with Schertz.

77-71 Good guys

I stand corrected. I thought he only won the A-10 once

He's shown - twice - he can build a program. I don't have ANY interest in a one season wonder. Especially someone who had that success with someone else's players. We've traveled that miserable path. All due respect to Mike Davis.

This is fun for me. Bear with me....I'm just talkin'. Looking at this list upsets me because IU was a year late getting rid of Woodson for what i think were the wrong reasons. Dusty took another job. IU was late dumping Mike Davis and wouldn't hire Pitino when he would have crawled here. IU was late dumping Crean and missed on Brad Stevens. To me, it's time to get serious. I understand why you listed every guy you did, and I don't think ANY of them are home runs except one....see bottom. All others "just guys" to me. Otzelberger and McCasland are the only two I wouldn't have to really work to love because : I think Buzz Williams is full of sh*t. A gas bag who uses catch phrases and platitudes like Tom Crean. Self important and would be hard to embrace for the fan base. To me? No thanks. Mick Cronin is volatile. Hasn't won enough to be the jackass he is. He wins in the regular season. A whole lot of early exits from the NCAA Tournament Byington lost to McCollum on a neutral court. In 13 years as a head coach has never won his own conference and just 62% of his games overall. To me? Just a guy. Pitino and Calhoun we discussed above. I wouldn't think either are candidates and I think McCollum is Now...Schertz? He's interesting. I haven't thought about him as much, but he fits to me. He has experience building a program. Granted in D2 but had 2 undefeated seasons in his conference which is REALLY hard, but started at Lincoln with a .500 team, built it and then in his final 11 seasons won 87% (!!!!!) of his games. I don't care WHAT level you're coaching, that's impressive. Did the same thing at Indiana State. First team was 11-20 with someone else's players, and his last? 32-7 and won the Valley. That shows a pattern to me. He has local recruiting ties and relationships and he understands Indiana Basketball. Of your list? I'd take him over anybody on it, I think. Maybe even above McCollum.

I agree the points are moot...probably. But let's say Dusty says no. Let's say IU won't hire Beard. (They AREN'T hiring Pearl for reasons in the same category) Who in your opinion are the worthwhile "less risky" options? I speak ONLY for myself here, but I have no interest in people like Buzz Williams or Mick Cronin. They're just guys and I think we know their ceiling. I've kinda' talked myself into Brad Brownell because he was a high school team mate of Calbert Cheaney's and I think would keep him and perhaps another IU guy. He also understands the program. I don't think Nate Oats is in play and I don't think Grant McCasland's leaving Texas Tech, but I'd love him. I don't see McDermott leaving Creighton and I'm not sure he fits. I'm going down the list, and I don't have to go far to think McCollum might be worth the risk. But again.....that's only my opinion and I know Scott Dolson's list is longer and broader than mine. Hell.....he could hire Steve Alford and I think Indiana would win far bigger than they have with Woodson or Archie. I'm just excited to care again.

Like I said.....i response to your first line; we have been down the "hire a coach who had one great season" road before with both Crean and Archie. One season doesn't do it for me. Sustained success does, and of the 3 coaches, McCollum's the only one who has shown it. Over his entire career he's won 81% of his games and this season, his record of 23-3 is better than Pitino OR Calhoun. I get the "wins v Top 50," but that's a technicality, I think. He beat Miami , Vanderbilt (coached by a guy Curt Cignetti allegedly promoted), and Kansas State; all on neutral courts, so I don't think his lack of experience against "Top 50" teams is all that important. He's also 3-0 in OT games, which says a lot to me. I don't think he's the guy primarily because he has never had to recruit at this level, but of the 3, I'd take him 100 times out of 100 over Pitino and Calhoun. And like you, I'd support him because the guy can coach. New time and new era I understand, but Knight recruiting at Army is similar to me to McCollum recruiting at Drake. And he turned the roster, recruited to what he does well, and is 23-3. All he'd be doing at Indiana is doing the same thing with taller and in some cases more athletic players. Your bullet points are all accurate, but I don't think any of them put him below Pitino or Calhoun. If you have experience and at best one decent season to show for it, does it matter? Good people around a great coach can mask a lot. This conversation is about three coaches....I took a shot comparing him to Pitino and Calhoun. I'm not trying to sell him, and like you, he would have my full support if hired because he is a GREAT basketball coach.

I'll take a shot at this. We've seen what Richard Pitino can do in the Big Ten. (Giving him credit for "200 more D1 wins" seems a lot like Woodson taking a lot of credit for winning his cupcake games against the likes of Army, Jackson State, and a 4 point win against Eastern Michigan) I'm not saying McCollum's the guy, but I AM saying Richard Pitino isn't. He was at Minnesota for 8 seasons and won 36% of his conference games, finishing higher than 7th place just once. That reason alone says a guy with 4 national titles who has won 81% of his games over his career is a better choice than Pitino. D1 experience is valuable, but even at New Mexico, Pitino has never finished above 6th in the Mountain West. The MW isn't that much better than the Valley. MW is projected to get 2 NCAA Tournament teams. Valley will get 1. Of the 31 conferences, both are ranked in the top 10. Talking about "pace" feels like Tom Crean talking about deflections. Calhoun...barely won 50% of his games in the Horizon League. In case everyone isn't familiar? In this league they feature : Ft,. Wayne, Oakland, IU-Indy, Northern KY, and Green Bay whose head coach also hosts a national sports talk show. Calhoun won just 55% of his games in that garbage conference over 7 seasons. 5 year D2 coach with nowhere near the resume McCollum has. We've been down the "one season wonder" trail (which he will be regardless of how USU finishes) with both Crean and Archie and both of those guys did it with far bigger programs and in far better conferences than Utah State. Both he and McCollum are 43. You're factually accurate but I think age is irrelevant given they're technically exactly the same age. Pitino is 42. I guess I don't understand why "McCollum is the oldest" matters. We're talking about days and weeks older. Not years. I'd take McCollum over both of those guys 100 times out of 100.

1) Will do everything it takes to win 2) Prioritizes winning 3) Obsesses over ways to win games 4) Sets public goals about winning and acts on it 5) Recruits to a style that wins 6) Understands than winning (as long as it's done within the very loose rules in place) is all that ultimately matters 7) Recruits kids who are winners Oh, and a few shooters would help. And kids who understand the game rather than just the sport. Basketball players vs athletes who play basketball. Did I mention winning?

Putting Woodson ahead of the program was an awful decision made for the same reason Mike Davis was given an extension. IU has to clean the slate and get serious. They have NOT been serious in a long time.

Great coach. The one thing I'd say is I don't know that Indiana is in a position (with this hire needing to hit and hit big) to give a guy his first D1 job. Especially after doing so with Mike Davis and watching that dumpster fire.

I had a thought today that is an extension for him was going to happen, it's as likely as not to have happened already.

I think I just got there before you did. I'd be interested in seeing how he'd do with a higher level of talent. I'd be fine with him but I'm starting to come around on Brad Brownell. High school team mate of Calbert Cheaney opens some doors for me.

I was thinking about exactly that and this in reality is the first unincumbered and non-influenced by 3rd party hire for IU men's basketball since 1971. I have 100% faith in Scott Dolson, even if it's not a common guy. Louisville hired a guy nobody had heard of and he took them from 4-28 to 19-6. I'm more concerned about the griping by some if we don't get "a name." Bob Knight wasn't "a name," and I don't think, say, Mick Cronin or Bruce Pearl fit here.

Not a bad idea but those don't honor ANYone

IU 77 UCLA 63

I'm in the process of teaching my sons the difference between mixing whiskey and sippin' whiskey. (one of the three is 21, so that makes it okay; and after all, it's a father's duty) For mixing, Makers is a standard. Easy and almost everyone will drink that mixed with anything they like with no complaint. Jack Daniels and Crown Royal also serve that purpose for me even though that's not bourbon, which is MY preference. To sip, my current favorite (and also for an old fashioned) is Angel's Envy Finished Rye. Finished in a rum cask and oh my goodness. It tastes like butterscotch. For those who like a great bottle of bourbon, it's hard to beat one I had with my uncle last week...Elijah Craig 18 year. Hard to find, but stupid good. Great idea for a thread while we all wait on and read stupid rumors about our upcoming men's basketball coaching hire.

Looking at Drake's scores, I see a whole lot of games (including against Miami (FL), Vanderbilt, and a couple of others with points scored in the 80's. I know some are concerned about tempo and pace, but I just don't think that's an issue. I think he'd be terrific here.