Bankshot

In my opinion, yes, if they're smart they would consider him. To me WHERE he played is secondary. What he learned, the type of ball he was coached to play, who he learned it from, who he coached under...those things are more important. Butler thought he was good enough to hire as an assistant, so did UCLA. Ball State (while not P5) thought he was a good head coaching hire. I think he can be too...maybe even great. Too long ago IU deviated from what brought us so much success, and we've never returned fully to it, IMO. I'm not talking just about former IU guys or former Knight guys. I'm talking about style of play, smart basketball, having a good and successful system and recruiting the right basketball players that fit it. I'm not interested in Michael Lewis because he's 'an IU guy', it's because he's the right kind of guy, and I think he has the potential to be wildly successful.

If/when it is time for a coaching change, if we do not hire Michael Lewis, I believe we will regret it. Perhaps for a long time. Played a full 4 years for Bob Knight, at least three of those as point guard (I believe) - Was a grad assistant under Knight (unless I'm mistaken) at Texas Tech - Was an assistant under Stevens at Butler. I realize he’s in his first head coaching gig, but he’s got the résumé and the chops I think. Been in the college game for several years now with great experience. The potential is there for him to be one of the next great up-and-coming coaches. Just my opinion.

Michael Lewis, Michael Lewis, Michael Lewis, Michael Lewis, Michael Lewis, Michael Lewis. If we don’t hire him next we’ll regret it.

I’m not saying it’s time to get rid of Woodson (yet), but I will say that if our next head coaching hire isn’t Michael Lewis I fear we will long regret it. Question: How did we get so bad at free throws like twenty years ago and then stay so bad for so long?

My opinion...we need a Hornsby/Alford caliber shooter who can play significant minutes from day one. Where will that guy come from?

Yes, this. Important context...this is a first year head coach and staff implementing a new system with new players. It's been terribly frustrating at times, but overall, not bad for a first year effort, IMO.

Agree. We look very good statistically everywhere but 3Pt %. If we shoot just a bit better we win.

My opinion...keep your eyes on the prize. It was fun and enjoyable to see this team wake up in this tournament and play so well, but the BTT is not the prize. I've long viewed the BTT as fool's gold...you expend precious resources against a less important goal. Focus maximum effort now on the NCAAs.

Is there a law against playing Xavier and Rob at the same time? Wasn't that part of our success against Michigan?

Seems like we have transitioned from "lose close" to "win close" within a week.

No sweat. But the main point I was offering is that there may be some pretty good reasons for some to think Michael Lewis could be a better coaching candidate than Dane Fife, and, I think highly of both of them.

I'm definitely not an expert but according to Lewis's bio on the UCLA site, he was a graduate assistant under Knight for two years at Texas Tech so I misread that. It was a grad asst. position not an assistant coach position. He went to Butler as an assistant coach in 2011 and Stevens was there until 2013.

He's probably ready to be a head coach somewhere and I think I may have preferred him over Fife as an assistant to Woodson.

Not directing this at IU Scott, just responding in general... Here are some reasons why some might consider Michael Lewis over Dane Fife: - Played a full 4 years for Bob Knight, at least three of those as point guard (I believe) - Was an assistant under Knight (unless I'm mistaken) at Texas Tech - Was an assistant under Stevens at Butler - Has more cumulative college coaching and recruiting experience than Fife, albeit not as a head coach - May (I say 'may' because I don't know) have contributed significantly to Butler's and UCLA's success So, in my personal opinion, I would tend to give an edge to Lewis over Fife, even without head coaching experience

In terms of increasing mental toughness, fundamentals, and decision-making, at this point I’d be okay with recruiting Galloways and Leals, sprinkling in some athletic talent here and there and see what happens. That’s basically what Knight did I think. I’m not so sure that it isn’t what Wisconsin and Purdue have been doing too.