Bankshot

I understand this position, a May hire has questions and uncertainties for sure. But, if there were only two choices and they were: another year of Woodson, or a May hire, put me down for the May hire.

I agree. I'm more in "Hail Mary" or "hopium" mode at this point.

If there remains chance of actually making a coaching change, it may be smart to wait and do a 'post-portaling' assessment. If the staffs bombs horrendously enough in the portal it could be a tipping point? (I'm holding out hope that someone in the administration is rational enough that having Woodson stay isn't a real possibility I guess)

Agree.

Thanks. Keep us posted I guess. I'm assuming he's back but also am thinking (unless I missed something) that nothing "official" has been said still by the AD or department yet. And there were previous rumblings of meetings or end of year discussions/evaluations.

Ok, so let's cut to the chase here... Is there anything going on in the background (the right kinds of conversations about moving on from Woodson, Dolson working some magic, end of season assessment, etc.), or is the decision for Woodson to stay actually real and final? Anyone?

I agree with the gist of this, strongly. But would modify it just a little. I'm just not sold yet on Dolson as AD. He was 'present' for, but I'm not sure how 'involved' with or supportive of, the Woodson hire. Some have said he thought the hire was good and supported it. If he did, that raises some questions or doubts for me. Plus, he had NO previous AD experience. None. (Neither did Glass...another problem) Another problem...he was also 'present' for the ridiculous @#$!&$ Woodson raise. Another serious question regarding judgement, IMO. So far, the Cignetti hire looks good, but what about the rest? So, I would say it like this "Hire a REAL AD, someone with proven success and experience, then let them do their job. If you don’t trust them to do their job, (or you aren't going to let them), then they should have never been hired to begin with. Don't interfere and inject nepotism and politics into it." I'm not saying Dolson isn't or won't be a good AD or do the right thing. Just saying I'm not sold on him yet...too many question marks right now.

Attention PhD candidates...need a thesis topic or a gold medal case study in failed leadership, organizational management disasters, or how to ruin a good organization through malignant ineptitude? Take a look at Indiana University's senior leadership failures and fiascos. (sorry its come to this, and I'm a two-time alum, but Good Lord our administration looks fatally and crippingly incompetent, again. Or is it "still"?)

I look at the "can't fire a legend or you'll look bad" very differently I guess. If Duke hired Grant Hill, or North Carolina hired Sam Perkins, etc., then fired them later for genuinely poor performance (or like NC did with Dougherty), I wouldn't say "Oh, look how crazy and unreasonable they are, they fired one of their own". I would be like, "look how serious they are about being good and not tolerating mediocrity, he sucked and they moved on". I think IU is WAY over-sensitive about this. If the coach isn't getting it done, move on!

Rumor has it that it will be Glen Rice...he wants to make Michigan good again. He was in the NBA so even without any college experience he should be really good. : )

Can we get back to firing Woodson please? Seems more important. : )

delusional adjective - Having false or unrealistic beliefs or opinions

- Consistently having a successful strategy/approach to the game, fundamentals, execution, and talent to be nationally competitive. - Being consistently ranked in the top 20 to top 10 in the nation. - Finishing in the top 2 or 3 in the Big Ten. - Winning at least two to three games in the NCAA tournament, annually. Those used to be the minimally acceptable requirements for Indiana basketball. Used to be.

"The key is not the will to win... everybody has that. It is the will to prepare to win that is important." - Bob Knight

Sadly, the only two things I could think of …in bounds plays and last year’s game plan at Purdue.

I agree with this. And I would add: d) has a real plan to address lingering issues from the last year or two (defensive scheme, offensive scheme, blocking out, free throws, etc.) some of that is a function of talent but not all IMO. Better talent still playing poorly isn’t a full enough fix.

Something I would be interested in, but don’t think I’ve heard about or seen discussed anywhere. Is Chris Beard any “different” now? What I mean is, has he done anything to change, or recover, or get or be better? Sometimes people come to a point where they decide they need to change and they make positive changes. If that kind of thing happens, sometimes second chances are deserved. I hadn’t heard anything about it, so I was curious.

Good job Hoosiers! Credit where it’s due. Looked much better tonight on both ends, and essentially without Reneau. I don’t have a good understanding or explanation yet for what happened in the first part of the second half, but we looked much better the rest of the game. Especially in the first half.

It looked like he might’ve hyperextended his elbow. He came down with all this weight on the one arm.

I think sometimes about how "close" IU was with both the Crean and Sampson eras. If Crean could have been more consistent year to year, and better with defense and valuing the ball (and zones). If someone at IU could have better managed the culture during Sampson's time. Either of those periods could have been, in theory, really, really successful. Potentially, championship level success.

I’m definitely not an X and O’s genius, but thought we might do some of that at times this year, and thought it might have been a good strategy with Edey and Purdue. Especially with the 3pt percentages some of those guys are shooting. Bottom line (and it’s a little bit weird) is that our bigger players are shooting threes better than our other players

IMO, the fact that it was more Buckner’s decision or influence than the AD’s is a root cause problem at an upper university level.