LamarCheeks

I still can't figure out what happened with him. He's an Indiana kid who wanted to play at IU. I never actually saw him play in high school, but had seen playoff games streamed and videos of his play (the videos, naturally, are edited to accentuate the positive). He had a nice shot and, I thought, would be a nice piece off the bench. I'm not sure if I ever saw him as a starter, but I figured he could play 20 minutes a game and maybe average 8-10 points. The main knock seemed to be that he needed to get stronger. My question is this: Did he get too strong? Because now, he's a beast. He was on the air with Fischer during Archie's show one night and said that he tests out as the strongest guy on the team. Did all that weightlifting ruin his shot? In high school, he had some lift on his shots and drifted backward a little after his release. But at IU, he gets about 2 inches off the ground, goes straight up and .. clanks it. Maybe he's got a very fragile ego -- and like a lot of guys on this team, once things start to go wrong, they steamroll? A couple times earlier in the season, he came off the bench and knocked down a couple 3s here and there -- and I hoped he had turned the corner and would be a solid contributor. But now, he couldn't throw the ball into the proverbial ocean. I think it was in the PSU game, he had an open 3 from beyond the top of the key. He totally bricked it. Didn't even hit the rim. It went to the left and was so hard and so long, that I thought it was gonna break the glass. Maybe his talents were overestimated in the first place -- and he's more of a mid-major caliber player? I don't know. His case is very puzzling to me, though.

I heard his comment and I think he just meant that we have two open right now. I don't think he made a Freudian slip or was insinuating anything. He was just saying they're not done with recruiting -- that they might look at adding a grad transfer or a transfer to the class of Leal and Galloway and Geronimo. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if we did have a couple extra slots become available after the season -- because of a couple guys leaving who have eligibility remaining.

I agree with your No. 2 -- get the hire right in the first place. I also would say stop including such cost-prohibitive buyouts in the first place. These coaches are making $2M and $3M and $4M a year in the first place. What's the need for paying these guys a truckload of money if they're not working out? If things are going well and they're winning, there would be no need to fire anybody -- or consider doing so. But as far as lengthy contracts? I think a six- or seven- or eight-year deal is pretty typical for a Power 5 men's basketball or football coach. Holtmann got eight years. Mack got seven. Shaka Smart got seven from Texas. So Archie's seven years is pretty much in line with the industry standard.

I meant that at least Knight did something. He didn't just make idle threats like Archie seems to ... But thank you for the history lesson.

Bruce Pearl is scum. Pure and simple.

South Carolina took UConn to the woodshed tonight -- 70-52. It's their first win over the Genos. Noblesville's Ty Harris led the way with 19 points. I guess since we beat South Carolina by 14 and they beat UConn by 18, we'd be a 32-point favorite over the Huskies. LOL!

Back in 1985, Knight benched the regulars and started four freshmen and Uwe Blab at Illinois. Two starters didn't even make the trip. We got hammered -- scored 12 points in the first half. But the message got sent.

Because I'm a glutton for punishment, I'm watching Archie's show on FB. He keeps saying the same sh-t over and over. ... We need to find out who's in and who's out. If guys aren't buying in, they don't need to be playing. We need everybody on the same page. We need to grow up. If it's six guys, it's six guys. If it's 11 guys, it's 11. But then on Thursday night, we'll see the same old crap -- no effort, no passion, no pride. And he'll play the same 11 guys he has been. I don't get it. If a kid keeps stealing cookies from the cookie jar and you keep telling him not to do it without any repercussions, he'll keep doing it. There have to be consequences. And with this team, there aren't. If he would play six or seven guys and bench the "cancers," I'd respect the hell out of him. But he won't do it.

My guess is that show is pretty scripted -- or monitored. Fischer asks questions that allegedly have been emailed or are from FB, but tough questions like that will be tossed out. And for the audience -- I suspect they have to say what their questions will be before asking and if they're controversial or overly difficult, they won't allow them. The only way a tough, hard-hitting question will be asked is if a person in the audience fudges about what they plan to ask, then when the mic is open, changes their tune. I don't know for sure if that's what happens. But it would be my guess.

I know people will think I'm crazy (many do) and the point I'm about to make is pretty much moot, because I think his time is past, but I have a name that I really wish we would have considered years ago. I'm pretty sure he was available when we hired Crean. Scott Skiles. I recall reading that when he was with the Bulls, a couple NBA coaches said his teams were tough to prepare for because he had some of the best offensive sets in the league. His main problem was that he tends to grate on players and after 4-5 years, the message is lost and any effectiveness goes out the window. But in college, you have a turnover of the roster every 3-4 years anyway, so that wouldn't necessarily be a concern. And at the time, he lived in Bloomington. He still might. My only question would be recruiting. But I would think an Indiana schoolboy legend and former NBA coach should be able to do fine in that regard. And if not, get some assistants to help. However, that was then and this is now. He's 55 and I'm just not sure he wants to coach anymore -- he quit on the Magic after one season four or five years ago and hasn't coached since. He's a little rough around the edges, but that's not always bad. I think he at least would've been worth a look.

Is that the exact timetable? ... What if they determine Dolson is the guy? I'm not saying he should or shouldn't be. But if they do, is there any chance they accelerate the timetable and by the middle or end of next month, say: "Thanks, Fred. But we're good now. You can head on out."

This is the thing that puzzles me. There are guys who are really negative influences on the team -- or so it would seem. And I would think we can guess who they are. But every game, the same guys are either starting or getting 25 or so min. of PT. Maybe it comes down from the higher ups that you can't kick guys off, but it certainly doesn't come down from the higher ups that you have to play them so much. It just seems very strange.

This is what Larry Bird said after the Celtics took an a$$ beating from the Lakers in the 1984 NBA finals: "We don't have the players with the heart sometimes that we need. Today, when you see Magic slappin' high-fives and guys going behind their backs and shooting layups on us all day, it seems like somebody would try to put a stop to it. Until we get our hearts where they belong, we're in trouble." After that, the Celts kicked butt and won the series. I realize that most of the blame for the debacle that has become this season falls on Archie and his staff. And I realize there's only one Larry Bird. But is there NOT ONE PLAYER who has enough pride to step up and light a fire under some a$$es? I just don't see how you can sit back and let Purdue do what it did on Saturday. But since it happened, I guess I answered my own question. No, there isn't anybody who has enough pride -- or sack -- to do so. And that's disappointing. I remember seeing a Chuck Noll documentary on the NFL Network. When he took over the Steelers (who were awful back then), after watching film from the previous season, he told them in a meeting: "There's a reason why you lost so many games last year. You're not any good." I think that sums up this season perfectly. We're just not very good. The FSU and Michigan State games were outliers while the Maryland games, the Arkansas game, the PSU road game, the Rutgers road game and the PU home game are the reality -- we're not good. I think I was kidding myself all along. Our players -- with the exception of TJD and Rob (when healthy) and maybe Armaan (still not sure what we have with Jerome) -- just aren't very good. Or they're not B1G good.

Iowa 77 IU 70

Whew! That was too close for comfort. ... Good road win, though.

I think everybody knows that if we blow this, it'll pretty much be your fault!

From 36-11 to 50-40 to 51-47. Now I'm REALLY worried!

Since the game's not on TV (and I don't have BTN-plus), I check on the stats every now and then. Early, we were up 36-11 and I had no worries. Now, I see it's 50-40. I have worries.

I know the difference between a 2-3 zone, a match-up zone, a 3-2 zone, a box and one and man-to-man defense. But as far as the pack-line defense, I'm not smart enough to know the nuances. (I lived in Minnesota for a while, and a legendary Div. II coach ran the "up the line, on the line" defense. Now, what that is -- I have absolutely no idea). I do know this, however. Tony Bennett runs the pack line -- or some version of it. And when he had good players, it worked. Since I live in Virginia, I see most of their games and before all their good players left for the NBA, they'd win 30-plus games, get a 1 or 2 NCAA seed and despite the first-round debacle in 2018, did win a national title. I've watched his defense limit teams to 35 points, to 40 points, to 45 points. What's the difference between what he does and what Archie's trying to do. It is it simply better execution, or it is a better variance of the pack line?

Not trying to toot my own horn, but I had the idea of "Bob Knight Arena in Assembly Hall" -- or at least I was one of the folks who expressed that idea. I still like that.

I'm probably in the minority, but at the time, I thought Archie was a really good hire. He had (IMO) an impressive pedigree: son of a successful coach, basketball junkie, gym rat, point guard, played ACC ball, a couple stints as a Power 5 assistant, successful run at a really good mid-major. The only thing left was to succeed at a Power 5 school. And outside of a Donovan, Few, Bennett or a Stevens, it seemed as if he was just about the perfect fit. I thought it would work out splendidly. ... And I can almost guarantee you, had we not hired him, Ohio State would have after they "parted ways" with Matta. I just cannot figure where it all went off the rails. Today's performance, which was just shameful, has me as pissed as I've ever been at this program. Maybe even more so than after the Syracuse NCAA loss.

UNC sucks this season, yet they're giving Duke (No. 7) a real tussle in Chapel Hill -- a rivalry game. Makes me even more disappointed in the effort from our boys today.

Randy Wittman is 60 and Isiah Thomas is 58 and I bet they'd make a better backcourt today than any combo we've got. I'm serious.

I'm at a loss ... One of the most embarrassing losses in IU basketball history -- I don't think it's hyperbole to say that ... You have the legendary coach end his blood feud with the program, return to a packed, raucous house -- and you play like that? ... Wow. ... Everybody in that locker room should be totally ashamed of themselves. I say that for our next game, we start Armaan, Race, Damezi, Jerome and Bybee. WTF not? If the end result is gonna be the same, maybe at least those kids will play hard. I just can't believe we performed like that on a day like today. Well, I can believe it, but I don't want to realize that it happened, I guess.