AH1971

A troll? For defending the coach at IU? You literally have people in this thread who openly rooted for the team to lose last year. Last thing I need is for some millennial from the east coast talking about IU and winning. You don't have a clue, you weren't around for it. Don't call me a troll.

Now that I think about, probably won't. This is in fact the Do No Fire Mike Woodson thread. I do keep receipts though.

If Mike Woodson didn't deserve a 4th year, none of the current or future HoF coaches I listed prior did either. I rest my case.

How did I contradict myself? I've been on record multiple times saying Woodson deserved a 4th year.

3 years bare minimum barring scandal or something that resembles Kenny Payne’s tenure. And that’s regardless of the college basketball climate. Firing a coach every two years because you don’t like their overnight results is asinine.

EXACTLY. Which is why it’s stupid to declare a coach a failure after 3 years if he doesn’t instantly win and win big (more so talking Woodson here). I just think it’s hypocritical for the Fire Archie/Fire Woodson crowd after 2-3 seasons to sit there and say they would have given all this leeway to these current or future HoF coaches who had similar or worse resumes in the same time frame. But I understand there’s a narrative that needs driven home. But cycling through coaches every 4-5 seasons because they don’t win at a high level overnight is only going to drive this program further and further into obscurity.

Jay Wright had a worse record in year 3 than he did year 1. So did Mike Kryzewski. As did Scott Drew. John Beilein went 15-17 in year 3 at Michigan. You want to know who improved years 1 through 3? Archie Miller. I don't buy for one second that people like you would have given these other coaches the benefit of the doubt. Your arguments clearly don't hold water. Archie Miller had a top 10 class in year 2 and followed that up with another 5* recruit.

Unless he's just absolutely blown away during his visit here next month, he's going to take that UK visit at the end of October before going into decision mode. Oct/Nov commits from top rated recruits prior to signing day is pretty par for the course.

So why didn’t IU give Archie more time given his young age? Most were done with Archie after year 2. I don’t buy for one second that those on this board who wanted Archie gone after 2-3 years would give the same pass to the above mentioned coaches who had similar or worse resumes after their first couple years at their respective programs.

Two missed tourney’s and zero tournament wins through 4 seasons would have had our Charmin-soft posters heads exploding on here.

Maybe you just need some thicker skin.

I’m not sure the internet’s for you.

Such a triggered bunch. Going to be a long and miserable winter for some.

Another person who doesn't know what floor means ^^^ And I'm not sure why you'd care either? You don't even root for the team to win and have stated on multiple occasions that you don't intend on tuning in this season.

I’m good

22 wins is absolute worst case scenario ie the “floor”. Would entail a devastating injury or two, Rice/Carlyle not being anywhere near as good as advertised, and/or team never gelling together. 22 wins and a 6/7 seed would be a major disappointment. There’s 8-10 other teams in the country whose “floor” is 22 wins. That’s how good next years team is going to be. Imagine getting caught up where the absolute worst case scenario is still comfortably making the tournament and still being expected to advance? What is wrong with you people?

Someone clearly doesn't know what floor means ^^^^

Funny that you posted a thread created in February of 2022 BEFORE he lost in the first round (again) to a lower seed (again) in the tournament a month later. The expectation for Hurley entering year 5 was that he better show something in the tournament. Luckily for him he passed with flying colors and hasn't looked back since.

UConn fans were literally calling for his job. He was in put up or shut up mode going into year 5.

That's not at all the comparison USPS was making. He was saying that Wright, Drew, Bennett, etc deserved more time despite have similar or worse resumes through 3 years over Woodson because they had more experience in the college game. Which is an absolute nonsense argument.

The bolded statement is just a flat out lie. Year 3 UConn lost in round 1 as a 7 seed to 10th seeded Maryland and in year 4 UConn lost as a 5 seed to 12th seeded New Mexico State. He had zero tournament wins at UConn prior to winning back to back national titles, in fact he came into year 5 with a very warm seat.

So being an assistant coach at Hofstra, Valpo, and freaking Army trumps being a head coach for a decade at the highest level of basketball!?! lol. Don’t hurt yourself too bad doing those mental gymnastics. Good lord.

-Jay Wright missed the tournament his first 3 years -So did Mike Krzyzewski -Scott Drew didn’t win his first tournament game until year 7 -Tony Bennett missed the tournament 3 out of his first 4 years and didn’t win his first tournament game until year 5 What else you need?

The current best coach in college basketball, Dan Hurley, would have been fired based on this boards criteria for retention well before winning his first title. Through 4 years at UConn, Hurley had: -two missed tournaments -zero tournament wins -both tournament losses to lower seeded teams -highest conference finish of 3rd place Jay Wright wouldn’t have made it here. Nor Scott Drew. Or Tony Bennet. Coach K would have been fired long before he ever saw national success. You need more or do you get my gist?

Agree wholeheartedly, but 5-6 years to gauge a coach is entirely different than 3 years. I’d wager substantially his 4th season is better than any of his previous 3 seasons despite being written off by a large portion of this board. He’s 66 not 96, plenty of time left to leave a big impact on the program even if he’s only here another 3-4 seasons.