TOM CREAN FIRED

[BGleas]

I don't think we've had a 5* that didn't deserve to start from day 1? Maybe Yogi, if you argue we should have gone bigger with Sheehey instead? But that's a coin flip. 

 

On the other guys, that doesn't mean that they got those minutes because of a recruiting promise to play them irregardless of performance, effort, etc. I'm sure they were told the opportunity is there to play big minutes as a freshmen, but I can't imagine a coach telling a recruit he'll play no matter what his effort or performance is. 

 

Edit: My comments don't mean I agree with all those guys playing time, it just means I don't think they played necessarily because of a recruiting promise. 

 

of course. Every 5 star player we've had has been a day 1 starter. Have they all deserved it? Maybe/probably.

Hollowell was force fed playing time and was bad nearly all the time. Troy wasn't ready for big minutes early in his career. I'm sure there are other examples. Blackmon recently??

[X-Hoosier]

of course. Every 5 star player we've had has been a day 1 starter. Have they all deserved it? Maybe/probably.

Hollowell was force fed playing time and was bad nearly all the time. Troy wasn't ready for big minutes early in his career. I'm sure there are other examples. Blackmon recently??

Zeller, Yogi, Vonleh, Blackmon and Bryant have been our only 5 star players. Williams and Hollowell were not.

[NRT137]

A coach must promise something to a recruit if he wants the recruit. If a coach makes a promise that the player will start, he is more likely to get that player. What's wrong with that?

[BGleas]

There's nothing wrong with it at all. But at the same time, telling a recruit in the recruiting process he's going to start isn't a lifetime pass to the starting lineup, and I don't think any coach offers it that way. So my point is, I think Crean tells guys they'll start in recruiting, but for example, I don't think that's why James Blackmon was starting in year 2 or why Troy Williams plays in year 3 despite his inconsistencies. 

 

Coaches say a lot of things in recruiting, but for the most part all bets are off once the player steps foot on campus as a student. 

 

A coach must promise something to a recruit if he wants the recruit. If a coach makes a promise that the player will start, he is more likely to get that player. What's wrong with that?

[WayneFleekHoosier]

There's nothing wrong with it at all. But at the same time, telling a recruit in the recruiting process he's going to start isn't a lifetime pass to the starting lineup, and I don't think any coach offers it that way. So my point is, I think Crean tells guys they'll start in recruiting, but for example, I don't think that's why James Blackmon was starting in year 2 or why Troy Williams plays in year 3 despite his inconsistencies.

Coaches say a lot of things in recruiting, but for the most part all bets are off once the player steps foot on campus as a student.

yes.

Holding to your word is big for future recruiting. This may be why we see some of what we are talking about.

In general, our five star players have been excellent and deserved their time. Hovadipo was right on about his assessment of that.

In this context, I wonder about Kansas. His 5 star players don't see much PT as Frosh with some exceptions. Oddly interesting. Yet they keep committing.

[WayneFleekHoosier]

Zeller, Yogi, Vonleh, Blackmon and Bryant have been our only 5 star players. Williams and Hollowell were not.

yep, knew that. They were heavily recruited players though, that may have had promises even though they weren't 5 stars.

Edit- I can see why my post was confusing in that regard. My bad.

[MartintheMopMan]

Hollowell was definitely force fed minutes his 2nd year (that point guard experiment especially...wut?), but thought he played some productive minutes as a freshy especially at home against Michigan. I don't think I'd agree Blackmon played unearned minutes as a freshman though. He was a pretty prolific scorer from the get-go. He was bad on defense, but I don't think he was or is ever going to be good on D. I guess what I'm trying to say is that, for the most part, our big time recruits play pretty well deserved minutes.

tl;dr...I agree for the most part.

That year with Hollowell though (and Troy's Freshman year), I think it's natural they both played too many minutes. I mean, we were bad. Who else was going to play those minutes? It was Hollowell or Troy at PF the whole year because those were our choices. The only players who deserved a lot of minutes were Yogi, Sheehey, and Vonleh, so that leaves a lot of other guys who are going to see the floor who probably shouldn't have after we saw what they could do. They got minutes as an investment in their development, it just didn't work out.

 

JBJ definitely played too many minutes, but was the driving force behind our offense. Who could have predicted if we sat him our offense would barely drop off and our defense would immediately improve? Even his detractors couldn't anticipate the immediate turnaround without him. I'm sure Crean thought, like I did when he was injured, JBJ's offense helps power our offense and keeps the floor spread for everyone else to succeed. It's a risk-benefit choice and we all have the advantage of hindsight.

[BGleas]

Because I think these promises are overblown. Are they made? Probably. But like I said, they're not a lifetime pass to starting or playing. A player has to hold up his end of the bargain for the promise to hold water (ie. working on his game, being a leader, working the classroom, effort, etc.). I don't think it would impact recruiting at all if a coach promised a kid he's start and then he didn't. You'd just explain to future recruits that you told player A he'd have a chance to start, but once he got on campus he didn't put in the required work. Player A didn't hold up his end of the bargain, it's not a free ride, we're here to win, etc. 

 

 

yes.

Holding to your word is big for future recruiting. This may be why we see some of what we are talking about.

In general, our five star players have been excellent and deserved their time. Hovadipo was right on about his assessment of that.

In this context, I wonder about Kansas. His 5 star players don't see much PT as Frosh with some exceptions. Oddly interesting. Yet they keep committing.

[TrueHoosier62]

Bring your ass up to God's country and you are definitely on my boat with me fishing for salmon, halibut, rockfish and whatever else our beer will let us.

Would if I could. Perhaps one day.

[BGleas]

Not to toot my own horn, but I predicted it. I was calling for JBJ to play a "Matt Roth" type role off the bench before he got hurt, I felt removing him would dramatically improve the defense, and wouldn't impact the offense too much. I said the offense would be less explosive, but more consistent, that our ball movement and shot selection would improve and that our turnovers would drop. 

 

 

 

JBJ definitely played too many minutes, but was the driving force behind our offense. Who could have predicted if we sat him our offense would barely drop off and our defense would immediately improve? Even his detractors couldn't anticipate the immediate turnaround without him. I'm sure Crean thought, like I did when he was injured, JBJ's offense helps power our offense and keeps the floor spread for everyone else to succeed. It's a risk-benefit choice and we all have the advantage of hindsight.

[KelleyHoosh]

Pure sarcasm.

My bad, just cursory scrolling through, saw that and jumped on it. That's on me

[KelleyHoosh]

What will be interesting IMO is how Crean manages JBJ's minutes next year after seeing how much better we have been largely without him this season

[NRT137]

What will be interesting IMO is how Crean manages JBJ's minutes next year after seeing how much better we have been largely without him this season

What will be interesting IMO is how we do in the ncaa tournament bc if we don't make it to the elite 8 then he should be fired.

[colonel06]

It would boost my confidence level as well. I know it's easy and certainly trendy to hate (jokingly or otherwise) on Crean but he is slowly showing signs of improvement. Why it has taken so long is beside the point.

Because this is a "do or die" season! for him:)!

[X-Hoosier]

That year with Hollowell though (and Troy's Freshman year), I think it's natural they both played too many minutes. I mean, we were bad. Who else was going to play those minutes? It was Hollowell or Troy at PF the whole year because those were our choices. The only players who deserved a lot of minutes were Yogi, Sheehey, and Vonleh, so that leaves a lot of other guys who are going to see the floor who probably shouldn't have after we saw what they could do. They got minutes as an investment in their development, it just didn't work out.

JBJ definitely played too many minutes, but was the driving force behind our offense. Who could have predicted if we sat him our offense would barely drop off and our defense would immediately improve? Even his detractors couldn't anticipate the immediate turnaround without him. I'm sure Crean thought, like I did when he was injured, JBJ's offense helps power our offense and keeps the floor spread for everyone else to succeed. It's a risk-benefit choice and we all have the advantage of hindsight.

We were in 13-14 because of coaching. Plain and simple. Couldn't adjust a game plan for the team he had.

[Naturalhoosier]

I am sorry man.  The WP doesn't count.  Lol, I should go further.  You just don't see sarcasm from new posters often. 

 

That was to MadAboutIndiana.  I will make sure everyone knows that was my bad. 

 

I removed the warning point from MadaboutHoosier's account placed it on to your account.  Congrats!

[mdn82]

I removed the warning point from MadaboutHoosier's account placed it on to your account.  Congrats!

Ha, only two more?

 

Edit:  17?  I should be banned.

[Alford Bailey]

I don't think we've had a 5* that didn't deserve to start from day 1? Maybe Yogi, if you argue we should have gone bigger with Sheehey instead? But that's a coin flip. 

 

On the other guys, that doesn't mean that they got those minutes because of a recruiting promise to play them irregardless of performance, effort, etc. I'm sure they were told the opportunity is there to play big minutes as a freshmen, but I can't imagine a coach telling a recruit he'll play no matter what his effort or performance is. 

 

Edit: My comments don't mean I agree with all those guys playing time, it just means I don't think they played necessarily because of a recruiting promise. 

The one that really makes me think promises were made was TW.

[HoosierAloha]

Yogi stated he was promised a starting spot as a frosh...

[BtownBanner6]

Kids are promised playing time all the time when being recruited, and they are giving that time. However I'm sure it's always widely known if you don't perform you won't play. Why do you think Skal has steadily lost more and more minutes.
That's purely just my speculation.