(2019) PG Austin Van Zyl

[Brass Cannon]

8 minutes ago, woodenshoemanHoosierfan said:

Did anyone else notice the reason for the negativity has gone from this looks like a desperate move that will lead to creaning to if a lot of high majors are interested(if factual) then Archie has no shot.
This fan base can be so laughable

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

What HMs are interested 

[Hillsdale87]

HM= High Majors? If so the odds arent good here.

Sure there's more competition, but do we really want somebody that high majors aren't interested in? If we're going to get good guys we will have to win recruiting battles against good schools


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brass Cannon]

7 minutes ago, Free Jurkin! said:

Sure there's more competition, but do we really want somebody that high majors aren't interested in? 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This board did two days ago

[Hillsdale87]

5 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

This board did two days ago

I didn't see anybody saying we needed to sign this guy ASAP, just that he was worth looking into. Nobody knew that other schools were pursuing him, but it seemed likely that he was a solid player. Archie's coaching deserved some criticism this year, and missing out on some recruits was not great, but he's not made any desperation offers, and there was no reason to think this one was either. Now that seems to be confirmed. If Archie wants a guy, the track record would say that he's probably pretty good.

[RaceToTheTop]

37 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

This board did two days ago

And you wrote it off as a 'Crean like desperation move' on a wasted scholarship player.  I think it's ironic that you are saying others jumped the gun.

All of this on a guy who doesn't have an offer....

[Brass Cannon]

42 minutes ago, brumdog45 said:

And you wrote it off as a 'Crean like desperation move' on a wasted scholarship player.  I think it's ironic that you are saying others jumped the gun.

All of this on a guy who doesn't have an offer....

Lol yeah silly me thinking a guy with bad numbers, injury history and no HM offers isn’t cut out for the big ten. I forgot like a dozen kids like that every year are successful in the big ten. 

[Hillsdale87]

Lol yeah silly me thinking a guy with bad numbers, injury history and no HM offers isn’t cut out for the big ten. I forgot like a dozen kids like that every year are successful in the big ten. 

Except that there is zero evidence to suggest that Archie would be interested in offering a guy who's no good. Crean earned skepticism around his recruiting offers. Archie has been pretty solid with his targets to this point. Now just needs to land a few more in the next couple years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brass Cannon]

Just now, Free Jurkin! said:

Except that there is zero evidence to suggest that Archie would be interested in offering a guy who's no good. Crean earned skepticism around his recruiting offers. Archie has been pretty solid with his targets to this point. Now just needs to land a few more in the next couple years


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Of the 6 scholarships handed out last year.  1 was a total bust grad transfer and another just transferred out because he wasn’t cut out for it. 

 

[Jeff_Boy_Ardee]

Of the 6 scholarships handed out last year.  1 was a total bust grad transfer and another just transferred out because he wasn’t cut out for it. 
 

It’s already been pointed out that Fitzner was a use it or “lose” it. We had an open scholarship and knew we were getting it back the very next year. No Risk hoping for a reward, didn’t pan out but nothing was lost. You keep trying to spin everything to horrible signings and/or creaning by unfortunately for your argument there isn’t any evidence of that.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Brass Cannon]

1 minute ago, Jeff_Boy_Ardee said:

It’s already been pointed out that Fitzner was a use it or “lose” it. We had an open scholarship and knew we were getting it back the very next year. No Risk hoping for a reward, didn’t pan out but nothing was lost. You keep trying to spin everything to horrible signings and/or creaning by unfortunately for your argument there isn’t any evidence of that.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

He claimed there’s no evidence that Archie would be interested in somebody that was no good. 

I cited two examples. The only way to refute that is to claim those 2 guys were indeed good. Which I’m really interested to see

[woodenshoemanHoosierfan]

What HMs are interested 

Don't know. I was going by the last tweet. It is also why I said "if factual" in parentheses. After that tweet the argument went from your opinion to we won't get him because others are interested. We haven't even offered him yet that I recall.

 

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[Hurryin' Hoosiers]

Maybe this HM - https://www2.hm.com/en_us/index.html

[woodenshoemanHoosierfan]

Maybe this HM - https://www2.hm.com/en_us/index.html

Where is the laugh button. Nice one

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[MikeRoberts]

Except that there is zero evidence to suggest that Archie would be interested in offering a guy who's no good. Crean earned skepticism around his recruiting offers. Archie has been pretty solid with his targets to this point. Now just needs to land a few more in the next couple years

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How do you figure? Several of Archie’s recruits have not proven they can play in the BigTen. A few sat the bench the entire year while we struggled and then transferred and others have just sat and do date have shown no signs of being ready.

 

Point is, you cannot say there is zero evidence to suggest that Archie would be interested in offering a guy that is no good when not only has he offered but accepted commitments, spent a year or two in the system with little to no fruit/proof they can hack it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Hoosierfan2017]

1 hour ago, Brass Cannon said:

He claimed there’s no evidence that Archie would be interested in somebody that was no good. 

I cited two examples. The only way to refute that is to claim those 2 guys were indeed good. Which I’m really interested to see

Are you talking about Forrester? Because while he wasn't ready to consistently play as a freshman, he had some good moments that makes it reasonable to believe he could've played as an upperclassman. That transfer seemed to have more to do with Big Daddy Cornbread than it did Forrester not being any good.

[Hillsdale87]

30 minutes ago, MikeRoberts said:

How do you figure? Several of Archie’s recruits have not proven they can play in the BigTen. A few sat the bench the entire year while we struggled and then transferred and others have just sat and do date have shown no signs of being ready.

 

Point is, you cannot say there is zero evidence to suggest that Archie would be interested in offering a guy that is no good when not only has he offered but accepted commitments, spent a year or two in the system with little to no fruit/proof they can hack it.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Name an offer that Archie has given which seemed like a huge stretch. The fact that Jake didn't pan out doesn't mean he was a stretch offer. Yes, not every guy that comes to Indiana is going to work out as hoped, but if Archie continues to target and attract the types of guys he's gotten so far, he'll be successful overall. No coach is batting 1.000 in recruiting. Jake was always going to be a longer term project, and he didn't want to stick around and wait. That's not a shot at him, he's welcome to do whatever he thinks is best for himself, but I don't think he was much worse than expected his freshman year. I expected him to be the last guy off the bench. But he had offers from 21 schools, including Miami, Seton Hall, Xavier, Virginia Tech, etc., and was a top 150 player. He was an in-demand player.

Similarly, Damezi may have had a bad freshman year, but he was a fringe top-100 guy. Nobody said that he couldn't play coming out of high school. Maybe it's Archie's fault that he didn't develop, maybe it's Damezi's, maybe he just needs more time, but he was being recruited by high major schools too. Judging recruiting success by how guys perform their freshmen years is not a good way to do it. Hopefully Damezi turns it around. Maybe he ends up a complete bust, but plenty of guys have gone from inconsequential freshman years to being valuable players.

[MikeRoberts]

Are you talking about Forrester? Because while he wasn't ready to consistently play as a freshman, he had some good moments that makes it reasonable to believe he could've played as an upperclassman. That transfer seemed to have more to do with Big Daddy Cornbread than it did Forrester not being any good.

You don’t think it had anything to do with the fact that we were SUPER thin on bodies all year and he almost never saw the floor?

He was either not very good at all or Archie was making a colossal mistake by not playing him.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[MikeRoberts]

Name an offer that Archie has given which seemed like a huge stretch. The fact that Jake didn't pan out doesn't mean he was a stretch offer. Yes, not every guy that comes to Indiana is going to work out as hoped, but if Archie continues to target and attract the types of guys he's gotten so far, he'll be successful overall. No coach is batting 1.000 in recruiting. Jake was always going to be a longer term project, and he didn't want to stick around and wait. That's not a shot at him, he's welcome to do whatever he thinks is best for himself, but I don't think he was much worse than expected his freshman year. I expected him to be the last guy off the bench. But he had offers from 21 schools, including Miami, Seton Hall, Xavier, Virginia Tech, etc., and was a top 150 player. He was an in-demand player. Similarly, Damezi may have had a bad freshman year, but he was a fringe top-100 guy. Nobody said that he couldn't play coming out of high school. Maybe it's Archie's fault that he didn't develop, maybe it's Damezi's, maybe he just needs more time, but he was being recruited by high major schools too. Judging recruiting success by how guys perform their freshmen years is not a good way to do it. Hopefully Damezi turns it around. Maybe he ends up a complete bust, but plenty of guys have gone from inconsequential freshman years to being valuable players.

 

You are now changing it to “name a kid that Archie offered that seemed like a stretch”. It’s about the kids ability to perform at Indiana university, not high school rankings and how many other offers a kid had. It’s his job to sort through all of that and determine who can produce at IU. Nothing else matters, that’s why I don’t question any offers whether it’s to a 200+ ranked kid or a McDonald’s all-american. I wait to see what the kid does at IU and some are good and some are not. The ones that are not good we’re not good offers.

 

Archie is not infallible, he has made bad offers.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

 

[Hillsdale87]

You don’t think it had anything to do with the fact that we were SUPER thin on bodies all year and he almost never saw the floor?

He was either not very good at all or Archie was making a colossal mistake by not playing him.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

But not every player is expected to contribute immediately. Forrester definitely wasn't, and he was never expected to, but the potential was and still is there. He needed to add serious weight. A year off will probably be really good for him. The fact that he couldn't contribute as a freshman doesn't make him a mistake. Plenty of guys redshirt as freshmen, and nobody looks down at that. Jake essentially redshirted


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RaceToTheTop]

10 minutes ago, Free Jurkin! said:

Name an offer that Archie has given which seemed like a huge stretch. The fact that Jake didn't pan out doesn't mean he was a stretch offer. Yes, not every guy that comes to Indiana is going to work out as hoped, but if Archie continues to target and attract the types of guys he's gotten so far, he'll be successful overall. No coach is batting 1.000 in recruiting. Jake was always going to be a longer term project, and he didn't want to stick around and wait. That's not a shot at him, he's welcome to do whatever he thinks is best for himself, but I don't think he was much worse than expected his freshman year. I expected him to be the last guy off the bench. But he had offers from 21 schools, including Miami, Seton Hall, Xavier, Virginia Tech, etc., and was a top 150 player. He was an in-demand player.

Similarly, Damezi may have had a bad freshman year, but he was a fringe top-100 guy. Nobody said that he couldn't play coming out of high school. Maybe it's Archie's fault that he didn't develop, maybe it's Damezi's, maybe he just needs more time, but he was being recruited by high major schools too. Judging recruiting success by how guys perform their freshmen years is not a good way to do it. Hopefully Damezi turns it around. Maybe he ends up a complete bust, but plenty of guys have gone from inconsequential freshman years to being valuable players.

Exactly.

Offers for Jake Forrester included:

Seton Hall, Indiana, Virginia Tech, South Carolina, Arizona State, Vanderbilt, Miami (FL), Minnesota, Notre Dame, Pittsburgh, Kansas State, Central Florida, Providence, Penn State, and Temple.  Ranked #147 by 247 compositie.

Offers for Grant Gelon included:

No other D1 offers when he signed.  Ended up ranked #391.

Offers for Tim Priller:

Incarnate Word

Offers for Jeremiah Priller:

Don't think he had any D1 offers.

Saying Forrester 'wasn't good' is a ex post facto point.  Saying Priller, April, and Grant weren't good was an ipso facto statement.  BIG difference.

Should also be mentioned that Miller wanted Forrester to redshirt.  It was Forrester and his dad that balked at it.