General Coach Candidate News

[TheWatShot 15,522]

16 hours ago, HoosierFan1994 said:

Archie is just as bad against Purdue as Harbaugh is against Ohio State. 

 

The difference is that Ohio State is always one of the best teams in the country. Archie loses to Purdue regardless of who they put on the floor. 

[Stuhoo 89,768]

2 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Would still fire him. 

 

If IU made the Sweet 16 this year and we fired Archie?!? lol... we'd have just fired a coach who in successive years went:

1. No tourney,
2. NIT,
3. Tourney if they'd had one, and
4. Sweet 16,

• with no problem kids and lots of great kids. 

Any program that was crazy enough to fire that coach would not attract fleas for future interest in the coaching opening. NO ONE of any proven quality would be interested. You'd be firing him to bring in a Bryce Drew, Pat Chambers, or John Groce level guy.

 

[Southside 1,914]

15 hours ago, HoosierAloha said:

Good for them, I don’t want him anywhere near the program again. He’s a heck of a coach. What he allowed in and around the program is terrible. IU can and should be better than that. That has zero to do with the extra phone calls.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Didn't say I wanted him. Boiling it down, I've pretty much said 3 things. 1) I wish he didn't screw up while here, 2) there are a lot strong opinions based on rumor that ignores fact, and 3) DD was present during it all and really didn't do anything different (and nobody trashes him for it).

[HoosierAloha 30,102]

1 hour ago, Irish YJ said:

Didn't say I wanted him. Boiling it down, I've pretty much said 3 things. 1) I wish he didn't screw up while here, 2) there are a lot strong opinions based on rumor that ignores fact, and 3) DD was present during it all and really didn't do anything different (and nobody trashes him for it).

What strong opinions are based on rumor that ignores fact?  I don't think anyone cares about DD because he wasn't brought up in the thread to be the coach of IU whereas some have pointed to bringing Sampson back.

[8bucks 7,578]

2 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

 

If IU made the Sweet 16 this year and we fired Archie?!? lol... we'd have just fired a coach who in successive years went:

1. No tourney,
2. NIT,
3. Tourney if they'd had one, and
4. Sweet 16,

• with no problem kids and lots of great kids. 

Any program that was crazy enough to fire that coach would not attract fleas for future interest in the coaching opening. NO ONE of any proven quality would be interested. You'd be firing him to bring in a Bryce Drew, Pat Chambers, or John Groce level guy.

 

You and Treesh give voice to an idea that has been brewing with me. If this end of year run was fueled primarily buy guys who would be back it would be even better. We really should be 2-2 at a minimum over the last 4 games heading into the BTT. If we could get that to 3-1 and couple that with our current 3-1 results then that would look like a pretty hot team. 
 

Make a little run in the BTT or the NCAA and play extremely competitive in the other and then next year looks promising.  
 

[Stuhoo 89,768]

1 minute ago, 8bucks said:

You and Treesh give voice to an idea that has been brewing with me. If this end of year run was fueled primarily buy guys who would be back it would be even better. We really should be 2-2 at a minimum over the last 4 games heading into the BTT. If we could get that to 3-1 and couple that with our current 3-1 results then that would look like a pretty hot team. 
 

Make a little run in the BTT or the NCAA and play extremely competitive in the other and then next year looks promising.  
 

If only that’s what happens......

no guarantees there.

 

[Magisterium 482]

4 hours ago, Treesh said:

You're telling me my boy Archie is getting an extension?! ;)

 

Also, I had a vision that we made a run to the Sweet 16 this year.. oh boy that would complicate some things.

actually, at this point I'm about 97% convinced that the IU Administration and BOT are perfectly content with Archie's first 4 years on the job, no matter what happens in the remaining conference games or in the BTT--even if the team doesn't make the NCAA tournament

and I expect any modest improvement next season will result in an extension

set the bar low enough and you'll never be "disappointed"

[lillurk 5,151]

15 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

If only that’s what happens......

no guarantees there.

 

I think the positive scenario “what if” stuff is within reach. However, every time IU has had such a scenario under Archie they’ve failed; that’s the inherent problem.

year 1: if they simply beat the mid-major teams they lost to, maybe also win a B1G tourney game against a bad Rutgers, they might have been at least a bubble team.

year 2: literally win one more game from the absurd stretch of losses or beating an evenly-matched OSU in the B1G tourney and you’re in.

year 3 and 4: any time they’re one win from being ranked, one win from avoiding a letdown, one win from feeling alright about the direction of the program; frustrating underperformance.

So yeah: this is a flawed team. They should be better, though, even with what’s on the roster, injuries, etc. They can salvage this season, and point to a brighter future. But we’ve been in this spot before with Miller.

And that’s to say nothing of next year. I could make a case for them, even assuming Trayce leaves, to be pretty good. But let’s at least meet expectations for a season before we assume we might exceed them.

[Southside 1,914]

2 hours ago, HoosierAloha said:

What strong opinions are based on rumor that ignores fact?  I don't think anyone cares about DD because he wasn't brought up in the thread to be the coach of IU whereas some have pointed to bringing Sampson back.

As far as facts are concerned around the whole drug situation, we have info from Gordon about some guys doing drugs. He also said Sampson tried to stop it. What other facts are out there? If that's it, IMO, opinions on that topic are far to strong as there are very few facts, and what first hand info we have seems to cancel out. I bring DD into the conversation because of the strong opinions that have always existed about Sampson on the topic, yet nobody ever connects DD (who didn't do anything either). I get it that nobody wants DD to be coach, I just find it hypocritical that many point to Sampson but not DD, who would have also been complicit. 

[HoosierAloha 30,102]

45 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

As far as facts are concerned around the whole drug situation, we have info from Gordon about some guys doing drugs. He also said Sampson tried to stop it. What other facts are out there? If that's it, IMO, opinions on that topic are far to strong as there are very few facts, and what first hand info we have seems to cancel out. I bring DD into the conversation because of the strong opinions that have always existed about Sampson on the topic, yet nobody ever connects DD (who didn't do anything either). I get it that nobody wants DD to be coach, I just find it hypocritical that many point to Sampson but not DD, who would have also been complicit. 

I don't ever bring up DD because I don't really care for his takes on the program or take them with a grain of salt.  Everyone blames the coach when things don't go right?  Sampson could have easily stopped it if he wanted it out of the program.  He runs the damn show and decides who stays and goes.  If he boots a couple of kids for drugs (talking things besides weed) then who is upset with him?  If he would have rid the team of bad apples I would have been on board with keeping him or even wanting him back.  The culture that surrounded that team is not what I think of when I think of IU basketball. 

[HoosierAloha 30,102]

From that article..

Gordon said Sampson “tried to stop it,” but the coach “was just so focused on basketball and winning and everything.”

 

[coonhounds 10,558]

Just incase any of you are confused there is literally zero chance Sampson is even a possibility of returning. No way the administration would consider that. I would say him and the general have the exact same chance of being rehired here and that is only because of bobs health otherwise I give him the edge lol

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[Stuhoo 89,768]

6 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

From that article..

Gordon said Sampson “tried to stop it,” but the coach “was just so focused on basketball and winning and everything.”

 

 

Sampson put up the yellow light. Like this:

 

 

[Southside 1,914]

1 hour ago, HoosierAloha said:

I don't ever bring up DD because I don't really care for his takes on the program or take them with a grain of salt.  Everyone blames the coach when things don't go right?  Sampson could have easily stopped it if he wanted it out of the program.  He runs the damn show and decides who stays and goes.  If he boots a couple of kids for drugs (talking things besides weed) then who is upset with him?  If he would have rid the team of bad apples I would have been on board with keeping him or even wanting him back.  The culture that surrounded that team is not what I think of when I think of IU basketball. 

Again, factually speaking, we don't know what he knew. We know from Gordon he knew something was going on, and tried to stop it. That's it as far as I know. Drug testing is done year around by both the NCAA and the school, so one would think it would have turned up something, no? You could go conspiracy and say Sampson hid stuff, but that's not practical as I believe the university does the testing, not the coaches/team. So you have no flagged testing by the NCAA or school, no benching/suspension action by Sampson, none by DD when he took over, etc.. So tell me specifically, and factually, what did Sampson know, or possess, that would give him the ability to show some kids the door? IMO, all this stuff is a bunch of assumptions based on pretty much very little direct facts. 

[HoosierAloha 30,102]

48 minutes ago, Irish YJ said:

Again, factually speaking, we don't know what he knew. We know from Gordon he knew something was going on, and tried to stop it. That's it as far as I know. Drug testing is done year around by both the NCAA and the school, so one would think it would have turned up something, no? You could go conspiracy and say Sampson hid stuff, but that's not practical as I believe the university does the testing, not the coaches/team. So you have no flagged testing by the NCAA or school, no benching/suspension action by Sampson, none by DD when he took over, etc.. So tell me specifically, and factually, what did Sampson know, or possess, that would give him the ability to show some kids the door? IMO, all this stuff is a bunch of assumptions based on pretty much very little direct facts. 

I'm not telling you what to believe or not believe.  You're a grown human that can form their own opinion based on what you know.  I was on campus at the time and a friend I grew up with was an athlete at IU during that same period.  If the coaches didn't know they had their heads collectively buried in the sand. 

It's interesting that you move the first part of Gordon's statement "he knew something was going on, and tried to stop it," to something we know but aren't willing to include that second part of it.  Why is that?

I believe at the time it was up to the school to determine their drug policy.  I'm not sure it was mandated they had to test or how often they were tested.  Further, I believe Syracuse ran into some trouble with implementation of their drug policy, i.e. not following their own rules that finally caught up to them. 

Who was suspended that season? 

How long do certain drugs stay in your system?

Any players leave the team that season?

What players were dismissed after the season and for what reasons?

 

 

[HoosierAloha 30,102]

Did a quick google search on Syracuse and found this.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/acc/2015/03/06/syracuse-college-basketball-ncaa-investigaton/24497089/

Quote

The NCAA does not require colleges to have drug-testing programs, but if one is adopted, the school is obligated to follow its policy. Syracuse reported to the NCAA that from 2001 to early 2009 it at times failed to follow the written terms of the program regarding players who tested positive for marijuana.

Crazy that a team would not follow their own rules!

[Southside 1,914]

44 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

I'm not telling you what to believe or not believe.  You're a grown human that can form their own opinion based on what you know.  I was on campus at the time and a friend I grew up with was an athlete at IU during that same period.  If the coaches didn't know they had their heads collectively buried in the sand. 

It's interesting that you move the first part of Gordon's statement "he knew something was going on, and tried to stop it," to something we know but aren't willing to include that second part of it.  Why is that?

I believe at the time it was up to the school to determine their drug policy.  I'm not sure it was mandated they had to test or how often they were tested.  Further, I believe Syracuse ran into some trouble with implementation of their drug policy, i.e. not following their own rules that finally caught up to them. 

Who was suspended that season? 

How long do certain drugs stay in your system?

Any players leave the team that season?

What players were dismissed after the season and for what reasons?

Not sure what you mean by the bolded. I said both in an earlier post. He tried to stop it, logically assumes he knew something was happening, but does not inherently suggest what he knew, which is one of my points.

I was a student in late 80s and hung with several BB players. Not BFFs or anything, but they were over at parties, little 5, my cousin and previous RA got them in at bars, etc. I can tell you stuff happened, even back then on Knights teams. And some that you think would not be involved, were. Some of the stuff would surprise people, it just never got out. Point is, it happens everywhere. Luckily, the players then didn't get out of hand enough to get in trouble (although the police were more forgiving back then). And nobody squealed either. Different days, but enough happened back then that could have been a cloud had it been known.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 9,310]

8 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

 

If IU made the Sweet 16 this year and we fired Archie?!? lol... we'd have just fired a coach who in successive years went:

1. No tourney,
2. NIT,
3. Tourney if they'd had one, and
4. Sweet 16,

• with no problem kids and lots of great kids. 

Any program that was crazy enough to fire that coach would not attract fleas for future interest in the coaching opening. NO ONE of any proven quality would be interested. You'd be firing him to bring in a Bryce Drew, Pat Chambers, or John Groce level guy.

 

Being satisfied with "ehh good enough" doesn't get you anywhere. It's been seen in the NBA. Sometimes a team just needs a coach to unlock it. Warriors went fired Mark Jackson who had went 23 wins, 47 wins and then 51 wins. They turned to Steve Kerr and went out and won 67 games and an NBA title. And unlocked Steph Curry and Klay Thompson. Dwyane Casey was the Raptors coach for 8 years, won a franchise record 59 games and Coach of the Year, they fired him and hired Nick Nurse(and traded for Kawhi obviously). They won the NBA title in the first season. Milwaukee is a situation more relative to our I'd say. Jason Kidd was a good defense first coach and terrible at offense. Had a young team to mold. But they never gained any traction and he never evolved as a coach. They won 41 games, 33, 42 and then he was fired mid season at 23-22 in 2017-2018 season. What does Milwaukee do? They go hire one of the best offensive minds in the business in Mike Budenholzer and the Bucks win 60 games. It is yet to be seen with the Pacers who are also a good comparison for us as well. Nate McMillan and Archie are about the same. Very good defensive coaches and as much offensive creativity as a chair. Nate was able to get a lot more our of guys than Archie has, especially effort wise but Nate was fired because the Pacers just couldn't get over the hump. 

Now I'm saying we are going to win a title with a different coach, but Archie is still not showing signs of evolving like we need him to. I guess there were some in the Minnesota game as he actually played dudes by how they were playing rather than what his paper said to do. That needs to continue to happen more and more. Faster offense, more 3s etc. If the evolving isn't shown, get rid of him. Because there is another coach out there who can unlock the roster we have. 

[MikeRoberts 7,995]

9 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

 

If IU made the Sweet 16 this year and we fired Archie?!? lol... we'd have just fired a coach who in successive years went:

1. No tourney,
2. NIT,
3. Tourney if they'd had one, and
4. Sweet 16,

• with no problem kids and lots of great kids. 

Any program that was crazy enough to fire that coach would not attract fleas for future interest in the coaching opening. NO ONE of any proven quality would be interested. You'd be firing him to bring in a Bryce Drew, Pat Chambers, or John Groce level guy.

 

That’s one way of looking at it but couldn’t disagree more. One, we won’t make the sweet 16, will be lucky to make the tourney but that was in response to chicken, I get it. More importantly, I don’t give Miller a pass on the first two seasons. He stunk it up and massively under-achieved. When you set the bar as low as he did getting the breaks beaten off him by IPFW and others there is nowhere to go but up

[NashvilleHoosier 3,906]

9 hours ago, MikeRoberts said:

That’s one way of looking at it but couldn’t disagree more. One, we won’t make the sweet 16, will be lucky to make the tourney but that was in response to chicken, I get it. More importantly, I don’t give Miller a pass on the first two seasons. He stunk it up and massively under-achieved. When you set the bar as low as he did getting the breaks beaten off him by IPFW and others there is nowhere to go but up

You’re disagreeing with your reasoning being to remove the entire context of the scenario Stuhoo is presenting. Of course if we don’t make the sweet 16 or even the tourney, Stuhoo doesn’t make this exact case. And I don’t think he’s giving him a pass on the first 2 seasons. He’s making the case that the overall progression of those 4 seasons would not warrant a firing. It would be asinine to fire a coach at that point and expect to get anything but laughs in our face from legitimate candidates. Our best choice would be from scraps on top of a flaming pile of dogs***.