General Coach Candidate News

[HoosierFan1994 5,157]

2 hours ago, Willkie71 said:

I agree 100%  Tired of all the hero worshipping and him laughing at us.  Dolson shouldn't be begging and throwing more money at the Masshole. He wants to be an NBA coach and live in Boston, fine.  Let's get someone who wants to be here.  

Agree with you. It is time to move on folks. Why do we want someone who doesn't want to be here? He made that pretty clear last week. I know it's a message board and it's fun to speculate but it is what it is. What if he came here and half-a$$ed the job? 

[IUsafety 2,775]

I’m ready to play dirty.  Tired of losing.  Might as well try to compete on an even playing field.  Crucify me now.

[Golfman25 6,586]

36 minutes ago, Moye > Boozer said:

So I have my reservations about Moser and, yes, given his background Marquette may very well be a better fit. I do think he has figured something out about "program building" --- finding a style of play and recruiting guys that fit that style ------ VERY HIGH basketball IQ guys who can shoot, p@$$, and defend. 

He doesn't run what we think of as a modern NBA offense, but depending on the NBA team, there are similarities. Specifically the way they play through the big man as the "point-center" much like the Nuggets do with Jokic. They pass the ball exceptionally well, cut to the basket like we were all taught, and play exceptional defense.

I listened to one of his former players now assistant coaches on the radio a couple days ago and the way that kid talked about their strategy and game preparation I would've thought he was the head coach. Bottom line, he's got a crew believing and pulling in the same direction. 

I don't think the style of play is what Dolson is looking for, but I do believe we could do much much worse in a hire. 

The most interesting thing to me is the dilemma Moser presents to us as Hoosier Nation. He is seemingly the antithesis of the Oats / Muss style of ball and DEFINITELY the antithesis of KU, Kansas, Duke, etc.

The Moser playing style:

• does not require the top recruits
• is still aesthetically pleasing to watch 
• can win against more athletic competition -- even comp picked by many to win the natty
• AND DOES NOT REQUIRE CHEATING TO BE SUCCESSFUL

Can we have our cake and eat it to if it's already been decided that we want to win by landing the top dogs and providing a style of play that helps shuffle them along to the NBA? I have my doubts. 

I think I've made it pretty clear by my 1,000 posts the past couple days that I really want Oats. 

I would be happy with Muss because the dude wins and does seem to wear pants that fit.

I'd be pretty damn happy with some of the other names still out there. 

Just want to make the point that Moser would be a good hire because it would represent that we want to win the way we used to win ---- with really smart players, playing fundamentally sound ball, hitting open shots, and mostly staying for 4 years. 

Kind of reminds me of the Brad Stevens model actually.

 

The question is could he, or would he, adapt his style to the better players he'd be able to recruit.  They way they smaked U of I was pretty impressive.   

[Unexpectedflash 1,641]

41 minutes ago, Moye > Boozer said:

So I have my reservations about Moser and, yes, given his background Marquette may very well be a better fit. I do think he has figured something out about "program building" --- finding a style of play and recruiting guys that fit that style ------ VERY HIGH basketball IQ guys who can shoot, pass, and defend. 

He doesn't run what we think of as a modern NBA offense, but depending on the NBA team, there are similarities. Specifically the way they play through the big man as the "point-center" much like the Nuggets do with Jokic. They pass the ball exceptionally well, cut to the basket like we were all taught, and play exceptional defense.

I listened to one of his former players now assistant coaches on the radio a couple days ago and the way that kid talked about their strategy and game preparation I would've thought he was the head coach. Bottom line, he's got a crew believing and pulling in the same direction. 

I don't think the style of play is what Dolson is looking for, but I do believe we could do much much worse in a hire. 

The most interesting thing to me is the dilemma Moser presents to us as Hoosier Nation. He is seemingly the antithesis of the Oats / Muss style of ball and DEFINITELY the antithesis of KU, Kansas, Duke, etc.

The Moser playing style:

• does not require the top recruits
• is still aesthetically pleasing to watch 
• can win against more athletic competition -- even comp picked by many to win the natty
• AND DOES NOT REQUIRE CHEATING TO BE SUCCESSFUL

Can we have our cake and eat it to if it's already been decided that we want to win by landing the top dogs and providing a style of play that helps shuffle them along to the NBA? I have my doubts. 

I think I've made it pretty clear by my 1,000 posts the past couple days that I really want Oats. 

I would be happy with Muss because the dude wins and does seem to wear pants that fit.

I'd be pretty damn happy with some of the other names still out there. 

Just want to make the point that Moser would be a good hire because it would represent that we want to win the way we used to win ---- with really smart players, playing fundamentally sound ball, hitting open shots, and mostly staying for 4 years. 

Kind of reminds me of the Brad Stevens model actually.

 

One of my worries with him is that his offense really seems to rely on an extremely skilled big man. It works with Krutwig but I don’t think it’s that easy finding someone that skilled in college every year.

[GreatMcCracken’sGhost 106]

1 minute ago, Golfman25 said:

The question is could he, or would he, adapt his style to the better players he'd be able to recruit.  They way they smaked U of I was pretty impressive.   

Agree with this. I honestly won’t be surprised when Archie finds success at a smaller school. Systems work as long as you’re not trying to cram unique talents into some bland floor plan system. Translating “I can make a system work” into success with major talents is my biggest fear with hiring another mid major type. 

I do love the motion and the scheming in Moser’s design, though.

[ap2345 11,254]

1 hour ago, Gnet550 said:

So the people who have Peegs membership...that guy still holding on to the 27th?

Yes it still hasn’t changed. Granted he only pops in a couple times a day

[hoosierpap 14,300]

11 minutes ago, Moye > Boozer said:

So I have my reservations about Moser and, yes, given his background Marquette may very well be a better fit. I do think he has figured something out about "program building" --- finding a style of play and recruiting guys that fit that style ------ VERY HIGH basketball IQ guys who can shoot, pass, and defend. 

He doesn't run what we think of as a modern NBA offense, but depending on the NBA team, there are similarities. Specifically the way they play through the big man as the "point-center" much like the Nuggets do with Jokic. They pass the ball exceptionally well, cut to the basket like we were all taught, and play exceptional defense.

I listened to one of his former players now assistant coaches on the radio a couple days ago and the way that kid talked about their strategy and game preparation I would've thought he was the head coach. Bottom line, he's got a crew believing and pulling in the same direction. 

I don't think the style of play is what Dolson is looking for, but I do believe we could do much much worse in a hire. 

The most interesting thing to me is the dilemma Moser presents to us as Hoosier Nation. He is seemingly the antithesis of the Oats / Muss style of ball and DEFINITELY the antithesis of KU, Kansas, Duke, etc.

The Moser playing style:

• does not require the top recruits
• is still aesthetically pleasing to watch 
• can win against more athletic competition -- even comp picked by many to win the natty
• AND DOES NOT REQUIRE CHEATING TO BE SUCCESSFUL

Can we have our cake and eat it to if it's already been decided that we want to win by landing the top dogs and providing a style of play that helps shuffle them along to the NBA? I have my doubts. 

I think I've made it pretty clear by my 1,000 posts the past couple days that I really want Oats. 

I would be happy with Muss because the dude wins and does seem to wear pants that fit.

I'd be pretty damn happy with some of the other names still out there. 

Just want to make the point that Moser would be a good hire because it would represent that we want to win the way we used to win ---- with really smart players, playing fundamentally sound ball, hitting open shots, and mostly staying for 4 years. 

Kind of reminds me of the Brad Stevens model actually.

 

A lot of good points here.

With regards to Moser, absolutely a different style of play than the current trend. I also think (and am witnessing) it be successful against more athletic competition. I like his entire swing set a lot, his weave has more options and is more intentional than CTC's 3MW. The Double High set seems to yield one of 3 good options... The goal is to slow the game down on both ends,but obviously more in your control on O/ value offensive possessions. I'll try to prove there is more than one way to skin a cat with some coaches/systems that are desired around this fanbase.

Blind "style of play" resume time...

AdjO: 28  AdjD: 3   AdjT: 11-    Overall (8)---------Team A

AdjO: 18  AdjD: 34  AdjT: 357- Overall (16)-------Team B

AdjO: 35  AdjD: 2    AdjT: 324- Overall (9)----------Team C

AdjO: 6   AdjD: 72   AdjT: 332- Overall (11)--------Team D

AdjO: 49  AdjD: 7   AdjT: 286- Overall (12)----------Team E

AdjO: 37  AdjD: 10 AdjT: 17-  Overall (15)----------Team F

 

Cheat Sheet below:

 

 

 

 

(Ɩᄅ,)  ssnW/sɐsuɐʞɹ∀ (Ⅎ
(0Ɩ,)  suǝʌǝʇS/ɹǝlʇnq (Ǝ
 (Ɩᄅ,)  ʇɥƃᴉɹM /ɐʌoN (p
(Ɩᄅ,) ɹǝsoW/oƃɐɔᴉɥƆ-ɐloʎo˥ (Ɔ
(Ɩᄅ,)  ʇʇǝuuǝq/ɐᴉuᴉƃɹᴉΛ (q
(Ɩᄅ,)  sʇɐO/ɐɯɐqɐl∀ (∀

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Zachetology 282]

18 minutes ago, Unexpectedflash said:

One of my worries with him is that his offense really seems to rely on an extremely skilled big man. It works with Krutwig but I don’t think it’s that easy finding someone that skilled in college every year.

In their final four run, Loyola relied mostly on the guards. 

[Iubravos 327]

4 minutes ago, Zachetology said:

In their final four run, Loyola relied mostly on the guards. 

Pass on Moser. Definitely not what Dolson said he was looking for. I'd take Altman over him. 

[MikeRoberts 7,885]

2 minutes ago, Iubravos said:

Pass on Moser. Definitely not what Dolson said he was looking for. I'd take Altman over him. 

Why? 

[hoosierpap 14,300]

2 minutes ago, Iubravos said:

Pass on Moser. Definitely not what Dolson said he was looking for. I'd take Altman over him. 

What'd Dolson say to the media he was looking for? And what are you looking for? What was your ideal list of candidates we have individual threads for on here?

[Unexpectedflash 1,641]

14 minutes ago, Zachetology said:

In their final four run, Loyola relied mostly on the guards. 

That’s true. Their offense wasn’t great that year though. Only 63 in efficiency compared to 35 right now. I think this team is better than that one. I remember the players from that 2018 team but i don’t remember their play style specifically. 

[Iubravos 327]

12 minutes ago, MikeRoberts said:

Why? 

His record is not very impressive. One run to the final four and 2 wins in the tourney this year. I just feel like there are at least 6-8 coaches I think we can get that are better. He's not a bad coach but I'm going for that home run instead of a seeing eye single. I'm not sure how well he'll be able to recruit top talent. 

[Iubravos 327]

13 minutes ago, hoosierpap said:

What'd Dolson say to the media he was looking for? And what are you looking for? What was your ideal list of candidates we have individual threads for on here?

Oats style is exactly what he said he wanted. I just hope we have the funds for the buyout and salary. He is exactly what we need to bring IU back to being sexy. 

[hoosierpap 14,300]

3 minutes ago, Iubravos said:

Oats style is exactly what he said he wanted. I just hope we have the funds for the buyout and salary. He is exactly what we need to bring IU back to being sexy. 

Gotcha. Forget the money... So you mean up-tempo/"sexy" is what you're looking for? And what was your list?

[TheDarkKnight69 328]

6 minutes ago, Iubravos said:

His record is not very impressive. One run to the final four and 2 wins in the tourney this year. I just feel like there are at least 6-8 coaches I think we can get that are better. He's not a bad coach but I'm going for that home run instead of a seeing eye single. I'm not sure how well he'll be able to recruit top talent. 

If he made it to the final four again you consider his resume impressive?

[Hoosierfan2017 24,501]

7 minutes ago, TheDarkKnight69 said:

If he made it to the final four again you consider his resume impressive?

I wouldn’t. Two final fours in the past four years is great, but those are the only two tournaments he’s made in 17 years as a head coach. I get that making the tournament in a one bid league is a lot different from making it at IU, but he was nowhere close for his first 13 years as a coach. We all differ in how much risk we’re willing to take, but I wouldn’t want to hand the program over to him.

[goonaha 2,974]

What exactly is the point of looking at his pre Saint Louis assistant record? He's clearly a different coach than he was 15 years ago. People learn and develop. He built Loyola (although slowly) from a complete cellar dweller to a legitimate program. 

[Hoosierfan2017 24,501]

22 minutes ago, goonaha said:

What exactly is the point of looking at his pre Saint Louis assistant record? He's clearly a different coach than he was 15 years ago. People learn and develop. He built Loyola (although slowly) from a complete cellar dweller to a legitimate program. 

Don’t really get the point of the pre and post St. Louis distinction, tbh. It’s not like he left and lit it up right away. He left St. Louis and posted six consecutive losing conference seasons at Loyola.
 

But if we want to make that distinction, since leaving St. Louis he’s won 58% of his games and 50% of his conference games. He made two tournaments in ten seasons. That’s not good enough for me. Archie won 69% of his games and 67% of his conference games at Dayton. Crean won 66% of his games and 62% of his conference games at Marquette. Moser has had two great seasons during a 17 year career. I’m not in favor of IU risking the fate of the program on those results. If this hire flops we’re Nebraska football moving forward.

[goonaha 2,974]

3 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Don’t really get the point of the pre and post St. Louis distinction, tbh. It’s not like he left and lit it up right away. He left St. Louis and posted six consecutive losing conference seasons at Loyola.
 

But if we want to make that distinction, since leaving St. Louis he’s won 58% of his games and 50% of his conference games. That’s not good enough for me. Archie won 69% of his games and 67% of his conference games at Dayton. Crean won 66% of his games and 62% of his conference games at Marquette. Moser has had two great seasons during a 17 year career. I’m not in favor of IU risking the fate of the program on those results. If this hire flops we’re Nebraska football moving forward.

Loyola is a far tougher and worse job than Dayton or Marquette, which have both had pretty consistent success over a wide range of coaches, and also dedicate a considerable amount of resources to basketball.

People said the same thing about if Archie fails, we're done, we're Nebraska football, etc. That's just not true. You can always make another hire. It just takes one to turn it around.