(2023) - PF Arrinten Page to USC

[HoosierAloha 30,100]

Can you not absolutely hate puke but acknowledge the results? I would be perfectly happy if puke never won another game. I would be falling all over the place if we were able to replicate their past decade in the next decade. Are people really not capable of separating those two points? 

Are we really back to the "you're not a fan" stage of this process again? It's amazing what some people on here contribute to the university and/or athletic department while being told they should take their stuff to a "rival's" board. That makes perfect sense. Should we fall in line and be happy when we make the tourney this season? Should we clap and excuse the mistakes made by coaches during games and in recruiting?

Lower the expectations so we can "overachieve." "We all want the same thing" but take your opinion to another board because we don't want those perspectives posted here. Are we that fragile and insecure as a fan base and site that we can't recognize the success of others and want the same for our beloved Hoosiers? Amazing! Although, it is pretty much par for how things have been managed. I have yet to see any "doomer and gloomers" (what phrase have we picked for this season?) tell the "sunshine pumpers" (again, need a better term for this iteration) to go find another place to hangout.

[Uspshoosier 51,190]

26 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

Can you not absolutely hate puke but acknowledge the results? I would be perfectly happy if puke never won another game. I would be falling all over the place if we were able to replicate their past decade in the next decade. Are people really not capable of separating those two points? 

Are we really back to the "you're not a fan" stage of this process again? It's amazing what some people on here contribute to the university and/or athletic department while being told they should take their stuff to a "rival's" board. That makes perfect sense. Should we fall in line and be happy when we make the tourney this season? Should we clap and excuse the mistakes made by coaches during games and in recruiting?

Lower the expectations so we can "overachieve." "We all want the same thing" but take your opinion to another board because we don't want those perspectives posted here. Are we that fragile and insecure as a fan base and site that we can't recognize the success of others and want the same for our beloved Hoosiers? Amazing! Although, it is pretty much par for how things have been managed. I have yet to see any "doomer and gloomers" (what phrase have we picked for this season?) tell the "sunshine pumpers" (again, need a better term for this iteration) to go find another place to hangout.

Read it more carefully I never told him to take it to another board I just pointed out it would go over better over there.  Everyone is entitled to post what they want within the rules just dont expect it to go over well on a Indiana message  board when you post how great Kentucky is.     I’ve pointed out plenty of times I acknowledged kentuckys results but think Cal is a piece of garbage.   

[JSHoosier 21,711]

30 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

Can you not absolutely hate puke but acknowledge the results? I would be perfectly happy if puke never won another game. I would be falling all over the place if we were able to replicate their past decade in the next decade. Are people really not capable of separating those two points? 

Are we really back to the "you're not a fan" stage of this process again? It's amazing what some people on here contribute to the university and/or athletic department while being told they should take their stuff to a "rival's" board. That makes perfect sense. Should we fall in line and be happy when we make the tourney this season? Should we clap and excuse the mistakes made by coaches during games and in recruiting?

Lower the expectations so we can "overachieve." "We all want the same thing" but take your opinion to another board because we don't want those perspectives posted here. Are we that fragile and insecure as a fan base and site that we can't recognize the success of others and want the same for our beloved Hoosiers? Amazing! Although, it is pretty much par for how things have been managed. I have yet to see any "doomer and gloomers" (what phrase have we picked for this season?) tell the "sunshine pumpers" (again, need a better term for this iteration) to go find another place to hangout.

I'd dance a friggin jig on live television if it meant UK never scored another point, let alone won a game (I canNOT dance).   I'd still be ecstatic if we had their results under Calipari.

[Hovadipo 59,808]

Screw Kentucky, I wanna be Kansas!

 

*ducks*

[Stuhoo 85,965]

My criticism of some of these posts is that we seem to hold up UK as an example of success when there are far better examples such as Gonzaga, UVA, Wisconsin, Villanova, even Tennessee or Michigan.

I understand the back and forth centered on Kensucky, but their model is nowhere near my hope.

[WayneFleekHoosier 50,005]

Look at Auburn as another example. People hate Pearl. He gets it done. You can win and get players if you want them.  With no winning history.  So that excuse for not landing elite players falls flat  

Arkansas anyone?  
 

Nil opens up the opportunity to get players if you want them.

 

Indiana: Ballin’ on a Budget since 4eva…….

 

[HoosierAloha 30,100]

9 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Read it more carefully I never told him to take it to another board I just pointed out it would go over better over there.  Everyone is entitled to post what they want within the rules just dont expect it to go over well on a Indiana message  board when you post how great Kentucky is.     I’ve pointed out plenty of times I acknowledged kentuckys results but think Cal is a piece of garbage.   

I didn't quote you for that exact reason. The "squad" does an excellent job of "moderating." I don't expect reason and evidence to go over well with some here. That would be asking far too much for some in this group. I don't post to get likes or to be included in the "gang." I enjoy identifying and discussing the trends, watching the few glimpses of great basketball we've seen the past decade, and laughing at the outrageous takes.

There have been a handful of programs that have been at an elite level the past decade. IU should have an easier path to reaching that level but we continue to get passed by program with half our history, fan base, and passion for the round ball. It's actually amazing to watch the ineptness the administration has shown while pumping the "firsts" to the masses while we eat it up.

[HoosierAloha 30,100]

19 minutes ago, JSHoosier said:

I'd dance a friggin jig on live television if it meant UK never scored another point, let alone won a game (I canNOT dance).   I'd still be ecstatic if we had their results under Calipari.

I'd jayboob it up until my back gave out.

[IU Scott 2,375]

13 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Look at Auburn as another example. People hate Pearl. He gets it done. You can win and get players if you want them.  With no winning history.  So that excuse for not landing elite players falls flat  

Arkansas anyone?  
 

Nil opens up the opportunity to get players if you want them.

 

Indiana: Ballin’ on a Budget since 4eva…….

 

Arkansas has a winning history

[WayneFleekHoosier 50,005]

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Arkansas has a winning history

meh.  more than Auburn for sure, less than Indiana.  

My point is winning doesn't necessarily have to come first if you want to get things done and convince those parties what you are working with.  

[Tasmanian Devil 1,847]

41 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

My criticism of some of these posts is that we seem to hold up UK as an example of success when there are far better examples such as Gonzaga, UVA, Wisconsin, Villanova, even Tennessee or Michigan.

I understand the back and forth centered on Kensucky, but their model is nowhere near my hope.

Spot on - especially Nova

[IU Scott 2,375]

18 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

meh.  more than Auburn for sure, less than Indiana.  

My point is winning doesn't necessarily have to come first if you want to get things done and convince those parties what you are working with.  

I agree that you can turn it around but it helps if you have a rich history and tradition.

You under estimate Arkansas

Elite 8 Arkansas 11. IU 11

Final four Arkansas 6, IU 8

Only difference is titles IU 5 Arkansas 1

[Hoosierfan2017 23,542]

1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

My criticism of some of these posts is that we seem to hold up UK as an example of success when there are far better examples such as Gonzaga, UVA, Wisconsin, Villanova, even Tennessee or Michigan.

I understand the back and forth centered on Kensucky, but their model is nowhere near my hope.

I use Kentucky because they’ve had better results than all those teams except probably Villanova. Nova 2 titles to their 1, but UK has more final fours and elite eights. UVA has done very well by their standards but they only have 2 elite eights + 1 sweet 16 since 1995.

I find the Calipari way more obtainable than the Villanova way because I believe it’s easier to find a Calipari-tier coach than it is a Jay Wright-tier coach. I.e., I believe the good coach + elite recruiting combination is more obtainable than the elite coach + good recruiting. Even an average coach like Sean Miller can have success with elite talent. We disagree on how good of a coach Mike Woodson is, but I think he’s good enough that he can win with elite talent. I’m fine with IU doing what it has to do to get that talent, but I understand that others aren’t as comfortable with that.

[Honkyman 1,670]

6 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Even an average coach like Sean Miller can have success with elite talent.

In your opinion is Mike Woodson an average or below average coach? You say "you think he is good enough to win with elite talent" suggesting you believe he is border line average.

[HoosierAloha 30,100]

6 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I use Kentucky because they’ve had better results than all those teams except probably Villanova. Nova 2 titles to their 1, but UK has more final fours and elite eights. UVA has done very well by their standards but they only have 2 elite eights + 1 sweet 16 since 1995.

I find the Calipari way more obtainable than the Villanova way because I believe it’s easier to find a Calipari-tier coach than it is a Jay Wright-tier coach. I.e., I believe the good coach + elite recruiting combination is more obtainable than the elite coach + good recruiting. Even an average coach like Sean Miller can have success with elite talent. We disagree on how good of a coach Mike Woodson is, but I think he’s good enough that he can win with elite talent. I’m fine with IU doing what it has to do to get that talent, but I understand that others aren’t as comfortable with that.

It would be interesting to see what people are comfortable with before/after they know what IU has done throughout the history of the program. I'd imagine there would be almost as much flip flopping on here as Alaska sees up there.

[IU Scott 2,375]

9 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

I use Kentucky because they’ve had better results than all those teams except probably Villanova. Nova 2 titles to their 1, but UK has more final fours and elite eights. UVA has done very well by their standards but they only have 2 elite eights + 1 sweet 16 since 1995.

I find the Calipari way more obtainable than the Villanova way because I believe it’s easier to find a Calipari-tier coach than it is a Jay Wright-tier coach. I.e., I believe the good coach + elite recruiting combination is more obtainable than the elite coach + good recruiting. Even an average coach like Sean Miller can have success with elite talent. We disagree on how good of a coach Mike Woodson is, but I think he’s good enough that he can win with elite talent. I’m fine with IU doing what it has to do to get that talent, but I understand that others aren’t as comfortable with that.

With how Wright's first few years went he would be fired in today's standards.  They were wanting to move on from him after 5-6 years.

[Hoosierfan2017 23,542]

1 hour ago, Honkyman said:

In your opinion is Mike Woodson an average or below average coach? You say "you think he is good enough to win with elite talent" suggesting you believe he is border line average.

It’s hard for me to say at this point. In the NBA he was pretty mediocre. He wasn’t put in the best positions to win in the NBA, but given the way the NBA recycles coaches, the fact he didn’t get another HC job there after the Knicks fired him speaks to his HC abilities at that level.

In college, I’d say he’s at least average. He got IU back to the tournament which was good. I had issues with some of his coaching decisions, though, and the team had many of the same issues it had under Archie. I especially hated his substitution patterns. This year should give us more insight into his college coaching abilities. He has a season under his belt and he has a better team. 

[WayneFleekHoosier 50,005]

Fwiw, Page wouldn't have made me feel that much better about the team in '23.  Would have been the Newton/Cupps equivalent at forward.  Now, as a 2nd year or 3rd year, he'll probably be good too.   Program building piece.  

 

I'll take a ready to go big out of the transfer portal if we can land an elite one.  

The reason this discussion took off in the Page thread isn't because we missed Page, its because we missed every big/player we identified since summer.  Page was the culmination of the misses officially.  

Transfer Portal has been my desire over the recruits we targeted in general anyway but Powers, Page, and Booker all were nice recruits. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

6 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Fwiw, Page wouldn't have made me feel that much better about the team in '23.  Would have been the Newton/Cupps equivalent at forward.  Now, as a 2nd year or 3rd year, he'll probably be good too.   Program building piece.  

 

I'll take a ready to go big out of the transfer portal if we can land an elite one.  

The reason this discussion took off in the Page thread isn't because we missed Page, its because we missed every big/player we identified since summer.  Page was the culmination of the misses officially.  

Transfer Portal has been my desire over the recruits we targeted in general anyway but Powers, Page, and Booker all were nice recruits. 

For me I only see one big miss and that was Page.  We put the time and effort in recruiting him the hardest.  To me Keiser who we got to hold off his commitment was not a big miss because we ncamebin so late. Booket I don't think we were real serious about recruiting him and there were questions about his motor and work ethic. Also have to wonder why the blue bloods didn't really recruit him that hard.

[WayneFleekHoosier 50,005]

10 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

For me I only see one big miss and that was Page.  We put the time and effort in recruiting him the hardest.  To me Keiser who we got to hold off his commitment was not a big miss because we ncamebin so late. Booket I don't think we were real serious about recruiting him and there were questions about his motor and work ethic. Also have to wonder why the blue bloods didn't really recruit him that hard.

I can't tell you on Booker.  He blew up on the AAU circuit.  I know Woodson didn't seem to like him.  He is a finesse big but man he is skilled.  To me its a miss but maybe its a family/personality thing.  IDK.  What about all the imaginary guys we didn't target because we spent a lot of time on guys we missed (Power. Page, Kaiser, DHS, etc----4 deep on several of these guys)?  We landed nobody.  No matter how you want to sugarcoat it, it was a debacle of an effort.  They picked guys to go after, of their and only their choosing, and missed all of them.  People have argued, they didn't really want them bad anyway and wanted Transfer portal instead.  Meh...  I didn't want them too badly, some of them, but the staff spent the Summer on these selected players.