Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Chris007 said:

Guys like Dalton begged us to tell him on Zoom how much we would pay him, then went to Tennessee and told them. They came up with more and he went there. As I have said two guards from the portal and one HS guard

I would have told him as much as you want. Just play better than the next guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, str8baller said:

Then we can just assume that Goodman article is nonsense then because I don’t see how he could fail a physical here (what could a coach’s physical even entail?) and pass one for the Butler job. 

Yeah I don't really know anything about that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

I'm more optimistic about IU football right now than I am about IU basketball. That's how low IU basketball has fallen.

Maybe Cig has a brother?   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bowhunter said:

I would have told him as much as you want. Just play better than the next guy.

I’m assuming there’s an allocation. And we wanted Ware and Mbako and Sparks and Walker. So he was probably given a number that prioritized him within that list, and Tennessee was able to beat it. Obviously UT really liked his fit there and we were seemingly trying to replace TJD. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

And that assumption is being made based off the story put out by the people who ran him off.  The people we are all now discussing running off.

I would take Fife over Rosemond and Hunter every day of the week and twice on Sunday.  Those two dudes are supposedly here for recruiting and all the big recruiting wins lately have come from Walsh.  Those guys haven't done **** since Dane was fired.

We basically recruit one high school -- what do we have 4 of their kids.  Pretty much sucks.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

I think that assumption has been proved by Fife still being out of coaching. Not one single head coach in all 350 Division I schools has hired him as an assistant. Pretty telling to me

Or he's been bad mouthed and/or way too selective.  But, yeah, he's going to have to go small and rebuild his career.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Then we can just assume that Goodman article is nonsense then because I don’t see how he could fail a physical here (what could a coach’s physical even entail?) and pass one for the Butler job. 

Possibly.  I could also have been borderline and he just needed to be able to spend some time in a similiar role to show he was able to get around reasonably.  After showing he could do some of that Butler may have been willing to bet on him and his health.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Golfman25 said:

Or he's been bad mouthed and/or way too selective.  But, yeah, he's going to have to go small and rebuild his career.  

If he left MSU in good standing, Izzo would be able to give a good recommendation.  Hopefully he can get back at it if that is what he wants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Then we can just assume that Goodman article is nonsense then because I don’t see how he could fail a physical here (what could a coach’s physical even entail?) and pass one for the Butler job. 

I thought his failed physical was in 2021. He got hired at Butler in 2022. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've thought quite a bit about this over the years and I believe the solution to be both simple (in concept) and difficult (to actually achieve). Here's a list of criteria for a great head coaching hire (my opinion). I think we got a guy like this when we hired Knight. Since then...not so much. I think that the closer a program comes to hiring someone who meets criteria like this, the better they will be. The further you stray from it, the worse you will be. In that sense, the solution is simple...hire someone who comes as close to it as possible.


1. Proven commitment to and execution of a ‘winning basketball philosophy’:
  a. Stresses/requires sound fundamentals
     i. Shooting, passing, blocking out, ball handling, shot selection, etc.
  b. Prioritizes recruiting players with sound fundamentals
  c. Prioritizes both offensive and defensive excellence (being good on both ends)
  d. Prioritizes recruiting players that fit and play within this system
  e. Stresses/requires minimizing mistakes, taking good shots, valuing each possession, playing hard, playing smart, etc.
2. Demonstrated ability to recruit players and build a balanced and effective roster
3. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make as-needed adjustments to talent/roster
4. Demonstrated ability to implement the system while keeping it attractive to modern players
5. Demonstrated ‘game management’ abilities: in-game coaching adjustments, timeouts, substitutions, foul management, matchups, etc.
6. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make adjustments to talent/roster strengths/abilities
7. Proven ability to develop players and measurable improvement of players (players get better)
8. Demonstrated ability to maximize player skills and production (gets the most out of the team)
9. Demonstrated ability to translate winning philosophy to on court results (the system is effective and produces wins)
  a. Win/Loss records
  b. Conference standings
  c. Tournament success
10. Demonstrated ability to achieve and sustain success across seasons, rosters, etc. (wins consistently without dramatic ups and downs) (Harder to evaluate with younger coaches or coaches from smaller schools?)
11. Possesses additional necessary D1 head coaching acumen: personable, personality, etc.
12. Does not possess disqualifying traits or issues that negate the above

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

I've thought quite a bit about this over the years and I believe the solution to be both simple (in concept) and difficult (to actually achieve). Here's a list of criteria for a great head coaching hire (my opinion). I think we got a guy like this when we hired Knight. Since then...not so much. I think that the closer a program comes to hiring someone who meets criteria like this, the better they will be. The further you stray from it, the worse you will be. In that sense, the solution is simple...hire someone who comes as close to it as possible.


1. Proven commitment to and execution of a ‘winning basketball philosophy’:
  a. Stresses/requires sound fundamentals
     i. Shooting, passing, blocking out, ball handling, shot selection, etc.
  b. Prioritizes recruiting players with sound fundamentals
  c. Prioritizes both offensive and defensive excellence (being good on both ends)
  d. Prioritizes recruiting players that fit and play within this system
  e. Stresses/requires minimizing mistakes, taking good shots, valuing each possession, playing hard, playing smart, etc.
2. Demonstrated ability to recruit players and build a balanced and effective roster
3. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make as-needed adjustments to talent/roster
4. Demonstrated ability to implement the system while keeping it attractive to modern players
5. Demonstrated ‘game management’ abilities: in-game coaching adjustments, timeouts, substitutions, foul management, matchups, etc.
6. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make adjustments to talent/roster strengths/abilities
7. Proven ability to develop players and measurable improvement of players (players get better)
8. Demonstrated ability to maximize player skills and production (gets the most out of the team)
9. Demonstrated ability to translate winning philosophy to on court results (the system is effective and produces wins)
  a. Win/Loss records
  b. Conference standings
  c. Tournament success
10. Demonstrated ability to achieve and sustain success across seasons, rosters, etc. (wins consistently without dramatic ups and downs) (Harder to evaluate with younger coaches or coaches from smaller schools?)
11. Possesses additional necessary D1 head coaching acumen: personable, personality, etc.
12. Does not possess disqualifying traits or issues that negate the above

That's it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked our AI Chatbot through work to help us all with a path forward. Needless to say, the bot is ambitious: "Here are five successful current or former coaches who could be potential candidates depending on the timing of Mike Woodson's departure:

  1. Brad Stevens: Although he's currently coaching in the NBA with the Boston Celtics, Stevens has a successful history in college basketball with Butler University. He's long been linked with Indiana University due to his Indiana roots.

  2. Tony Bennett: He's currently the head coach at University of Virginia and led the Cavaliers to a NCAA Championship in 2019. His defensive-focused style might be appealing to Indiana.

  3. Mark Few: The longtime Gonzaga coach has turned the Bulldogs into a perennial powerhouse, reaching the NCAA tournament every year. He has proven success at developing an elite program.

  4. Jay Wright: The head coach of Villanova has proven his abilities many times over, winning two NCAA championships in the past few years.

  5. Billy Donovan: Having previously had great success at the University of Florida with two NCAA Championships, he's another coach with a strong track record; however, he's currently coaching in the NBA as well.

Remember, these are just potential names and these coaches might not be interested or available when Indiana University is looking at potential replacements."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, IU-DL said:

I asked our AI Chatbot through work to help us all with a path forward. Needless to say, the bot is ambitious: "Here are five successful current or former coaches who could be potential candidates depending on the timing of Mike Woodson's departure:

  1. Brad Stevens: Although he's currently coaching in the NBA with the Boston Celtics, Stevens has a successful history in college basketball with Butler University. He's long been linked with Indiana University due to his Indiana roots.

  2. Tony Bennett: He's currently the head coach at University of Virginia and led the Cavaliers to a NCAA Championship in 2019. His defensive-focused style might be appealing to Indiana.

  3. Mark Few: The longtime Gonzaga coach has turned the Bulldogs into a perennial powerhouse, reaching the NCAA tournament every year. He has proven success at developing an elite program.

  4. Jay Wright: The head coach of Villanova has proven his abilities many times over, winning two NCAA championships in the past few years.

  5. Billy Donovan: Having previously had great success at the University of Florida with two NCAA Championships, he's another coach with a strong track record; however, he's currently coaching in the NBA as well.

Remember, these are just potential names and these coaches might not be interested or available when Indiana University is looking at potential replacements."

I think somebody dropped your AI on its head.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, IU-DL said:

That's it?

Yep.

A competent (and unhindered) AD should be able to assess candidates against these criteria and down select to a hire.  : )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we're in the rant thread...

I haven't seen a ton here using this rationale, but I just saw Crimson Quarry make a sarcastic tweet about needing "just one more" coaching hire til we find "The Guy." Some talking about being exhausted of the coaching carousel madness. 

Uhhhh... we've had 2 coaches in the last 7 years? The guy before them was here for 9 years? 

It's pretty wild to imagine how different things would be if we never hired Archie and just kept Crean another year or two... or hired Woody when we hired Archie. 

To be abundantly clear.... I understand not being ready to move on from Woody just quite yet (I personally don't like where I see things headed but willing to let things play out before I am beating down the door calling for his job)... I just don't understand being tired of "all" the coaching hires as reasoning? We've made 2 hires in 7 years lol. 

Assuming we don't make the tournament, the only way I'm remotely excited for next year is if we return Mgbako, land Queen, and find 3 quality guards in the portal/spring decommits, etc. It's tough though because you'd really like to see some positive momentum heading into the offseason and without the tournament, the best bet of that is an announcement from Mack or Ware they're returning. 

I personally see little to no chance of Ware coming back and think odds of Mack returning are less than 50/50. 

So if the season flames out and we've got little to no momentum in terms of building next year's roster, you'd really hope Woody can see things for what they are and ride off into the sunset with a big payday. Not sure how likely or not that is, doubt anyone really does. 

Of course I will hope that the team turns things around this season and we have a great year. I don't think the odds are particularly high but I can't influence these decisions so I'm just going to root like hell for the best case scenario no matter what. 

Looking forward to all the rumors toward the end of this year about what someone's neighbor's best friend's dog who goes to the same dog park as Kenya Hunter's wife heard the other day about what Woody wants to do lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

I've thought quite a bit about this over the years and I believe the solution to be both simple (in concept) and difficult (to actually achieve). Here's a list of criteria for a great head coaching hire (my opinion). I think we got a guy like this when we hired Knight. Since then...not so much. I think that the closer a program comes to hiring someone who meets criteria like this, the better they will be. The further you stray from it, the worse you will be. In that sense, the solution is simple...hire someone who comes as close to it as possible.


1. Proven commitment to and execution of a ‘winning basketball philosophy’:
  a. Stresses/requires sound fundamentals
     i. Shooting, passing, blocking out, ball handling, shot selection, etc.
  b. Prioritizes recruiting players with sound fundamentals
  c. Prioritizes both offensive and defensive excellence (being good on both ends)
  d. Prioritizes recruiting players that fit and play within this system
  e. Stresses/requires minimizing mistakes, taking good shots, valuing each possession, playing hard, playing smart, etc.
2. Demonstrated ability to recruit players and build a balanced and effective roster
3. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make as-needed adjustments to talent/roster
4. Demonstrated ability to implement the system while keeping it attractive to modern players
5. Demonstrated ‘game management’ abilities: in-game coaching adjustments, timeouts, substitutions, foul management, matchups, etc.
6. Demonstrated ability/willingness to make adjustments to talent/roster strengths/abilities
7. Proven ability to develop players and measurable improvement of players (players get better)
8. Demonstrated ability to maximize player skills and production (gets the most out of the team)
9. Demonstrated ability to translate winning philosophy to on court results (the system is effective and produces wins)
  a. Win/Loss records
  b. Conference standings
  c. Tournament success
10. Demonstrated ability to achieve and sustain success across seasons, rosters, etc. (wins consistently without dramatic ups and downs) (Harder to evaluate with younger coaches or coaches from smaller schools?)
11. Possesses additional necessary D1 head coaching acumen: personable, personality, etc.
12. Does not possess disqualifying traits or issues that negate the above

Just about everyone is a risk for points 1 - 11 at the P5 level except guys that have some issues with #12.  If you assume any of the AI guys above as realistic then maybe those guys could get you all 12 but I think we have to take a guy who had 1 - 11 at a lower level or take a guy who has had 1 - 11 at a P5 school but also has some issues with #12 (Drew to a lesser extent, Pearl and Beard come to mind)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×