Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[JSHoosier 20,599]

2 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

After another year of Woodson alford may be the best we can do. This program will be a mess next spring.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
 

The program is a mess now. 

[Hoosierinbham 178]

2 hours ago, Chris007 said:

I would remove Tony Bennett and Bruce Pearl from the list for next year. Probably even Scott Drew just because it sounds like Louisville made him a generous offer and he said no if Dusty gets the job.

No way IU goes after Will Wade even though everything he did is legal now. 

Just not sure what are choices are. 

He's probably one job away from being ready, but I know for a fact Samford's coach Bucky McMillan wants to coach a blue blood program and would take the IU job in a heartbeat.  He plays a fun brand of attacking basketball on offense and defense, and can really coach and recruit. He also won numerous large school state titles at a high school that had never been very good in basketball.  Just a flat out winner.   If they pull a couple upsets, he could become a hot name.

[Bankshot 544]

If Jerry Yeagley's post is correct, it sounds like the BoT is "only interested in a homerun hire" (and that may be a super long shot), so it would seem dreaming or speculating about coaches who don't meet that may not be worthwhile. 

I'm not knocking anyone's ideas, I like hearing other perspectives and thinking outside the box. Just saying, it would seem only "homerun hires" would fit he bill.

[ap2345 8,572]

3 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

If Jerry Yeagley's post is correct, it sounds like the BoT is "only interested in a homerun hire" (and that may be a super long shot), so it would seem dreaming or speculating about coaches who don't meet that may not be worthwhile. 

I'm not knocking anyone's ideas, I like hearing other perspectives and thinking outside the box. Just saying, it would seem only "homerun hires" would fit he bill.

He said a homerun hire for a move this year. Not next year.

[Bankshot 544]

Just now, ap2345 said:

He said a homerun hire for a move this year. Not next year.

Yes, agree. This year is what I was referring to, as a super long shot, if any at all.

[68Hoosier 657]

5 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

If Jerry Yeagley's post is correct, it sounds like the BoT is "only interested in a homerun hire" (and that may be a super long shot), so it would seem dreaming or speculating about coaches who don't meet that may not be worthwhile. 

I'm not knocking anyone's ideas, I like hearing other perspectives and thinking outside the box. Just saying, it would seem only "homerun hires" would fit he bill.

But what is the BoT idea of home run hire?  What are the boxes to check off for them?

[Bankshot 544]

Just now, 68Hoosier said:

But what is the BoT idea of home run hire?  What are the boxes to check off for them?

That's a great question. IMO, they can't even evaluate the current coach properly or he would be gone already.

[Chris007 46,478]

2 minutes ago, 68Hoosier said:

But what is the BoT idea of home run hire?  What are the boxes to check off for them?

The way it was explained to me is a proven Power 5 head coach. Someone who has won and won at a high level for a long time. 

[spe317 612]

Can this discussion please not provide any glimmers of hope? My heart can’t take it anymore. Just bury me face down already. 

[Bankshot 544]

2 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

Yes, agree. This year is what I was referring to, as a super long shot, if any at all.

I'm having trouble drumming up enough interest now (after the 'decision' to keep Woodson) to think about enjoying the postseason, the portaling season, or next year. Pretty much totally deflated and lost all interest since the shockingly inept occurred.

[Golfman25 5,812]

1 minute ago, Chris007 said:

The way it was explained to me is a proven Power 5 head coach. Someone who has won and won at a high level for a long time. 

That is completely delusional.  Someone who has done that probably isn't interested in the IU job.  Who would even fit that description?  Pearl and ?????  Would Painter?     

[Bankshot 544]

2 minutes ago, Bankshot said:

I'm having trouble drumming up enough interest now (after the 'decision' to keep Woodson) to think about enjoying the postseason, the portaling season, or next year. Pretty much totally deflated and lost all interest since the shockingly inept occurred.

I guess I have college basketball on "ignore" until Woodson is gone. Maybe it's a defense mechanism to protect myself.

[Kentuckysucks 2,472]

It's all about who you can get.  I've never been high on Alford either but I can certainly see a scenario where he's the best we can get next year.  I really think it's going to get that bad.

[Chris007 46,478]

2 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

That is completely delusional.  Someone who has done that probably isn't interested in the IU job.  Who would even fit that description?  Pearl and ?????  Would Painter?     

I think that is why they made those standards because they knew Dolson wouldn't be able to get anyone like that after the tournament and portal started

[Hornsby 2,435]

I think we are a mess now.... LOL

I mean yes we are I mean even worse. Like needing to fill 10 or 11 roster spots.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[Hornsby 2,435]

If Jerry Yeagley's post is correct, it sounds like the BoT is "only interested in a homerun hire" (and that may be a super long shot), so it would seem dreaming or speculating about coaches who don't meet that may not be worthwhile. 

I'm not knocking anyone's ideas, I like hearing other perspectives and thinking outside the box. Just saying, it would seem only "homerun hires" would fit he bill.

All of a sudden they want a home run hire? They didn't seem very interested in home run hire when they handed Woodson the job. Basically they just want to make it incredibly hard to get rid of Woodson imo. These people are a complete joke.

 

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

[Kentuckysucks 2,472]

4 minutes ago, Hornsby said:

All of a sudden they want a home run hire? They didn't seem very interested in home run hire when they handed Woodson the job. Basically they just want to make it incredibly hard to get rid of Woodson imo. These people are a complete joke.

 

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Some day the rest of you will connect the dots and finally understand why the past 24 have been such a sh!t show.  Hint: it really isn't stupidity.

[JF87 1,585]

43 minutes ago, lillurk said:

As a person who was in high school 20 years ago, I don’t think he would’ve been some special recruiter. My classmates and teammates hadn’t watched him play.

He would’ve made our parents happy, I guess.

He knew a lot of high school and AAU coaches in the state.  He would have done well recruiting Indiana.  

[Hornsby 2,435]

Some day the rest of you will connect the dots and finally understand why the past 24 have been such a sh!t show.  Hint: it really isn't stupidity.

I know they don't really want the program to be good or they never would have hired Woodson. But they can stop the home run hire talk nonsense.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[JF87 1,585]

28 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

The way it was explained to me is a proven Power 5 head coach. Someone who has won and won at a high level for a long time. 

That's just an excuse by the decision makers to keep Woodson.  They know that unicorn doesn't exist.  

(Never mind. Chris already made this comment.)