Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[Hornsby 2,145]

I would be shocked to learn that any coach doesn't report to the AD. That seems wildly innacurate and "rabbit holish"

He may on paper bur I'm guessing quinn strongly advises dolson on how to handle him. Gives him hints on what moves would not be good for his career. Cig certainly seems to be a good hire but next year will be telling. Remember allen had the one good year and it was a total fluke.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[Hornsby 2,145]

He didn't even deserve 4 years. Should've been gone last season.

100% Instead they threw 6.2 million dollars at the failed experiment

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[Pagoda 673]

Just now, Hornsby said:

He may on paper bur I'm guessing quinn strongly advises dolson on how to handle him. Gives him hints on what moves would not be good for his career. Cig certainly seems to be a good hire but next year will be telling. Remember allen had the one good year and it was a total fluke.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
 

FB may take a step back, it’s hard not to, but this staff and program have little in common with Allen.  Staff, NIL, and recruiting are quite different.

[Hornsby 2,145]

FB may take a step back, it’s hard not to, but this staff and program have little in common with Allen.  Staff, NIL, and recruiting are quite different.

Right just saying people should probably not expect another 11-1 season. Could be more like 8-4.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk

[Pagoda 673]

1 minute ago, Hornsby said:

Right just saying people should probably not expect another 11-1 season. Could be more like 8-4.

Sent from my SM-A146U using Tapatalk
 

Yea, and that would be not a Tom Allen fluke is all I’m saying.  

Only thing that gives me hope for the next BB hire breaking our 25 year run of mistakes is what happened with FB.

[Stuhoo 81,514]

4 hours ago, Pagoda said:

Yea.  I don’t get this at all.  Any well run organization gets rid of bad executives asap.  IUBB does the opposite.

Because well-run organizations in different industries have very different norms.

This is an organization in an industry that, absent extreme misconduct or extraordinary operational failure (i.e. Kenny Payne), the position routinely gets at least four years. And in this industry, giving less than the minimum norm will greatly discourage future qualified candidates. Moreover, a large buyout accompanies the early years of the deal.

Therefore, it is of paramount importance to carefully vet and only hire an excellent choice for this high-profile head coaching job, because absent a national headline, he is going to be the coach for at least four years.

It appears to me that selecting Woody was the bad choice, but giving him a fourth year was a given.

 

[Pagoda 673]

4 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

Because well-run organizations in different industries have very different norms.

This is an organization in an industry that absent extreme misconduct or extraordinary operational failure (i.e. Kenny Payne), the position routinely gets at least four years. And in this industry, giving less than the minimum norm will greatly discourage future qualified candidates. Moreover, a large buyout accompanies the early years of the deal.

So it is of paramount importance to carefully vet and only hire for this very high-profile job a head coach that is truly an excellent choice, because absent a national headline, that's going to be the coach for at least four years.

It appears to me that selecting Woody was the bad choice, but giving him a fourth year was a given.

 

I’m not sure it discourages future candidates.  Any incoming coach would see Woody’s three year track record and think wow that’s not great I’ll do much better than that with top-5 NIL and have a long stint at IU.  Coaches are a confident bunch. 

UK got rid of Billy Clyde after two years and UNC fired Doherty after three.  Those are programs behaving in a serious manner.  Of course you could point to differences in those situations, but Woody’s year three was so bad on the court and recruiting, plus with knowledge of how he operates, there was a solid case to move on after three years.  The buyout would be $4M more back then, but there are downsides to keep him around such as declining revenue/donations and wasted NIL.

I agree getting the hire right is key and schools will try to give coaches time, and I think they should try to give coaches time, but it was pretty clear last year there were serious issues that justified moving on.

But, we didn’t.  We’ll see what happens this over the next three months.

[WayneFleekHoosier 48,548]

The recruiting misses are tough. The “insiders” are saying the fans put too much pressure on the team and the guys crumble under the immense pressure.

 

I get that. I think it’s probably a real thing. But Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, and others have the same type of large, loud fanbases. They win (mostly). Maybe we get the wrong guys that don’t relish the big stage. I mean, also obviously the coach. Because a good product and Wins and our fanbase can be our biggest asset as well.

 

I’m excited to see a different brand of basketball. I miss ball movement, player movement.

 

It’s a shame because this roster had me excited again until I’ve seen the product 4-5 times and it looks the same as it always does. And the results are line with other Mediocre Mike seasons. Ugh……….

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners

 

[MikeRoberts 7,084]

11 minutes ago, Pagoda said:

I’m not sure it discourages future candidates.  Any incoming coach would see Woody’s three year track record and think wow that’s not great I’ll do much better than that with top-5 NIL and have a long stint at IU.  Coaches are a confident bunch. 

UK got rid of Billy Clyde after two years and UNC fired Doherty after three.  Those are programs behaving in a serious manner.  Of course you could point to differences in those situations, but Woody’s year three was so bad on the court and recruiting, plus with knowledge of how he operates, there was a solid case to move on after three years.  The buyout would be $4M more back then, but there are downsides to keep him around such as declining revenue/donations and wasted NIL.

I agree getting the hire right is key and schools will try to give coaches time, and I think they should try to give coaches time, but it was pretty clear last year there were serious issues that justified moving on.

But, we didn’t.  We’ll see what happens this over the next three months.

Yep, 4 years is directional and not a rule for a reason. When a coach has pissed off lifelong fans, been aloof and disinterested in building relationships with recruits and their coaches and families and isn’t winning… there is no need to extend the misery but yet they did.

i do want to call out that those definitively saying we will move on from Woodson might in the end be right but they are not right right now. That has not been determined, it’s just heading in that direction. That direction can be changed if this team turns it around. The bar is LOW

[Stuhoo 81,514]

I cited extreme misconduct or extraordinary operational failure as the exceptions:

Gillespie was a raging drunk that mistreated players ...  and underperformed on the court. He is the definition of an  extreme misconduct exception.

Doherty underperformed way beyond Woody (8-20 his second season), and had a full scale open team revolt on his hands after his third year. Incomparably worse than Woody; he was a misconduct/operational failure combo with extra cheese! And he still got three years.

 

 

[TheWatShot 14,176]

1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

And in this industry, giving less than the minimum norm will greatly discourage future qualified candidates.

 

If it does, then you're targeting the wrong coaches. 

[Hoosierfan2017 21,657]

IU gave Mike Woodson 4 more years than any serious school would ever even think of giving him. 

[Home Jersey 8,142]

20 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

I cited extreme misconduct or extraordinary operational failure as the exceptions:

Gillespie was a raging drunk that mistreated players ...  and underperformed on the court. He is the definition of an  extreme misconduct exception.

Doherty underperformed way beyond Woody (8-20 his second season), and had a full scale open team revolt on his hands after his third year. Incomparably worse than Woody; he was a misconduct/operational failure combo with extra cheese! And he still got three years.

I think it's fair to say that firing decisions ultimately come down to reaching a tipping point in a coach's tenure. How you get to the tipping point includes misconduct, operational failures, on court results, tons of behind the scenes/off the court stuff we're not privy to, etc.

All those factors being assessed on a spectrum from flunk to success... When that tipping point is met, likely varies quite a bit among "stakeholders" and the process for making a decision about it is certainly different at each school. There is no denying those other schools have had better results... probably have a better process/calculus. 

There were points in Crean's tenure where people were ready to move on but we brought him back. And he had some success after that tipping point had been met by the fans. There were still valid reasons to believe he could lead a competitive team. 

I don't think you could say the same for Woodson after last season. But Archie got 4 years, so of course Mike does too.

Looking at all of the factors, I don't think it would be outrageous or ground shaking for potential new coaches if we decided to part ways after 3 seasons of mediocre at best results when the man was 66 and had no momentum in his program. 

Yet... Archie got 4, so Mike gets 4. And we get to snooze through the rest of this season. 

Hope they make the right hire next time around. 

[Home Jersey 8,142]

6 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

IU gave Mike Woodson 4 more years than any serious school would ever even think of giving him. 

This is really what it comes down to and all that needs to be said. 

[JSHoosier 20,327]

11 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

IU gave Mike Woodson 4 more years than any serious school would ever even think of giving him. 

The fact no one else wanted him to be HC should've told them do not pass go, that's a giant red flag. Either the only thing that mattered was him playing here 40 years ago, or their vetting was laughably abysmal.

[DougWil 51]

Incorrect. Please remove 

Edited December 26, 2024 by DougWil

[Scotty R 2,216]

IU has zero commitments.

That isn't true because we have 1 in Sisley 

[HoosierHoopster 7,180]

Guys, @Stuhoo is right, objectively. Most programs including the bluebloods give coaches 4 years to develop their roster, recruiting, system and track record before throwing in the towel and forking over the large buyouts that come with breaking the contract— which amounts are higher in the earlier years.

Woodson went 21-14 and 23-12 his first 2 years and made the tourney. Some of us, me for sure, couldn’t stand his 2-big “system” that completely ignored the perimeter game, but it wasn’t clear after 2 years that he would fail or not develop better teams at IU. It’s clear now TJD carried him, but it wasn’t then.
Year 3 put his failures on full display imo, and I was one who wanted him gone then, but there’s NIL now and the ability to quickly reload, so more reason to give a HC a 4th year to show what he can do — and Woodson then did very well in the portal. 
A good (even decent) coach would be winning with this roster — the roster is not flawed, that Woodson is just a bad, outdated system-running, inflexible, flawed coach is now fully clear. He’ll be gone after this season. That was the realistic likelihood after year 3. 
Btw, Archie Miller is now 11-1 at Rhode I. Lol

[Banksyrules 4,867]

6 minutes ago, Scotty R said:

IU has zero commitments.

That isn't true because we have 1 in Sisley 

Light the beacons and order the beer, we’re a basketball school again. 

[Stuhoo 81,514]

1 minute ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Btw, Archie Miller is now 11-1 at Providence. Lol

At Rhode Island, but yes.

But the loss is to Brown and the wins are all incredibly low/mid-level, at best.