Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[iu-dl 1,436]

35 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

Winning percentage aside, I think Crean was still a better coach. Since Knight id rank em...

 

1. Sampson

2. Crean

3. Mike Woodson and Mike Davis

4. Archie Miller

And way, way down the list:  Dan Dakich.
1. Sampson, and there's a considerable gap between him and the rest
2. Crean
3. Mike Woodson and Archie Miller 
4. Tie for the toilet bowl, Mike Davis & Dan Dakich

None of #2-4 make the best of what we have. They stink, actually. Davis was a clown. Dakich is a clown. Crean & Woody's success has been totally dependent on talent. I love the coaches who can really squeeze talent out of a program and medicre players. Painfully: Purdue, Wisconsin, FAU, Virginia, etc. I honestly thought Archie was that guy.
 

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,460]

5 minutes ago, iu-dl said:

And way, way down the list:  Dan Dakich.
1. Sampson, and there's a considerable gap between him and the rest
2. Crean
3. Mike Woodson and Archie Miller 
4. Tie for the toilet bowl, Mike Davis & Dan Dakich

None of #2-4 make the best of what we have. They stink, actually. Davis was a clown. Dakich is a clown. Crean & Woody's success has been totally dependent on talent. I love the coaches who can really squeeze talent out of a program and medicre players. Painfully: Purdue, Wisconsin, FAU, Virginia, etc. I honestly thought Archie was that guy.
 

I don't see anyway possible you could put Archie above Mike Davis. Or even Mike Woodson above Davis. Davis still won a Big Ten championship, made a final four and made an NCAA tourney(something Archie was completely incapable of doing).

[steubenhoosier 612]

14 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

I don't see anyway possible you could put Archie above Mike Davis. Or even Mike Woodson above Davis. Davis still won a Big Ten championship, made a final four and made an NCAA tourney(something Archie was completely incapable of doing).

Frankly, I find some of Davis' behaviors much more appalling than anything Woodson has said. The whole "I don't desreve to coach here" situation was such an embarrassment.

[iu-dl 1,436]

29 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

I don't see anyway possible you could put Archie above Mike Davis. Or even Mike Woodson above Davis. Davis still won a Big Ten championship, made a final four and made an NCAA tourney(something Archie was completely incapable of doing).

We can agree to disagree. Once the Knight guys and their habits were gone, it was a full program deterioration. Plus an administrative failure. I can't speak to why Archie found success at Dayton and that didn't transfer to IU, but I would never put Davis in any conversation relating to a quality coach. Archie at least "gets" how to coach, whether the players listen to him or not. Davis....look at his track record after those first couple of years. It's amongst the worst ever, at any school for any coach.

[JSHoosier 19,700]

12 minutes ago, iu-dl said:

We can agree to disagree. Once the Knight guys and their habits were gone, it was a full program deterioration. Plus an administrative failure. I can't speak to why Archie found success at Dayton and that didn't transfer to IU, but I would never put Davis in any conversation relating to a quality coach. Archie at least "gets" how to coach, whether the players listen to him or not. Davis....look at his track record after those first couple of years. It's amongst the worst ever, at any school for any coach.

Miller is awful at Rhode Island too. He's not the first coach to do pretty well at Dayton and bomb elsewhere.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,460]

18 minutes ago, iu-dl said:

We can agree to disagree. Once the Knight guys and their habits were gone, it was a full program deterioration. Plus an administrative failure. I can't speak to why Archie found success at Dayton and that didn't transfer to IU, but I would never put Davis in any conversation relating to a quality coach. Archie at least "gets" how to coach, whether the players listen to him or not. Davis....look at his track record after those first couple of years. It's amongst the worst ever, at any school for any coach.

But what Davis did after IU means absolutely nothing. Davis at IU was way better than Archie and it isn't close.

[go iu bb 5,258]

9 hours ago, Schreckbagger said:

And finally, the 2 guys that were fired for "not winning enough" that you speak of, had 5 and 8 years on the job before being let go.

 

There's the "we kept other bad coaches too long so we should keep this bad coach too long as well" argument again. It's not the great point that you think it is.

[go iu bb 5,258]

2 hours ago, iu-dl said:

And way, way down the list:  Dan Dakich.
1. Sampson, and there's a considerable gap between him and the rest
2. Crean
3. Mike Woodson and Archie Miller 
4. Tie for the toilet bowl, Mike Davis & Dan Dakich

None of #2-4 make the best of what we have. They stink, actually. Davis was a clown. Dakich is a clown. Crean & Woody's success has been totally dependent on talent. I love the coaches who can really squeeze talent out of a program and medicre players. Painfully: Purdue, Wisconsin, FAU, Virginia, etc. I honestly thought Archie was that guy.
 

Woodson on the same level as Miller? I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I don't think Woodson is a very good coach but I do think he's better than Miller. 

[Hoosierfan2017 20,327]

44 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

Woodson on the same level as Miller? I'm going to have to disagree with you here. I don't think Woodson is a very good coach but I do think he's better than Miller. 

He’s probably better than Archie, but he does have two big advantages that no other IU coach has had. What would Woodson look like without the transfer portal and NIL? He’s sitting at 31-29 in the Big 10 with it. Without it, he’d likely be a total disaster given his halfhearted recruiting efforts. 

[HoosierHoopster 6,480]

5 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

He’s probably better than Archie, but he does have two big advantages that no other IU coach has had. What would Woodson look like without the transfer portal and NIL? He’s sitting at 31-29 in the Big 10 with it. Without it, he’d likely be a total disaster given his halfhearted recruiting efforts. 

Completely fair, imo. Woodson also benefitted from having TJD, and then JHS, both made a huge difference. 

Real test is this season, with this roster at least on paper as we see it now, this team should compete at the top of the B1G. I'm in the wait and see camp. 

[HoosierHoopster 6,480]

Side note for levity -- Driving in this morning (Houston) the car in the lane next to me has IU personalized plates, and I found myself thinking I should lean out the window and ask if he thinks Woodson should be fired. Lol

[AH1971 1,306]

1 hour ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

He’s probably better than Archie, but he does have two big advantages that no other IU coach has had. What would Woodson look like without the transfer portal and NIL? He’s sitting at 31-29 in the Big 10 with it. Without it, he’d likely be a total disaster given his halfhearted recruiting efforts. 

Or....

He only targets freshman that he believes can contribute from day 1 and uses the portal otherwise to land players who are seasoned and don't need 2-3 years to develop. The portal and NIL has completely changed the landscape of college basketball and the dynamics in recruiting and the philosophy on how it is approached. 

[Golfman25 4,847]

2 hours ago, go iu bb said:

There's the "we kept other bad coaches too long so we should keep this bad coach too long as well" argument again. It's not the great point that you think it is.

Chit, does that mean Woodson gets 8 years?

[Schreckbagger 612]

Chit, does that mean Woodson gets 8 years?

EXTEND COACH WOODSON

 

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app

 

 

 

[Stuhoo 77,368]

[Certified Sunshine Pumper 8,746]

I mean---every coach has that (NIL) advantage now, it's not like Woodson does and whoever is at Michigan, OSU, and others don't. 

Woodson is just better than Archie because Woodson is better than Archie. 

Archie was 33-44 in B1G games and 1-3 in the BTT and couldn't make the NCAAs. He'd been 1-4 in the BTT but there was Covid. 

Woodson is 31-29 and 4-3 in the tourney. 2-2 in the NCAA. 

----------------------------

None of it's good enough, but Archie isn't close to Woodson. Really speaks to how poor Archie was. 

[Certified Sunshine Pumper 8,746]

5 hours ago, iu-dl said:

We can agree to disagree. Once the Knight guys and their habits were gone, it was a full program deterioration. Plus an administrative failure. I can't speak to why Archie found success at Dayton and that didn't transfer to IU, but I would never put Davis in any conversation relating to a quality coach. Archie at least "gets" how to coach, whether the players listen to him or not. Davis....look at his track record after those first couple of years. It's amongst the worst ever, at any school for any coach.

What argument could you make for Archie being a better coach than Woodson? 

[JSHoosier 19,700]

3 hours ago, go iu bb said:

There's the "we kept other bad coaches too long so we should keep this bad coach too long as well" argument again. It's not the great point that you think it is.

Yeah, the solution is to stop keeping bad coaches too long. Not keep giving them too long.

[Schreckbagger 612]

Yeah, the solution is to stop keeping bad coaches too long. Not keep giving them too long.

The solution is PAYING for a real Tier 1 coach and doing said at the right time. Playing musical coaches is not a winning formula long term.

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app

[JSHoosier 19,700]

5 hours ago, Schreckbagger said:

The solution is PAYING for a real Tier 1 coach and doing said at the right time. Playing musical coaches is not a winning formula long term.

Sent from my SM-S906U using BtownBanners mobile app
 

Hiring a good coach to begin with would be my preference. Keeping a bad coach because the previous bad coach was kept around too long just damages the program.