Fire Coach Woodson Thread

[AH1971 1,306]

4 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

I never attacked you. My point stands: you want to equate Woodsons crap-fest with Danny Hurley's first 4 years. I am simply saying there's no comparison. Danny Hurley was a rising start... Mike Woodson was a mediocre NBA coach with no clue what he was doing (still not sure he understands what it takes to be successful as a college basketball coach).

Lol. You disagreed with an opinion I shared and inferred I was on drugs. The hell else do you call that?

[AH1971 1,306]

3 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

IU hadn’t played in a tournament game since 2016 because a once in a century pandemic canceled the tournament in 2020. He got blown out in the round of 64 his first year, blown out in the round of 32 in his second year, and missed the tournament entirely his third year. Not taking a giant step back in year 3 is certainly something you expect from your aging head coach.

But, of course, I’m forgetting that it’s Indiana! Simply making the tournament gets you a hefty raise. Leave your expectations at the door.

So by that logic, a big boy program like UConn would have fired Danny Hurley for not winning a single tournament game in 4 years?

Thank you for making my point. 

[Hoosierfan2017 20,327]

5 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

So by that logic, a big boy program like UConn would have fired Danny Hurley for not winning a single tournament game in 4 years?

Thank you for making my point. 

Your “point” completely ignores all context. If Dan Hurley was 66 years old would they have fired him after his first four seasons? Yeah, probably. They fired Kevin Ollie four years removed from a national championship (you’ll probably say they fired him because of the ncaa investigation, but they’re keeping him if he was delivering results). 

No one was calling for Archie’s head after year three, and his first three years were worse than Hurley’s. But yes, no big boy program is keeping a 66 year old coach with Woodson’s first three seasons under their belt. No big boy program is hiring Mike Woodson in the first place, but that’s another discussion. 

[AH1971 1,306]

2 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Your “point” completely ignores all context. If Dan Hurley was 66 years old would they have fired him after his first four seasons? Yeah, probably. They fired Kevin Ollie four years removed from a national championship (you’ll probably say they fired him because of the ncaa investigation, but they’re keeping him if he was delivering results). 

No one was calling for Archie’s head after year three, and his first three years were worse than Hurley’s. But yes, no big boy program is keeping a 66 year old coach with Woodson’s first three seasons under their belt. No big boy program is hiring Mike Woodson in the first place, but that’s another discussion. 

People were calling for Archie's head after year 2. He lost 12/13 games with a top 5 recruit and an All B10 player in Juwan Morgan. 

[Banksyrules 4,347]

I think each of us need to draw our line. Write down what constitutes a successful season with this roster and let's let the chips fall where they fall. I think this is a sweet sixteen team and competing in a close to go into the elite eight.  

[Scotty R 2,051]

44 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

And age has to factor into the decision. A young coach trying to get his feet under him is a far cry from a 65+ year old has-been NBA coach trying to rewrite his legacy. And Hurley turned his record around without the help of a couple of billionaires buying him a team so he could keep trying.

It is legal now so why are you complaining about paying players. UCLA and UK won a lot of championships paying players and I thought that is what you want.

I just realized why I stopped posting in this thread because of how some are so closed minded. Like I said I wanted him gone as much as anyone but he wasn't fired so I am going to back the team including the coach. Some just won't sit back and let this season play out so they just keep bitching and moaning about the same thing over and over again. I realize some can never let themselves to relax and just look forward to the future. It must be miserable to always look at everything in a negative light and do this all off season where the season doesn't start for another 6 months.

[Scotty R 2,051]

30 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

People were calling for Archie's head after year 2. He lost 12/13 games with a top 5 recruit and an All B10 player in Juwan Morgan. 

Some were calling for his head after the first game of his IU career vs ISU

[AZ Hoosier 6,243]

1 minute ago, Scotty R said:

It is legal now so why are you complaining about paying players. UCLA and UK won a lot of championships paying players and I thought that is what you want.

I just realized why I stopped posting in this thread because of how some are so closed minded. Like I said I wanted him gone as much as anyone but he wasn't fired so I am going to back the team including the coach. Some just won't sit back and let this season play out so they just keep bitching and moaning about the same thing over and over again. I realize some can never let themselves to relax and just look forward to the future. It must be miserable to always look at everything in a negative light and do this all off season where the season doesn't start for another 6 months.

No, I am not saying that at all. But it's an established fact that Woodson could not/would not recruit. Dolson had to make him go to Mullins' sectional game to watch him play.

@AH1971 is bent on comparing Woodson's first 3 years with Danny Hurley's first four years. My point was that Hurley did not have the same advantage as Woodson - a couple of billionaires with money burning a hole in their pockets.

Comparing the first four years of a 50 year old coach with what, 20 years left to coach with a 65+ year coach who was hired as a "bridge" guy, and who was only hired because he played here 40+ years ago (no one in the NBA or college ranks was even looking at him as a potential coach), is a big ask.

Woodson has now seen the light and discovered that guards and perimeter players are the key to winning basketball games now. Let's see what he can do... but remember, the best predictor of future performance is relevant, past performance. He had talent his first 2 years... and barely made the tournament, bowing out both time in blowout losses.

 

[AH1971 1,306]

14 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

No, I am not saying that at all. But it's an established fact that Woodson could not/would not recruit. Dolson had to make him go to Mullins' sectional game to watch him play.

@AH1971 is bent on comparing Woodson's first 3 years with Danny Hurley's first four years. My point was that Hurley did not have the same advantage as Woodson - a couple of billionaires with money burning a hole in their pockets.

Comparing the first four years of a 50 year old coach with what, 20 years left to coach with a 65+ year coach who was hired as a "bridge" guy, and who was only hired because he played here 40+ years ago (no one in the NBA or college ranks was even looking at him as a potential coach), is a big ask.

Woodson has now seen the light and discovered that guards and perimeter players are the key to winning basketball games now. Let's see what he can do... but remember, the best predictor of future performance is relevant, past performance. He had talent his first 2 years... and barely made the tournament, bowing out both time in blowout losses.

 

Delusional…

[go iu bb 5,258]

1 hour ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Your “point” completely ignores all context. If Dan Hurley was 66 years old would they have fired him after his first four seasons? Yeah, probably. They fired Kevin Ollie four years removed from a national championship (you’ll probably say they fired him because of the ncaa investigation, but they’re keeping him if he was delivering results). 

No one was calling for Archie’s head after year three, and his first three years were worse than Hurley’s. But yes, no big boy program is keeping a 66 year old coach with Woodson’s first three seasons under their belt. No big boy program is hiring Mike Woodson in the first place, but that’s another discussion. 

Additional context:

Year 1 blowout loss was with a team that had one of the best big men in IU's history on it.

Year 2 blowout loss was with that same big plus a PG taken in the middle of 1st round of the NBA draft. 

Did Hurley also do less with more like Woodson has done? I think not. He had to rebuild after the mess Ollie left.

I expect the team this year will underperform the talent just as Woodson's teams all 3 years.

[AH1971 1,306]

24 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

Additional context:

Year 1 blowout loss was with a team that had one of the best big men in IU's history on it.

Year 2 blowout loss was with that same big plus a PG taken in the middle of 1st round of the NBA draft. 

Did Hurley also do less with more like Woodson has done? I think not. He had to rebuild after the mess Ollie left.

I expect the team this year will underperform the talent just as Woodson's teams all 3 years.

He had 4 future NBA players the year they were upset by Maryland in the first round including lottery pick James Bouknight and then another 4 future NBA players the following year when they lost as a 5 seed to New Mexico St, three of them who remained for the following seasons title team.

So glad you could clear up that context.

[go iu bb 5,258]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

He had 4 future NBA players the year they were upset by Maryland in the first round including lottery pick James Bouknight and then another 4 future NBA players the following year when they lost as a 5 seed to New Mexico St, three of them who remained for the following years title team.

So glad you could clear up that context.

They were upset but not blown out like Woodson has been.

But you're right, Woodson is as good as or better than Hurley. I'm looking forward to our back-to-back championships. The first will be this year or next, do you think?

[AH1971 1,306]

9 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

They were upset but not blown out like Woodson has been.

But you're right, Woodson is as good as or better than Hurley. I'm looking forward to our back-to-back championships. The first will be this year or next, do you think?

*upset (twice) with a plethora of NBA talent. Context remember, don’t leave it out.

And JFC, nobody is comparing Woodson to Hurley. I’m comparing the standard to which this board has held Woodson through 3 seasons to the standard UConn held Hurley through 4 years….which was much worse. It’s a direct response to a poster who said a real basketball program wouldn’t have tolerated Woodson’s first 3 seasons.

 

[Banksyrules 4,347]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

*upset (twice) with a plethora of NBA talent. Context remember, don’t leave it out.

And JFC, nobody is comparing Woodson to Hurley. I’m comparing the standard to which this board has held Woodson through 3 seasons to the standard UConn held Hurley through 4 years….which was much worse. It’s a direct response to a poster who said a real basketball program wouldn’t have tolerated Woodson’s first 3 seasons.

 

You keep ignoring proper context.  Woodson is 68 and supposed to already be an experienced coach.  Horrible comparison. 

[AH1971 1,306]

4 minutes ago, Banksyrules said:

You keep ignoring proper context.  Woodson is 68 and supposed to already be an experienced coach.  Horrible comparison. 

He has a top 10-15 roster next year, who cares how old he is? And he’s not 68 either. 
 

So theoretically, had IU hired any other coach who was younger than say 50, these last 3 years are now somehow now respectable? But they aren’t because of the coach’s age? It’s ok for a younger coach to lose? Most mind-numbingly dumb thing I’ve ever heard.

Narratives…..I get it. 

[Banksyrules 4,347]

On 5/30/2024 at 4:25 PM, AH1971 said:

He has a top 10-15 roster next year, who cares how old he is? And he’s not 68 either. 
 

So theoretically, had IU hired any other coach who was younger than say 50, these last 3 years are now somehow now respectable? But they aren’t because of the coach’s age? It’s ok for a younger coach to lose? Most mind-numbingly dumb thing I’ve ever heard.

Narratives…..I get it. 

Again context. We hired Woodson under the context he knew how to coach and knows more than most on the topic. AkA "look he coached in the NBA" .  If it's a younger coach then yeah you go through some bump and bruises that come naturally through growth.  You're just biased and stuck to a narrative. Pinky swear if Woodson does well I'll be the first one singing praise to him. 

[steubenhoosier 612]

7 hours ago, AZ Hoosier said:

And age has to factor into the decision. A young coach trying to get his feet under him is a far cry from a 65+ year old has-been NBA coach trying to rewrite his legacy. And Hurley turned his record around without the help of a couple of billionaires buying him a team so he could keep trying.

Ever hear of something called ageism? 
 

Last I checked there are laws against even mentioning a person’s age in regards to their employment 

[HoosierAloha 30,020]

This thread is wild. Projection left, right, and center with some weird hypotheticals. You could fire Woody tomorrow because of his “age” and not worry about a lawsuit. One would hope our administration is factoring age along with results into any contracts but not much would surprise me with our administration.

For those defending Woody, what has he done in his first three seasons that makes you optimistic he’ll overachieve or even just meet expectations in his fourth? Just having better talent? Having a player or two that will step up to lead? Reversing his downward trend of team defense? Finally playing through his guards instead of just talking about it?

[RaceToTheTop 24,421]

1 hour ago, steubenhoosier said:

Ever hear of something called ageism? 
 

Last I checked there are laws against even mentioning a person’s age in regards to their employment 

Pretty damn hard to prove that age is the reason for firing a coach if they coached for four years at a school after replacing someone who also coached four years.  Coaches get fired all the time,  regardless of age.  Pretty much every college coach gets fired from their first job or climbs to up to a better job until they reach a point where they will get fired.

Bottom line is that while you can't fire based solely on age, you can do so if someone's age results in lack of on the job performance.  Yuo don't have to say age is why someone is fired if they aren't as active on the recruiting trail as younger coaches -- the lack of activity is a cited reason.

And I'm not saying anything about the state of Woodson's future, just that while you can't use age as a basis for firing someone, you also can't hide behind it as an excuse not to fire them.

[steubenhoosier 612]

5 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Pretty damn hard to prove that age is the reason for firing a coach if they coached for four years at a school after replacing someone who also coached four years.  Coaches get fired all the time,  regardless of age.  Pretty much every college coach gets fired from their first job or climbs to up to a better job until they reach a point where they will get fired.

Bottom line is that while you can't fire based solely on age, you can do so if someone's age results in lack of on the job performance.  Yuo don't have to say age is why someone is fired if they aren't as active on the recruiting trail as younger coaches -- the lack of activity is a cited reason.

And I'm not saying anything about the state of Woodson's future, just that while you can't use age as a basis for firing someone, you also can't hide behind it as an excuse not to fire them.

Understand… however Woodson’s age is repeatedly brought up by folks here… which should have no bearing on his ability to coach.

The recruiting trail you point out should be a responsibility of the staff , don’t you think? Younger guys who have the connections to 17-19 year olds. Woodson certainly needs to be involved, but the staff should be doing the heavy lifting.

My point is… judge Woodson for the on court results but don’t bring the age issue into the conversation. Hell, we’re about to elect a president who will be in his mid 70’s. 
 

If the upcoming season is a cluster, then time for a change. But let the upcoming season play out before making a decision … based on performance, not age.