Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, ap2345 said:

Multiple people have said this. Either way it's the first time anyone has ever said Buckner was involved with that. Archie, yes but he firing no. 

Sorry two hours behind I see that now.

Posted
agreee - reminds me of James Blackmon.  Believe he reopened his recruitment and once new coach came in JB stayed at IU
James committed to iu and Tom crean. He reopened his recruitment and got injured. Crean and iu was very supportive of him during his recovery .when it came down to iu and kentucky he chose iu because of that.

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk

Posted
54 minutes ago, Papacap said:

Nest year, after a mass exodus of players, IU ends up 5 games under .500 and Woodson will say, given our player situation, it was a good year. And IU will give him an extension.

Don't laugh... it's akin to the dude who murdered both of his parents and then begged the judge for mercy because he was an orphan...

Posted
1 minute ago, OKHOOSIER said:

Archie was 139-63 with four straight NCAA tournaments and four straight seasons of 24+ wins to include the EE run when we hired him. He was hardly “flavor of the month.” I didn’t like Archie as coach either but this is revisionist history. He was at least talked about in connection to almost every major opening from about 2014 on. 

He was only ever HC for 6 seasons at Dayton which is a well-oiled machine from a basketball program perspective. He had 5 20+ win seasons, an EE, and three first weekend exits. He was associated with major openings because people assumed he'd be like his brother Sean. They are totally different people. The fact he was not a good personality fit should have been identified during interviews. Compare that to someone like Dan Hurley who had 17 years as a HC under his belt before going to UConn. When a struggling program, like UConn post Ollie or IU right now, is making the next coaching hire... they need to be sure of what they are getting. Archie did not have the personal attributes or coaching track record for him to have been considered a great hire in my book. It is easy to understand why the decision was made, but I wasn't very excited about it at the time and neither were others, so I'd hardly call it revisionist history to be fair.

Posted
50 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Not sure if that's in jest or not.  If it isn't, IMO there is absolutely NO WAY IN HELL a member of the BoT would sign up on btb let alone use a screen name so close to their real name.  Nothing personal DoctorP but that's a pretty crazy take.

Or is it? It could be so obvious that is slides under the radar. :D 

Posted
2 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

It could be as simple as "they don't give a sh!t who knows how they feel."

IMO there is too much societal belief that everything is influenced/rigged. Sure, that happens and is possible. But what's also possible is that people, including reporters, act independently and without 'getting a message' from somewhere.

People do love their conspiracy theories. Probably all of us do to some extent.

Posted
1 minute ago, Home Jersey said:

He was only ever HC for 6 seasons at Dayton which is a well-oiled machine from a basketball program perspective. He had 5 20+ win seasons, an EE, and three first weekend exits. He was associated with major openings because people assumed he'd be like his brother Sean. They are totally different people. The fact he was not a good personality fit should have been identified during interviews. Compare that to someone like Dan Hurley who had 17 years as a HC under his belt before going to UConn. When a struggling program, like UConn post Ollie or IU right now, is making the next coaching hire... they need to be sure of what they are getting. Archie did not have the personal attributes or coaching track record for him to have been considered a great hire in my book. It is easy to understand why the decision was made, but I wasn't very excited about it at the time and neither were others, so I'd hardly call it revisionist history to be fair.

We are in agreement on this. I was all in on Pearl last time, but figured our squeaky clean administration would not consider it. I understand Archie had his warts we should have vetted, but on paper it was lauded. No one thought he would fail. I thought Woodson would probably fail from the jump. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...