Do Not Fire Mike Woodson

[AH1971]

10 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Along with what Stuhoo said, Archie looked in over his head almost from the beginning. Probably because he was young I held out a little hope longer than I normally would. But most other HoF coaches listed gave fans/admins real tangible evidence of an upward trajectory, often in the form of recruiting. 
 

With that said, recruiting is different now with unlimited transfers and NIL. I’d give Woody the benefit of the doubt and say this offseason (basically, March till now) he’s nailed it. That’s different than what those other coaches did through recruiting, but it’s quite possible we live in an entirely different cbb world now. 
 

If he can continue to dominate that aspect combined with some minor coaching adjustments, people are going to give him more time.  I still think there a limited time frame given his age, but we take things one season at a time.

Jay Wright had a worse record in year 3 than he did year 1. So did Mike Kryzewski. As did Scott Drew. John Beilein went 15-17 in year 3 at Michigan. You want to know who improved years 1 through 3? Archie Miller.

I don't buy for one second that people like you would have given these other coaches the benefit of the doubt. Your arguments clearly don't hold water. Archie Miller had a top 10 class in year 2 and followed that up with another 5* recruit. 

[IUCrazy2]

5 hours ago, AH1971 said:

Jay Wright had a worse record in year 3 than he did year 1. So did Mike Kryzewski. As did Scott Drew. John Beilein went 15-17 in year 3 at Michigan. You want to know who improved years 1 through 3? Archie Miller.

I don't buy for one second that people like you would have given these other coaches the benefit of the doubt. Your arguments clearly don't hold water. Archie Miller had a top 10 class in year 2 and followed that up with another 5* recruit. 

Jay Wright was in the Sweet 16 in year 4, Elite 8 in Year 5, tournament appearance in year 6, Sweet 16 again in year 7, and Final Four in year 8.  Yeah he might have been on the hot seat a bit heading into year 4 but he took off from there.  And that was in an era where you couldn't openly buy your team.

Coach K went to 2nd round in year 4 and 5 and was runner up in year 6.  He followed that with Sweet 16, Final Four, Final Four, Runner Up, Champion, Champion.

Scott Drew may make your point but he took over a program where players were literally killing each other.   So not exactly a top flight program and a crappy situation to boot.

In the past when you were recruiting high school seniors to build a team, you expected to see things take off around year 4.  That is when your recruiting and your system dominate the team.  Coaches that do well tend to hit their stride on or before year 4 and then have a period where they go on a run.  Woodson has his team, we should expect big things this year.  And yes, those other guys would have been on the hot seat in year 4.  The difference between them and Miller was that they made hay in year 4 and answered critics and he laid an egg.

[AH1971]

29 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Jay Wright was in the Sweet 16 in year 4, Elite 8 in Year 5, tournament appearance in year 6, Sweet 16 again in year 7, and Final Four in year 8.  Yeah he might have been on the hot seat a bit heading into year 4 but he took off from there.  And that was in an era where you couldn't openly buy your team.

Coach K went to 2nd round in year 4 and 5 and was runner up in year 6.  He followed that with Sweet 16, Final Four, Final Four, Runner Up, Champion, Champion.

Scott Drew may make your point but he took over a program where players were literally killing each other.   So not exactly a top flight program and a crappy situation to boot.

In the past when you were recruiting high school seniors to build a team, you expected to see things take off around year 4.  That is when your recruiting and your system dominate the team.  Coaches that do well tend to hit their stride on or before year 4 and then have a period where they go on a run.  Woodson has his team, we should expect big things this year.  And yes, those other guys would have been on the hot seat in year 4.  The difference between them and Miller was that they made hay in year 4 and answered critics and he laid an egg.

EXACTLY.

Which is why it’s stupid to declare a coach a failure after 3 years if he doesn’t instantly win and win big (more so talking Woodson here). 

I just think it’s hypocritical for the Fire Archie/Fire Woodson crowd after 2-3 seasons to sit there and say they would have given all this leeway to these current or future HoF coaches who had similar or worse resumes in the same time frame. But I understand there’s a narrative that needs driven home.

But cycling through coaches every 4-5 seasons because they don’t win at a high level overnight is only going to drive this program further and further into obscurity.

[J34]

10 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

EXACTLY.

Which is why it’s stupid to declare a coach a failure after 3 years if he doesn’t instantly win and win big (more so talking Woodson here). 

I just think it’s hypocritical for the Fire Archie/Fire Woodson crowd after 2-3 seasons to sit there and say they would have given all this leeway to these current or future HoF coaches who had similar or worse resumes in the same time frame. But I understand there’s a narrative that needs driven home.

But cycling through coaches every 4-5 seasons because they don’t win at a high level overnight is only going to drive this program further and further into obscurity.

Out of curiosity, what's your criteria on how long to give a coach to prove himself. I've always thought at least give them the full 4 year recruiting cycle. But with how NIL and the portal are, you should have a pretty good idea if they are going to be successful in year 2 or 3.

[AH1971]

1 hour ago, J34 said:

Out of curiosity, what's your criteria on how long to give a coach to prove himself. I've always thought at least give them the full 4 year recruiting cycle. But with how NIL and the portal are, you should have a pretty good idea if they are going to be successful in year 2 or 3.

3 years bare minimum barring scandal or something that resembles Kenny Payne’s tenure. And that’s regardless of the college basketball climate. Firing a coach every two years because you don’t like their overnight results is asinine. 

[J34]

27 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

3 years bare minimum barring scandal or something that resembles Kenny Payne’s tenure. And that’s regardless of the college basketball climate. Firing a coach every two years because you don’t like their overnight results is asinine. 

Not sure if you're calling me asinine, but I actually agree. Didn't you just say that it's stupid to declare a coach a failure after 3 years. So people are stupid and asinine if they can't keep up with your own  contradictions? In today's landscape, I don't think any of the coaches mentioned would have had the same leniency as they had then. 

CMW has everything he needs this year to be successful. Year 4. No excuses. 

[AH1971]

9 hours ago, J34 said:

Not sure if you're calling me asinine, but I actually agree. Didn't you just say that it's stupid to declare a coach a failure after 3 years. So people are stupid and asinine if they can't keep up with your own  contradictions? In today's landscape, I don't think any of the coaches mentioned would have had the same leniency as they had then. 

CMW has everything he needs this year to be successful. Year 4. No excuses. 

How did I contradict myself? I've been on record multiple times saying Woodson deserved a 4th year. 

[Hoosierfan2017]

36 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

How did I contradict myself? I've been on record multiple times saying Woodson deserved a 4th year. 

Absolutely nothing Mike Woodson did in his first three seasons “deserves” a fourth season. He got a fourth season because Scott Dolson is a puppet and Woodson’s buddy is the one calling the shots. 

[AH1971]

3 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Absolutely nothing Mike Woodson did in his first three seasons “deserves” a fourth season. He got a fourth season because Scott Dolson is a puppet and Woodson’s buddy is the one calling the shots. 

If Mike Woodson didn't deserve a 4th year, none of the current or future HoF coaches I listed prior did either.

I rest my case. 

[Home Jersey]

3 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

I rest my case. 

Promise?

[AH1971]

Just now, Home Jersey said:

Promise?

Now that I think about, probably won't. This is in fact the Do No Fire Mike Woodson thread. I do keep receipts though. 

[Home Jersey]

8 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Now that I think about, probably won't. This is in fact the Do No Fire Mike Woodson thread. I do keep receipts though. 

Hope you have a reason to pull out those receipts. Not that anyone is actually going to care about an internet troll saying “I told you so” as long as it means their team is actually winning. We haven’t had a ton of that lately. 

[AH1971]

6 minutes ago, Home Jersey said:

Hope you have a reason to pull out those receipts. Not that anyone is actually going to care about an internet troll saying “I told you so” as long as it means their team is actually winning. We haven’t had a ton of that lately. 

A troll? For defending the coach at IU? You literally have people in this thread who openly rooted for the team to lose last year.

Last thing I need is for some millennial from the east coast talking about IU and winning. You don't have a clue, you weren't around for it. 

Don't call me a troll. 

[Shooter]

1 hour ago, AH1971 said:

If Mike Woodson didn't deserve a 4th year, none of the current or future HoF coaches I listed prior did either.

I rest my case. 

Almost all of the coaches you have listed were young coaches just getting started. Most were showing some improvement by year 3. None are a good comp for Woodson - a veteran coach in his 60s who had some initial modest success with an inherited All American, then fell off sharply in year 3 after that guy graduated.

If you can't see the differences between evaluating Mike Woodson's record at IU after 3 years versus Scott Drew's record at Baylor after 3 years, I'm not sure what else to say. The only guy I've seen you name that is a half decent comp for Woodson is John Beilein at Michigan.

IU had a tough choice to make this offseason. Woodson did a great job in the portal, better than I expected. I hope he crushes it this year. But if he does, that won't change the absurdity of comparing his first three seasons to Scott Drew.

[AH1971]

2 minutes ago, Shooter said:

Almost all of the coaches you have listed were young coaches just getting started. Most were showing some improvement by year 3. None are a good comp for Woodson - a veteran coach in his 60s who had some initial modest success with an inherited All American, then fell off sharply in year 3 after that guy graduated.

If you can't see the differences between evaluating Mike Woodson's record at IU after 3 years versus Scott Drew's record at Baylor after 3 years, I'm not sure what else to say. The only guy I've seen you name that is a half decent comp for Woodson is John Beilein at Michigan.

IU had a tough choice to make this offseason. Woodson did a great job in the portal, better than I expected. I hope he crushes it this year. But if he does, that won't change the absurdity of comparing his first three seasons to Scott Drew.

Jay Wright was worse in year 3 than year 1, as was Mike Krzyzewski. I don't believe either would have gotten the leniency here given this boards standard. Hell Archie was light years improved in year 3 from year 1 and most wanted him gone after his 2nd season. 

[Hoosierfan2017]

All the talk about all-time great coaches who struggled early on is completely meaningless to IU’s situation. We’ve fired three coaches since Bob Knight for poor performance. After being fired by IU, none of them have high-major success. Davis was decent at times at lower levels, Crean was terrible at Georgia, and Miller is terrible at Rhode Island  

 

Sure, some coaches struggle early on and then go on to have great success. That. Is. Not. What. Has. Happened. At. IU. The coaches IU has hired have all been terrible post-Knight, except for Sampson who never should’ve been fired. IU’s problem is hiring terrible coaches and then keeping them for too not, not firing coaches “too early.” 

[HoosierHoopster]

4 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

All the talk about all-time great coaches who struggled early on is completely meaningless to IU’s situation. We’ve fired three coaches since Bob Knight for poor performance. After being fired by IU, none of them have high-major success. Davis was decent at times at lower levels, Crean was terrible at Georgia, and Miller is terrible at Rhode Island  

 

Sure, some coaches struggle early on and then go on to have great success. That. Is. Not. What. Has. Happened. At. IU. The coaches IU has hired have all been terrible post-Knight, except for Sampson who never should’ve been fired. IU’s problem is hiring terrible coaches and then keeping them for too not, not firing coaches “too early.” 

Agree with everything until the part about "all" being terrible post Knight. Crean wasn't terrible, you don't have multiple B1G titles/SW 16 runs and be terrible, but no need to recount his whole tenure of ups and downs, Crean couldn't win consistently at IU w/o the elite recruits he needed (after they left for the pros etc.), his recruiting fell apart and he was absolutely terrible at GA. 

[AH1971]

7 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

All the talk about all-time great coaches who struggled early on is completely meaningless to IU’s situation. We’ve fired three coaches since Bob Knight for poor performance. After being fired by IU, none of them have high-major success. Davis was decent at times at lower levels, Crean was terrible at Georgia, and Miller is terrible at Rhode Island  

 

Sure, some coaches struggle early on and then go on to have great success. That. Is. Not. What. Has. Happened. At. IU. The coaches IU has hired have all been terrible post-Knight, except for Sampson who never should’ve been fired. IU’s problem is hiring terrible coaches and then keeping them for too not, not firing coaches “too early.” 

Stability and continuity are two huge factors that go into winning at a high level consistently. Turning coaches over every 3-4 seasons because you don't like their overnight results isn't a recipe for success, clearly. There are some coaches who do win big right away but that's not the norm in this industry. 

[Shooter]

11 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Jay Wright was worse in year 3 than year 1, as was Mike Krzyzewski. I don't believe either would have gotten the leniency here given this boards standard. Hell Archie was light years improved in year 3 from year 1 and most wanted him gone after his 2nd season. 

Again with the guys who were young coaches in their 30s. Do you acknowledge that if Woodson turns it around this year, he is not going to give IU 5 NCAA titles over the next 40 years like Coach K gave Duke? The situations are not comparable.

What do you mean "most wanted Archie gone after 2nd season?". Archie was a young coach, I supported giving him time. Four years was appropriate. He stunk that fourth year and then was rightfully fired.

[AH1971]

1 minute ago, Shooter said:

Again with the guys who were young coaches in their 30s. Do you acknowledge that if Woodson turns it around this year, he is not going to give IU 5 NCAA titles over the next 40 years like Coach K gave Duke? The situations are not comparable.

What do you mean "most wanted Archie gone after 2nd season?". Archie was a young coach, I supported giving him time. Four years was appropriate. He stunk that fourth year and then was rightfully fired.

No one hires a coach thinking they're getting 40 years and 5 national titles. Not at all how the hiring process works. But I'd sure as hell take 3-4 more seasons of Woodson getting to the 2nd weekend of the tournament and winning at a high level so long as he continues to have an offseason like the one prior and then calling it quits on his own terms leaving the program better than he found it. Sure as hell beats the alternative of hiring Dusty May and then listening to this board call for his head because he didn't win a national title by year 3.