Do Not Fire Mike Woodson

[J34 1,425]

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 1,312]

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 20,343]

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 1,312]

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 5,710]

3 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

I rest my case. 

Promise?

[AH1971 1,312]

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 5,710]

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 1,312]

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 292]

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 1,312]

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 20,343]

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 6,490]

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 1,312]

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 292]

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 1,312]

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. 

[Scotty R 2,068]

8 minutes 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.

Some people wanted Archie gone after his first game

[Scotty R 2,068]

3 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

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. 

Aren't you getting tired of arguing the same point over and over again. You aren't going to change their minds because they already have their minds made up.

[WayneFleekHoosier 47,428]

48 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

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. 

I agree with the first part assuming Woody gets the results of course.  
 

As far as people calling for Dusty Mays firing, that would only happen with missed NCAAs in my opinion.
 

 Woody statistically underperformed expectations 3 straight years. With the third year being a missed NCAA. If his first year was a miss (which it was So close to being BTW) and then back to back NCAAs while outperforming expectations everything is changed.  

[AH1971 1,312]

10 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Woody statistically underperformed expectations 3 straight years. With the third year being a missed NCAA. If his first year was a miss (which it was So close to being BTW) and then back to back NCAAs while outperforming expectations everything is changed.  

Well we definitely have a differing opinion on this.

Making the tournament was the singular expectation I had for Woodson's first year, we hadn't been since 2016. Beating Purdue for the first time in 9 tries was also refreshing.

Year 2 I had higher preseason expectations although those were tempered when two starters went down for the majority of the conference season. Comfortably making the tournament as a 4 seed, sweeping Purdue, and finishing in the top third of the B10 was fine by me, but the blowout loss to Miami is the only thing people are going to remember.

Last year was a train wreck and unacceptable. Can't happen again. 

So no I don't think he's underachieved 3 consecutive years. But to each their own. 

[WayneFleekHoosier 47,428]

42 minutes ago, AH1971 said:

Well we definitely have a differing opinion on this.

Making the tournament was the singular expectation I had for Woodson's first year, we hadn't been since 2016. Beating Purdue for the first time in 9 tries was also refreshing.

Year 2 I had higher preseason expectations although those were tempered when two starters went down for the majority of the conference season. Comfortably making the tournament as a 4 seed, sweeping Purdue, and finishing in the top third of the B10 was fine by me, but the blowout loss to Miami is the only thing people are going to remember.

Last year was a train wreck and unacceptable. Can't happen again. 

So no I don't think he's underachieved 3 consecutive years. But to each their own. 

“Underachieved statistical expectations” 3 straight years.  All the computer models. 
 

I was mostly ok with the first 2 years personally. Year 3 was an utter trainwreck but glimpses of that were everpresent throughout the first 2 years despite TJD being a monster and carrying us along.