Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

ccgeneral

(2018) SG Romeo Langford - INDIANA HOOSIERS

Recommended Posts

Yeah, I think we will get there. Just not on the surefire rapid approach. Without Romeo or star power in '19, year 3 may be underwhelming too. Idk what to think. Just ready for fresh faces. Give me Moore, Smith tonight. Anyone new. Let's see what they have. Can't do worse. 

The above was posted by Doc in the Tennessee Tech game thread but I didn't want my thoughts to start that thread down another road.

As it's played out thus far this season, I'm becoming less sure Romeo is what we need.  Don't get me wrong, if he decides to come to IU, I'm all for it, but looking at the bigger picture is a 1 and done Romeo in our program's long term best interest?   Undoubtedly, he gives us the outside scoring that we're sorely lacking but most likely for only one year.   And does having Romeo for a single year do that much for future recruiting if he's not going to be there for the next year's recruits to team with?   Would we be better at going after a solid scorer who we can feel fairly confident will be with our team for at a minimum of 2 years (hopefully more).  It certainly wouldn't be a 5-star as is Romeo, but would it be better for establishing some longer term stability for our program?    I've got questions, I just wish I had the answers.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Yeah, I think we will get there. Just not on the surefire rapid approach. Without Romeo or star power in '19, year 3 may be underwhelming too. Idk what to think. Just ready for fresh faces. Give me Moore, Smith tonight. Anyone new. Let's see what they have. Can't do worse. 

The above was posted by Doc in the Tennessee Tech game thread but I didn't want my thoughts to start that thread down another road.

As it's played out thus far this season, I'm becoming less sure Romeo is what we need.  Don't get me wrong, if he decides to come to IU, I'm all for it, but looking at the bigger picture is a 1 and done Romeo in our program's long term best interest?   Undoubtedly, he gives us the outside scoring that we're sorely lacking but most likely for only one year.   And does having Romeo for a single year do that much for future recruiting if he's not going to be there for the next year's recruits to team with?   Would we be better at going after a solid scorer who we can feel fairly confident will be with our team for at a minimum of 2 years (hopefully more).  It certainly wouldn't be a 5-star as is Romeo, but would it be better for establishing some longer term stability for our program?    I've got questions, I just wish I had the answers.

 

I can't say that I disagree.  We'd all LOVE to have him at IU but every time I see him comment on our recruiting approach of "home town hero" he looks about as disinterested as one could be.  Just holding onto the hope this coaching staff is what I think they are....winners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I think we will get there. Just not on the surefire rapid approach. Without Romeo or star power in '19, year 3 may be underwhelming too. Idk what to think. Just ready for fresh faces. Give me Moore, Smith tonight. Anyone new. Let's see what they have. Can't do worse. 
The above was posted by Doc in the Tennessee Tech game thread but I didn't want my thoughts to start that thread down another road.
As it's played out thus far this season, I'm becoming less sure Romeo is what we need.  Don't get me wrong, if he decides to come to IU, I'm all for it, but looking at the bigger picture is a 1 and done Romeo in our program's long term best interest?   Undoubtedly, he gives us the outside scoring that we're sorely lacking but most likely for only one year.   And does having Romeo for a single year do that much for future recruiting if he's not going to be there for the next year's recruits to team with?   Would we be better at going after a solid scorer who we can feel fairly confident will be with our team for at a minimum of 2 years (hopefully more).  It certainly wouldn't be a 5-star as is Romeo, but would it be better for establishing some longer term stability for our program?    I've got questions, I just wish I had the answers.
 

If Romeo comes in and works his tail off from day 1 I see only good things coming if it. It gives Anderson a year to build strength and understanding along with the image of having the best Indiana player going to IU, again.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fkfootball1 said:

I think he's going to Kansas. It just makes a lot of sense.

I'm starting to think this is a real possibility. I think there is a chance that he could could still end up at IU but it's very questionable with the way the team has been playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I think we will get there. Just not on the surefire rapid approach. Without Romeo or star power in '19, year 3 may be underwhelming too. Idk what to think. Just ready for fresh faces. Give me Moore, Smith tonight. Anyone new. Let's see what they have. Can't do worse. 
The above was posted by Doc in the Tennessee Tech game thread but I didn't want my thoughts to start that thread down another road.
As it's played out thus far this season, I'm becoming less sure Romeo is what we need.  Don't get me wrong, if he decides to come to IU, I'm all for it, but looking at the bigger picture is a 1 and done Romeo in our program's long term best interest?   Undoubtedly, he gives us the outside scoring that we're sorely lacking but most likely for only one year.   And does having Romeo for a single year do that much for future recruiting if he's not going to be there for the next year's recruits to team with?   Would we be better at going after a solid scorer who we can feel fairly confident will be with our team for at a minimum of 2 years (hopefully more).  It certainly wouldn't be a 5-star as is Romeo, but would it be better for establishing some longer term stability for our program?    I've got questions, I just wish I had the answers.
 

Wouldn't make a difference, there is only one way that CAM can approach this. He has to go hard after Romeo. Too many boosters wouldn't endorse otherwise. First major 'bump in the road' moment.

Sent from my SM-G930P using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Romeo is absolutely an important player to get. He makes us much better next year and boosts our national profile. Look what Trae Young is doing at Oklahoma. It doesn’t matter that he would be a one and done. Landing him sends a message that IU is appealing to top talent.
That being said, he isn’t coming here and I would not be surprised if TJD starts focusing on other schools as well. We just don’t have the appeal anymore and I don’t know how good of a recruiter Archie is. Can he land top thirty talent?


IF recruiting is an issue for Archie, which personally I don't believe it will be, Eddie Schilling helps that quite a bit.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Romeo is absolutely an important player to get. He makes us much better next year and boosts our national profile. Look what Trae Young is doing at Oklahoma. It doesn’t matter that he would be a one and done. Landing him sends a message that IU is appealing to top talent.
That being said, he isn’t coming here and I would not be surprised if TJD starts focusing on other schools as well. We just don’t have the appeal anymore and I don’t know how good of a recruiter Archie is. Can he land top thirty talent?
Well since hes not coming here per you let's talk 2019. If we wiff on the in state guys id be very concerned iu has totally lost its appeal to top 20 guys. We'd probably be on a Wisconsin type recruiting path.

Sent from my SM-J700T using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

NEW ALBANY — New Albany delivered a gutty performance Friday at the Doghouse and slipped past Pike 61-55. 

Romeo Langford poured in 34 points as the Bulldogs (7-1) won their 33rd straight home game in front of another sellout crowd. Sean East added 17 as New Albany's dynamic duo paved the way once again for the home team.

“This was a good win for us,” Bulldogs head coach Jim Shannon said. “[Pike] is going to win some games.”

The Bulldogs, who led by as many as nine points in the second half, was a perfect 14-of-14 from the foul stripe in the final period to secure their fourth straight win.

“We maintained out poise most of the night,” Shannon said. “Pike played really hard and really well, but in the end, we hung on and stepped up and made some free throws.”

Langford and East scored all but two of their team's second half points.

“Everyone knows those two are going to carry us,” Shannon said. “They're out 1-2 punch but some other kids are going to have to step up. I think we have kids that are capable of stepping up and I thought we took good shots tonight as a team.”

Langford, who moved into 12th on the state's all time scoring list, was bounced around all night by the rugged Red Devils (2-4) defense.

“It felt like neither team really got into a good flow,” Langford said of the game, which was marred with whistles throughout. “It was a tough game to get into a nice feel of things. In the first half it was tough for me to get to the middle of the paint. Things opened up for me in the second half and I was able to take it to the basket more and got to the line.”

A Langford step-back triple put the host on top 9-0 at 5:05 on the first quarter clock. Pike responded and closed within 14-13 at the first stop. Langford then proceeded to score 10 of his team's 12 second quarter points as the Dogs led 26-23 at intermission.

“Their whole game plan was to make it ugly,” Shannon said. “That's a good strategy. They play a lot of kids and were fouling a lot and the referees get tired of calling all of them and the flow just gets out of whack. Then the whistles stop because the refs want some kind of flow and then you can't get a shot off without getting grabbed.”

East hit his only 3-pointer of the contest early in the third frame as New Albany rebuilt its nine-point advantage. The senior guard has just one first half field goal, and his running mate was encouraging East to shoot more.

“[Langford] was telling me to shoot the ball more,” East said. “I just needed to get my feet set and then made some shots.”

East scored 13 of his 17 in the second half.

“He just wasn't taking shots he normally takes,” Langford said of East. “I was just telling him to keep shooting and then he hit a 3 and got going.”

The Red Devils made one last run and tied the game at 43-43 with 5:11 left, but couldn't take a lead. New Albany did not commit a fourth quarter turnover and finished plus-7 in the giveaway/takeaway department.

“Late in the game Coach wants Romeo and me to get the ball and get to the line and knock them down,” East said. “Fortunately, we did that and now we get three days off. I don't think I've ever had a three day weekend at New Albany.”

New Albany is back in action Thursday at Evansville Central (1-5). The Bulldogs next home game is Jan. 5 versus unbeaten archrival Jeffersonville.

NEW ALBANY 61, PIKE 55

Pike                 13  10  13  19—55

New Albany     14  12  12  23—61

     Pike (2-4): Hunter White 4, Ditwan Gary 8, Ahmoni Jones 14, Steve Miller 6, Darian Porch 17, Chris Robinson 2, Brandon Vernon 4.

     New Albany (7-1): Romeo Langford 34, Darin Starks 2, Sean East 17, Derrick Stevenson 2, Julien Hunter 4, Trey Hourigan 2.

     3-point field goals: Pike 1 (Porch); New Albany 3 (Langford 2, East).

     Rebounds: Pike 31, New Albany 29.

     Turnovers: Pike 12, New Albany 5.

     Field goal shooting: Pike 24-49, New Albany 17-45.

     3-point shooting: Pike 1-11, New Albany 3-15.

     Free throw shooting: Pike 6-8, New Albany 24-29.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not but so far so is getting outdone. So let's stop acting like Schilling is some sort of savior. 
 

I expected some bigger payoffs from him with such a big class. Seems to me like he is biggest on Langford and Brooks. Anyone else I'm missing. Probably.

I'm sure he played a part in some of our other current commits at a lesser extent.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm not but so far so is getting outdone. So let's stop acting like Schilling is some sort of savior. 
 

Savior? No, but thanks for putting words in my mouth.

We all know a high profile recruitment is either 1)built upon a relationship with a particular recruiter, head coach, and familiarity with the associated school often over a period of years or 2) won by the highest bidder. This staff has been together at IU for 9 months. I don't know who he was *supposed* to have landed by now based on where IU stood with Romeo, Garland, and other high profile recruits previously but we all seem pretty satisfied with the 2018 class so far. Starting well behind the 8 ball with RL and coming off last season's embarrassment I'd say it's a bit of an uphill climb in recruiting. But again, we all seem satisfied with 2018 as it exists currently. I'd be hard pressed to say they've underachieved, nor would I believe Schilling wasn't involved of any of them. Like I said, he's *helpful* in the arena of recruiting.

If he were a savior, we'd have Garland, Romeo, and a horde of other 5 stars knocking on the doors of SSAH, and probably for the wrong reasons.




Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Flint and Ostrom have had the same amount of time here to recruit and have multiple recruits. 

Ms chilling has an advantage since he was already recruiting at a high level school before coming here. Yet nothing. 

 

 

Should we fire him? In your opinion what makes him worthy 9 months in?

 

I mean, he hasn't gotten the big fish in 9 months so he's evidently worthless by what I'm reading.

 

It's probably pretty easy to convince your existing recruits to change their mind from playing ball in LA to playing ball in Indiana.

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, HinnyHoosier said:

 

Should we fire him? In your opinion what makes him worthy 9 months in?

 

I mean, he hasn't gotten the big fish in 9 months so he's evidently worthless by what I'm reading.

 

It's probably pretty easy to convince your existing recruits to change their mind from playing ball in LA to playing ball in Indiana.

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Now whose putting words in other people mouths. 

Its fine to have faith in him but he has shown nothing to indicate he's some magic fix to help Archie's recruiting issues. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Now whose putting words in other people mouths. 

Its fine to have faith in him but he has shown nothing to indicate he's some magic fix to help Archie's recruiting issues. 

 

T i t for tat, knew you'd say that. (Don't test my rhymes)

 

I never said he was a savior and I never said he was a magic fix. I simply said he can (and likely will) help with recruiting. You act as if he's of no value just 9 months on the job and I just have trouble seeing why. He's probably got the toughest recruiting assignments and those often take time. He's also here for the coveted in-state talent. This staff is 13 games into season #1 when this program had no chance at top tier talent coming into the year. My guess is that talent wants to see the product before becoming that product. If not, the kid is either truly passionate about the Indiana Hoosiers or there's incentive under the table.

 

Brass, you're a poster that with whom I usually find myself in agreement, but I think we've got to agree to disagree on this one. Time will tell, I could totally be eating some crow down the road, who knows. No harm done though, that's why we have discussion threads!

 

BTB, my apologies. Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Back to our regularly scheduled programming:

 

Romeo Langford is really good. Like, super good!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, HinnyHoosier said:

 

T i t for tat, knew you'd say that. (Don't test my rhymes)

 

I never said he was a savior and I never said he was a magic fix. I simply said he can (and likely will) help with recruiting. You act as if he's of no value just 9 months on the job and I just have trouble seeing why. He's probably got the toughest recruiting assignments and those often take time. He's also here for the coveted in-state talent. This staff is 13 games into season #1 when this program had no chance at top tier talent coming into the year. My guess is that talent wants to see the product before becoming that product. If not, the kid is either truly passionate about the Indiana Hoosiers or there's incentive under the table.

 

Brass, you're a poster that with whom I usually find myself in agreement, but I think we've got to agree to disagree on this one. Time will tell, I could totally be eating some crow down the road, who knows. No harm done though, that's why we have discussion threads!

 

BTB, my apologies. Didn't mean to hijack the thread. Back to our regularly scheduled programming:

 

Romeo Langford is really good. Like, super good!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

You literally said Schilling does help recruiting quite a bit. 

And all I said was the guy hasn't shown any results on that. 

You made a claim about the future I stated a fact about the present. There's nothing to agree or disagree about.  

We we as a fan base need to quit getting our hopes up and overhyping people  schilling is a guy with connections not sure about his recruiting chops though  didnt  he introduc the UCLA staff to Wilkes and somebody else led the recruitment  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×