Bert to SMU

[keefe]

Meanwhile, our only Final Four in the last 39 years was coached by........

Dwyane Wade?

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Weird, 3 tournaments in 7 years also is 3 tournaments in 4 years.  I guess you were being selective and using "tongue in cheek".   First Big Ten title outright in decades.  Good team coming this year.  Perfect APR scores three straight years.  He's had his share of issues, no doubt.

Meanwhile, our only Final Four in the last 39 years was coached by........

Selective sampling all around... "Crean reached every Final Four in 2003! Dynasty!"

[wadesworld]

Weird, 3 tournaments in 7 years also is 3 tournaments in 4 years.  I guess you were being selective and using "tongue in cheek".   First Big Ten title outright in decades.  Good team coming this year.  Perfect APR scores three straight years.  He's had his share of issues, no doubt.

Meanwhile, our only Final Four in the last 39 years was coached by........

3 Tournaments in 7 years is what he's done at IU. Not sure why that's hard to comprehend. It's a fact. He's coached at IU for 7 years. He's gone to 3 NCAA Tournaments in those 7 years. There is nothing at all selective about it. That's looking at the full body of work. Looking only at his (very minor by IU standards) successes is where "selective" comes in.

Again, true blue bloods (which IU is) respond to coaching mistakes (which Kelvin Sampson was) by turning around and having huge NCAA Tournament success (UNC won a National Title 2 years after they fired their worst coaching mistake in program history). They don't respond by going 10 over .500 in 7 years. That's embarrassing. They don't have a ceiling of Sweet 16 (the best Crean has ever done beyond having a top 20 basketball player of all time fall into his lap). They should be competing for National Titles year in and year out, not proudly flaunting their 3 Tourney appearances in 4 years  . They should be the best program in their own state, not the 3rd best. They shouldn't have players transferring out because of the culture of drug use and players drunkenly driving over their teammates.

Crean is worse for IU than Sampson was. Sampson actually won their. Had they made the right hire they would've been back to winning and still "It's Indiana, It's Indiana." Instead, IU went from a cheating blue blood (like many blue blood programs are) to a middle of the pack B1G program (unlike any blue blood program).

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

3 Tournaments in 7 years is what he's done at IU. Not sure why that's hard to comprehend. It's a fact. He's coached at IU for 7 years. He's gone to 3 NCAA Tournaments in those 7 years. There is nothing at all selective about it. That's looking at the full body of work. Looking only at his (very minor by IU standards) successes is where "selective" comes in.

Again, true blue bloods (which IU is) respond to coaching mistakes (which Kelvin Sampson was) by turning around and having huge NCAA Tournament success (UNC won a National Title 2 years after they fired their worst coaching mistake in program history). They don't respond by going 10 over .500 in 7 years. That's embarrassing. They don't have a ceiling of Sweet 16 (the best Crean has ever done beyond having a top 20 basketball player of all time fall into his lap). They should be competing for National Titles year in and year out, not proudly flaunting their 3 Tourney appearances in 4 years  . They should be the best program in their own state, not the 3rd best. They shouldn't have players transferring out because of the culture of drug use and players drunkenly driving over their teammates.

Crean is worse for IU than Sampson was. Sampson actually won their. Had they made the right hire they would've been back to winning and still "It's Indiana, It's Indiana." Instead, IU went from a cheating blue blood (like many blue blood programs are) to a middle of the pack B1G program (unlike any blue blood program).

I disagree with a lot of this, but can at least see why someone would think this way. The bolded section however, I don't see how any reasonable person could believe that.

[tower912]

16 seasons a head coach.   8 trips to the big dance.   One trip past the sweet 16.    If a resume like that would have applied for the MU job after Buzz, no one would have wanted that guy.

[GoldenWarrior11]

16 seasons a head coach.   8 trips to the big dance.   One trip past the sweet 16.    If a resume like that would have applied for the MU job after Buzz, no one would have wanted that guy.

+1

[wadesworld]

I disagree with a lot of this, but can at least see why someone would think this way. The bolded section however, I don't see how any reasonable person could believe that.

A blue blood program can recover from NCAA sanctions by making a good hire.  It happens.  What's harder to recover from is when a coach takes a blue blood and makes them no longer a blue blood.  When you show that you're willing to settle for anything less than being in the hunt for a National Title year in and year out (obviously some years you just have bad years - UK missed the Tourney a few years ago but obviously turned it around the next year) you show you're no longer a blue blood.  That's what Crean has done to IU (as evidenced by the fact that Chicos wants to flaunt "3 NCAA Tournament appearances in 4 years baby!").  That wasn't acceptable at the time that Sampson left IU, even knowing he had cheated.  All of a sudden that's just what the culture is at IU.  "Hey, we might get to the Dance this year, this could be a good year!"  That attitude is a much, much bigger issue for a (now past) blue blood than having to move past NCAA recruiting violations.

[GGGG]

I think you are completely off base that Crean was the one to take "a blue blood and makes them no longer a blue blood."

After the 2001-02 Final Four season, IU did nothing significant under Mike Davis for four seasons and Sampson for two.  Hell you could even argue that they fell from blue blood status during the end of the Knight era where they didn't reach the Sweet 16 for his last six seasons.

So if you include those six seasons, and the Davis and Sampson eras, in those 14 years, IU went to 11 NCAA tournaments, but only went to the Sweet 16 (and then the Final Four) once.  That certainly isn't the resume of a blue blood.

[wadesworld]

I think you are completely off base that Crean was the one to take "a blue blood and makes them no longer a blue blood."

After the 2001-02 Final Four season, IU did nothing significant under Mike Davis for four seasons and Sampson for two.  Hell you could even argue that they fell from blue blood status during the end of the Knight era where they didn't reach the Sweet 16 for his last six seasons.

So if you include those six seasons, and the Davis and Sampson eras, in those 14 years, IU went to 11 NCAA tournaments, but only went to the Sweet 16 (and then the Final Four) once.  That certainly isn't the resume of a blue blood.

Fair points.  I guess I'm just looking at the attitude of the fanbases.  If their mindset really is "We've made 3 of the past 4 NCAA Tournaments!" I think that's far different from when Mike Davis was at the helm.

[keefe]

I think you are completely off base that Crean was the one to take "a blue blood and makes them no longer a blue blood."

After the 2001-02 Final Four season, IU did nothing significant under Mike Davis for four seasons and Sampson for two.  Hell you could even argue that they fell from blue blood status during the end of the Knight era where they didn't reach the Sweet 16 for his last six seasons.

So if you include those six seasons, and the Davis and Sampson eras, in those 14 years, IU went to 11 NCAA tournaments, but only went to the Sweet 16 (and then the Final Four) once.  That certainly isn't the resume of a blue blood.

Well, Crean was hired to return them to perennial glory and in that he has failed. That is the bottom line.

[GGGG]

Well, Crean was hired to return them to perennial glory and in that he has failed. That is the bottom line.

I agree with that.  Started well, but clearly fizzled.

[Lennys Tap]

Crean picked the absolute best time to go to Bloomington:

1. IU was two coaches removed from their "legend".

2. Zero expectations for years 1 and 2 (and 3, as it turned out). That kind of leash is rare at a mediocre program. I don't think it's ever happened before at a blue blood.

Tradition, great recruiting base and patience from the administration and fan base. Dream scenario. Mixed results.

[Spotcheck Billy]

I thought this thread was about Bert?

[Dawson Rental]

Weird, 3 tournaments in 7 years also is 3 tournaments in 4 years.  I guess you were being selective and using "tongue in cheek".   First Big Ten title outright in decades.  Good team coming this year.  Perfect APR scores three straight years.  He's had his share of issues, no doubt.

Meanwhile, our only Final Four in the last 39 years was coached by........

Does coaching in the final four count when the coaching job referred to is disavowed by everyone including the coach involved.

[ChicosBailBonds]

3 Tournaments in 7 years is what he's done at IU. Not sure why that's hard to comprehend. It's a fact. He's coached at IU for 7 years. He's gone to 3 NCAA Tournaments in those 7 years. There is nothing at all selective about it. That's looking at the full body of work. Looking only at his (very minor by IU standards) successes is where "selective" comes in.

Incredibly selective.

If you said the New England Patriots have only won one Super Bowl in the last 10 years you would be correct.  Of course if you said they won the last Super Bowl you would also be correct.  The first sentence would get you laughed out of the room, even though you are correct.

How you can ignore the first three years of what he had is beyond me, but whatever.  Sure feels selective.

At any rate, are you bitter or something about it?  Fred Glass and IU apparently don't agree with you.  As for Sampson....well that version of the Big Ten was not exactly what the current Big Ten is.   In the three years Sampson coached in that conference, it was rated 4th, 6th and 2nd...and when it was second he got fired and didn't finish out.    The conference that Crean has coached in has been 2nd, 5th, 2nd, 1st, 1st (they won the conference that year), 2nd, and 4th.   A lot harder conference version.

But whatever  3 of 7....Patriots have won the Super Bowl once in the last 10 years.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Fair points.  I guess I'm just looking at the attitude of the fanbases.  If their mindset really is "We've made 3 of the past 4 NCAA Tournaments!" I think that's far different from when Mike Davis was at the helm.

That's not the point....most level headed people know what happened in years 1 to 3.  Certainly the administration and AD do.  You don't seem to be level headed, and certainly most fan bases are...but they aren't the ones making the decisions.

Mike Davis coached in a Big Ten that one year sent 3 teams to the NCAA tournament.  That's how bad the Big Ten was when Mike Davis was around.

[ChicosBailBonds]

A blue blood program can recover from NCAA sanctions by making a good hire.  It happens.  What's harder to recover from is when a coach takes a blue blood and makes them no longer a blue blood.  When you show that you're willing to settle for anything less than being in the hunt for a National Title year in and year out (obviously some years you just have bad years - UK missed the Tourney a few years ago but obviously turned it around the next year) you show you're no longer a blue blood. 

Sure, if IU wanted to cheat like UK does, they probably could.  They don't want to go down that path.  Different strokes for different folks. 

What troubles me with your "selective" analysis is that you totally ignore that IU has been average for the last 20 years.  This isn't a Crean thing, they've been anything like a blue blood the last 20 years.   What happened in the last 5 or 6 years with Knight in the tournament?  They got crapcanned constantly.  Not just beat, but rolled by nobody teams.  It's one thing to get upset, lose by 3 to 5 points, quite another to destroyed.   What do they have in the last 20 years....3 Sweet 16's?  Two are from the Crean era.  How many Big Ten titles outright?  One.  Guess who.

My point is, yeah he hasn't returned them to the promise land, but no one has since Knight left and quite frankly the last half dozen years with Knight weren't at IU standards.  This is endemic within the IU program.  Would you argue he hasn't had the most success of anyone since Knight when you properly factor in what he walked into? 

[wadesworld]

Sure, if IU wanted to cheat like UK does, they probably could.  They don't want to go down that path.  Different strokes for different folks. 

What troubles me with your "selective" analysis is that you totally ignore that IU has been average for the last 20 years.  This isn't a Crean thing, they've been anything like a blue blood the last 20 years.   What happened in the last 5 or 6 years with Knight in the tournament?  They got crapcanned constantly.  Not just beat, but rolled by nobody teams.  It's one thing to get upset, lose by 3 to 5 points, quite another to destroyed.   What do they have in the last 20 years....3 Sweet 16's?  Two are from the Crean era.  How many Big Ten titles outright?  One.  Guess who.

My point is, yeah he hasn't returned them to the promise land, but no one has since Knight left and quite frankly the last half dozen years with Knight weren't at IU standards.  This is endemic within the IU program.  Would you argue he hasn't had the most success of anyone since Knight when you properly factor in what he walked into?

Haha.  So you'd rather have a team just underachieve and miss the NCAA Tournament then get "rolled" in it?  Got it.  How about a team with 2 of the top 5 draft picks in a single draft class being ranked number 1 for a large part of the regular season and only getting to the Sweet 16?  But hey, they didn't get steam rolled!

BUT that 2003 Final Four steam rolling wasn't embarrassing at all because we got there!

Have it both ways, Chicos.  Please.

Also, "no one has since Knight left" when speaking of "returning to the promised land" is simply false.  Unless you think making it to a National Title is falling short of the promised land.  Which is fine.  That's what you think.  Yet you continue to flaunt a Conference Championship and 2 Sweet 16s and conference rankings and claim Crean is better than Mike Davis because the B1G was harder and Mike only made it to the National Title.  Who would want to make it to a National Title when you can have a B1G title when it was ranked a spot better as a conference than when Mike Davis and Kelvin Sampson were around?  This argument is beyond silly.  Even from you.

You think picking certain years out of a larger body of work (see: a selection) is being something other than being selective while looking at a total body of work is being selective.  It's hilarious how ridiculous that is.

I guess the Golden State Warriors are the best NBA Franchise in history.  I mean, they've won 1 out of the last 1 NBA Titles!

Also, please provide proof that UK is cheating.  I'd love to see it.  Never have before.

And please tell me how Crean runs a program IU fans are proud of.  How players under Sampson were doing drugs and going crazy partying, but Crean's boys are all choir boys.  Don't forget all the suspensions that finally magically started to happen only after one of Crean's underage players drunkenly ran over his own teammate in a vehicle.  But it's just a coincidence, there was absolutely no drug or alcohol use in the 6 years prior to that instance, it was just that instance and it then spurred 2 other players to use marijuana after that.  Crean wouldn't look the other way as long as none of this culture got out in the public or anything.  Just ask Luke Fischer how clean all the players at IU were.

[keefe]

3 tournaments in 4 years

That is a Bronz Beast of Bloomington Banner waiting to happen...

[tower912]

Story on the IU boards is that Fischer came to MU because he was uncomfortable with the amount of drugs and booze being imbibed by his teammates, not just because he was homesick.     Of course, it is an internet rumor and should be treated as such.

[Galway Eagle]

Story on the IU boards is that Fischer came to MU because he was uncomfortable with the amount of drugs and booze being imbibed by his teammates, not just because he was homesick.     Of course, it is an internet rumor and should be treated as such.

Interesting because last year I visited some of my buddies still at MU and went to a massive party... 99% sure I saw Fisher there with a beer. Of course I can't be sure but how many 6-11 guys with a blond fohawk are there on mus campus?

[GGGG]

Being "uncomfortable with the amount of drugs and booze" doesn't mean he can't drink a beer.

[4everwarriors]

Gotta be 21, doe, ai na?

[naginiF]

Gotta be 21, doe, ai na?

for everyone else but me!  of course the drink'in age was 18 then and i was 18 er 17 er16?

[Galway Eagle]

Being "uncomfortable with the amount of drugs and booze" doesn't mean he can't drink a beer.

Well this was one of the bigger parties I'd seen at MU in 5yrs of being there plus my post grad year and Senior in HS visiting friends there... If someone was uncomfortable with drinking and such it didn't seem to be the right place to be... That being said there was a bouncy house but I don't think he'd have fit in it.