Damezi Anderson enters the portal
- Thread starter ChoiceBeef
- Start date
- Status
How are you still posting on this site after getting completely body bagged about your lack of knowledge? Don't even bring up the word analytics when you don't even understand something as simple as strength of schedule. You're a clown. You're done here. No one respects anything you have to say after the embarrassment you've already put yourself though.
Hell, I predicted a FF run for the Boilers before the season. That turned out about as good as your liking IU's chances. The fact remains that IU had more or as much talent as most of the league, played as pure a cupcake pre-season as one can play, and we're still talking after it's over that they "might" have made the dance. Fact is, IU under Arch plays lazy, his vaunted pack line defense packs crap and has been figured out, his offense is about the same, he lets players do what they want, and I'll go so far as to say, he's not B10 material...talent or no. Get ready for a huge disappointment if there is a season coming up.
Mo......As I said, I trust both my mailbox and my friend more than I trust you.
And as I've posted before, I do business in Dayton. An associate who has for years had season tix to Dayton behind the bench, row two. Huge OSU FB fan but as big for Dayton BB.
He always said he didn't want Archie to leave, yet before the virus lock down I asked him if he'd take him back. Guess what his answer was?
Yep...he said no way.
Last edited:
Can you point to a year when the 11th place Bigten team has ever made the tournament?
They finished T-10th and conference finish/record is not a criteria used by the committe. The B10 was abnormally strong last year. Ohio State got in the year before with an 8-12 conference record, a lower NET, a 9th place finish, a lower KenPom rating, and a worse overall record than IU did last year.
IU would have been in the tournament had one been played.
Again, you have no valid answer to your statement. Sure, the NCAA likes having IU in, because they travel well...haven't had much of chance lately...they spend money, and they pad the NCAA coffers. But to continue to say "They would have been in this year" has no validity to it at all. Wishing doesn't make it happen.
As I said earlier, You're not going to change my opinion. IU made the tournament just as much as they missed if that is the stance you're going to take as it is for every other team. There wasn't a tournament to be played.
Last edited:
Okay. Sure. We got it. Easter Bunny will be at your house soon. Yep. Keep your rabbit's foot around your neck and that lucky buckeye in your pocket.
Should be a great FF run for IU and the mighty midget next year, what with all the talent he has coming in and back. Yes sir...you just wait.
Trying to call someone an idiot, being a condescending dick, and being completely wrong about it? What are you, an iu fan? Are you just going to continue to not acknowledge that you were blatantly wrong despite being a smug asshole about it? Go back to Peegs with the rest of the head-in-the-sand crowd.
Can you name a time a 9th place B10 team made the tournament up until Ohio State did it last year? You can't because it was the first time. There's no rule the committee uses stating a team that finishes X place in their conference misses the tournament. Nebraska finished 4th in the B10 two years ago and didn't make it. Conferences aren't created equal and it's exactly why conference standing isn't a criteria used by the committee.
Learn something new everyday huh?
So how can Purdue fans claim IU "missed" a tournament that wasn't played? Two-way street or no?
"Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in!" -- Michael Corleone
First, let me repeat this isn't a discussion that belongs here. It has nothing to do with Purdue Men's basketball. But I can't let this go unanswered. And since the post was made here, my response will be made here too.
Jay Wright, Tony Bennett, John Belein etc all those guys took baby steps before getting to where they were. Archie's not behind any of those guys after 3 years.
I can't say that I follow Villanova, Virginia, or Michigan. The best I can point to in the case of Nova and Virginia are the rare games of theirs I've caught, mostly in the post-season, or simply looking at records. As for Michigan, obviously I saw them more -- but still not nearly as much as I've watched my own team.
So I really have no idea how those programs progressed during those coaches' first several seasons.
But I can speak to how we've progressed during Archie's first 3 seasons. And the fact that it's a legitimate matter of debate speaks volumes. Some people insist we've progressed, others say we haven't. But even those who see improvement feel compelled to defend their case with this or that metric.
Well, if the improvement was really all that significant, nobody would have to support it with statistics. It would be obvious to anybody who pays attention -- and, more importantly, it shows up in the results.
Without getting too much into the weeds on a subject that doesn't even belong here, I would say that whatever progress our teams have made during any individual season, and spanning 3 seasons, has been.....insufficient. I'm not going to say it's been zero. It just hasn't been enough to justify sticking with the current coaching staff.
To me, one of the hallmarks of effective coaching is how a team progresses during a season -- wherever they start from, whatever their roster....are they clearly improving? And I've just never had that impression in any of Archie's 3 years at IU.
This whole thread has nothing to do with Purdue basketball if we're being fair. It was an honest post at first by ChoiceBeef as he has been up to date on a lot of portal entries. But this was obviously destined as another typical Archie shit-on fest because he somehow couldn't turn a player who clearly wasn't that good into an all-conference player and ultimately is choosing to leave the program to try and re-invent himself at a lower-major school.
There was actually decent dialogue until a disgruntled Knight-Apologist started talking out of his ass claiming Anderson was "creaned" from the team and made up some second hand rumor that heard from his imaginary buddy and it went south. This is exactly what the majority of these people wanted. Find another way to shit on Archie.
I am in agreement that Archie hasn't been great out of the gate but continue to believe that he is slowly but surely righting the ship. It may not be at the pace most IU fans would have liked, but I see the progress. Year 4 will be a telling year one way or the other. Archie will start to feel heat if it's another "meh" and if things go really south ie miss the tournament, then he could and probably should be gone. By next years team will be light years ahead of any other Archie coached IU in terms of mixed talent and experience. I'm certainly going to see things through, assuming a season is played next year, before completely jumping ship.
Last edited:
Great post....but you forgot the one common thread with IU coaches lately.
Bob Knight left it bare for Davis. Yet Davis took that bare cupboard of leftover Knight guys and made the FF..
Davis left it bare for Sampson. But Sampson did a much better job than Davis did in the short time he was there.
Sampson left it bare for Crean. This is all to true and the only legit excuse.
And...Crean left it totally bare for Lil Arch. Hardly. Crean left several quality players and recruits for Lil Arch.
Those are the facts of a current IU fan.
Mo, my old friend from years ago....No imaginary buddy Mo. Second row seats/big donor/IU grad/highly successful businessman. Facts. Anderson was told by the IU staff he might want to transfer because he would get no playing time....thus he was Creaned which in essence is what it is. Shitting on Arch isn't needed and is not what happened here. Facts are hard for you to understand...they were when Sampson was hired and you loved it. Even though folks told Ol' Mo that he was a cheat. No, you're unable to speak the truth when it comes to IU basketball, and folks on here and on the IU rivals board simply call you out for it. As for the Little Guy feeling heat, look no further than him slapping a clipboard out of his coaches hands. Multiple times.
And, unless Lil' Arch makes a sweet 16 or better next year...WITH ALL OF THAT TALENT AND EXPERIENCE....THE MOST HE'S EVER HAD...he's done. Hell Mo, you can even claim they won the whole damned thing this year. After all they finally beat a totally inferior team for a Big 10 tourney win. You guys should hang another banner declaring "We are the Champions 2020".
Highly doubt any self-respecting adult with the credentials you list above is a hanging out with a dipshit like yourself. I mean what self-appreciating adult uses words like “Mighty Midget” or “Meatchicken” (when describing another adult or university). You need a doctor or an institution, not some imaginary friend feeding you bullshit.
I think arguing about whether IU or Purdue could have made the tournament this year is fun, but about as useful as arguing about how many angels can sit on the head of a pin. Can’t prove either side of the arguments, and it often dissolves into yes-he-did/no-he-didn’t.
Maybe discussing whether Archies teams have improved year over year is a more interesting discussion. Several of the IU fans here have stated Archie’s teams have been getting better. Why do you guys think that? I can’t offer an opinion because I didn’t get to see many of IU’s games this year. I did watch the two Purdue games this last year and was not overly impressed. Purdue’s two bigs seemed to negate TJD, so the game fell onto the other IU players, who didn’t seem to have a plan. Just my opinion, but that was a coaching issue.
Maybe discussing whether Archies teams have improved year over year is a more interesting discussion. Several of the IU fans here have stated Archie’s teams have been getting better. Why do you guys think that? I can’t offer an opinion because I didn’t get to see many of IU’s games this year. I did watch the two Purdue games this last year and was not overly impressed. Purdue’s two bigs seemed to negate TJD, so the game fell onto the other IU players, who didn’t seem to have a plan. Just my opinion, but that was a coaching issue.
I don't think I used the term "missed" but now we're arguing semantics and IU narrowly making or missing the tournament this year would not change my opinion that I thought he would've done much better in 3 years, particularly with some of the recruits he's landed.
will agree with you on the tourney arguments. It's pointless. No tourney. No one got in. Not IU, not Purdue, not Duke, not Kansas. Waste of everyone's time. Wish everyone would see that and just stop wasting space on the internet.
I'm still in a holding pattern with CAM but getting ready to make a decision. Check with me in 9-10 months. Next year year I'm either all in, or all out. No more CTC excuses beginning next year. Recruiting is better but it has to translate into more than bottom tier B1G and NCAA bubble arguments.
It varies by year.
Year 1 there wasn't much expectations. Most had IU projected to finish anywhere from 8th to 10th and that's with IU losing it's 3 best players (OG, Blackmon, Bryant) from a team who significantly underachieved the year before. Robert Johnson was a solid returning player and Morgan had a breakout year but De'Ron Davis got hurt early and IU just wasn't good from talent perspective. They started a walk-on and had a a bunch of undersized guys playing in the front court. B10 wasn't very good that year but the fact the finished .500 was kind of surprising given a depleted roster. I thought for the most part his teams played hard given a few of the players left over from Crean already had their foot out the door.
Year 2 there was entirely way too high of expectations internally from the fan base due to Romeo's signing. Romeo and Morgan were very solid players and played at an all-conference level, but once you got past those two the talent level dropped off significantly and IU was playing with a bunch of inexperienced players. Yes losing 12/13 was very disappointing and even though the talent wasn't all there that was a team that still should have made the tournament. That was very frustrating.
You'll get mixed reactions depending on who you ask, but a lot of people thought IU was a fish out of water losing Morgan and Romeo. There was definitely highs and lows last year but overall the team was much more balanced and much better than the year prior. IU did squander some late leads at home against Maryland and Wisconsin that turned what would have been a very promising season that showed marked improvement into a meh season. Still, I believe that meh season would have netted an NCAA invite had the tournament been held. I think making the tournament was the bare minimum Archie had to prove going into last year.
Year 4 is a telling year and there isn't any doubt about it. He needs to have a strong showing in the B10 (minimum top half finish and a respectable seed) or his seat is going to be on fire going into year 5. Missing the tournament could potentially be grounds for losing his job and at that point I would support that call. But I don't think Archie has to worry about that this coming year because I think he has by far and away his best team, but only time will tell.
I can't quite tell how much of this is facetious and how much isn't. But...
I've never come across anybody who held this view (or, if they did, they never said as much). The roster and pipeline that year were in pretty good shape. And that was pretty universally recognized.
I'd generally agree with that. Mike Davis was a swing big, miss big recruiter. He did a lot of missing big. And his backup plans weren't often better than bunts back to the mound.
Well, obviously. What few players were going to stick around through the coaching change were dismissed. Crean took over a team with two returning players -- both were walk-ons and I think only one of them had ever seen the court.
Totally bare? No. But well-stocked? No, not that either.
Archie's first roster at IU had just 3 players who had been top 100 RSCI recruits -- Rob Johnson (#46 in 2014), Justin Smith (#87 in 2017), and De'Ron Davis (#40 in 2016).
That said, citing the hand he was dealt in terms of initial roster only gets his defenders so far. It does nothing to explain how -- for instance -- his teams can beat good opponents like Marquette (2018-19) and Florida State (2019-20) early in the season only to appear to stagnate, if not regress, as those seasons went on. It does nothing to explain how he's been virtually unable to find at least one halfway reliable perimeter threat in 3 years or how Langford can continue launching 4 or 5 treys a game despite shooting 26%.
IU's primary problem goes beyond Archie Miller. I've argued that we have a cultural problem that goes deeper than any single coach. Our standards have fallen hard and we have way too much tolerance and patience for mediocrity.
I've never come across anybody who held this view (or, if they did, they never said as much). The roster and pipeline that year were in pretty good shape. And that was pretty universally recognized.
I'd generally agree with that. Mike Davis was a swing big, miss big recruiter. He did a lot of missing big. And his backup plans weren't often better than bunts back to the mound.
Well, obviously. What few players were going to stick around through the coaching change were dismissed. Crean took over a team with two returning players -- both were walk-ons and I think only one of them had ever seen the court.
Totally bare? No. But well-stocked? No, not that either.
Archie's first roster at IU had just 3 players who had been top 100 RSCI recruits -- Rob Johnson (#46 in 2014), Justin Smith (#87 in 2017), and De'Ron Davis (#40 in 2016).
That said, citing the hand he was dealt in terms of initial roster only gets his defenders so far. It does nothing to explain how -- for instance -- his teams can beat good opponents like Marquette (2018-19) and Florida State (2019-20) early in the season only to appear to stagnate, if not regress, as those seasons went on. It does nothing to explain how he's been virtually unable to find at least one halfway reliable perimeter threat in 3 years or how Langford can continue launching 4 or 5 treys a game despite shooting 26%.
IU's primary problem goes beyond Archie Miller. I've argued that we have a cultural problem that goes deeper than any single coach. Our standards have fallen hard and we have way too much tolerance and patience for mediocrity.
I thought much of his response was sarcasm. Davis inherited a pretty loaded team. Haston, Jeffries, Netwon, ton of good role players who could shoot and play defense, etc...Davis was in over his head and fell out with IN HS coaches. Help is on the way...Bracy, Strickland, et al...never did pan out like he claimed. Mike Davis is a good guy but was not ready for the pay raise.
Rob Johnson is a great kid but never played like a top 50 recruit. Justin was and still is an enigma. And the Deron Davis that Miller has seen isn't a #40 recruit. However he does have the legs of a 60 yr old man.
I saw a game last night of IU when Davis was a freshman...comparing that Davis to the player this yr is just sad. His body completely betrayed him.
Crean's problems were roster management, no interest in defense, and overall, just being weird to the point of borderline creepiness.
Last edited:
Archie’s Kenpom numbers both offensively and defensively have improved significantly in each of his first 3 seasons.
Board for the school on International studies. School of Biology. Major donor to that school..We've heard your BIL story too many times. So which board is he on...Peegs or Rivals?
If only Kenpom numbers were the benchmarks of success rather than things like Wins, losses, conference standings, etc.
You're driving home the point I made above about having to cite statistics to demonstrate improvement and progress. If you're having to do that, it means that it's not otherwise perceptible -- which is to say, in all the ways that actually count.
I mean, how would you like to be the agent of a coach coming up on contract renewal, despite middling results in terms of W-L, league performance, tournaments, etc. and the best argument you're armed with is "Hey, forget about the teams finishing 6th, 8th, and 11th out of 14 and missing the tourney 2 out of 3 seasons, my client's Kenpom numbers both offensively and defensively have improved significantly in each of his first 3 seasons."?
Not exactly a strong case for retention.
When substantial improvement happens, it's obvious enough that nobody has to go on a search for supporting statistical evidence.
Meetchicken dammit...Meetchicken. If you can't read, have someone do it for you.
You seem to forget that IU's marginal game had already been completed, and they had convincingly beaten Nebraska. Their next 2 games were guaranteed Quad 1 opponents (including PSU who they had just beaten) and Maryland (who they should have beaten )
and losing to either of those would have been another quad 1 loss and not enough to "toss them out" without something like the last place teams in the Big 12,ACC SEC and PAC 12 ALL winning their Conference tourneys. There were not enough outstanding 1 bid leagues left, as they had all played their Conference Tourneys a week earlier...
IU didn't even have the oppty of playing another Quad 2 game,unless PU had advanced and they had played against each other in the Semis. And again that could only occur if IU had beaten Maryland. It's one thing to hate your rival-it's another to try and justify that obsession with fantasy scenarios. If the IU Nebraska game hadn't already been played then you'd at least have some rational basis for the claims you're making since Nebraska presented IU with an oppty for a devastating loss.
Nice post. My part about Bob leaving it bare was facetious for sure, and was to make a point about the hiring of Davis who was in no way qualified for the job. Sampson...a great coach who has no morals in regard to cheating or the players he brought in or left. He should have been fired for the kind of players he let come to IU. Honestly, he should have never been given the time of day at IU. Or anywhere.
Crean left Archie with enough talent that Miller should have done much better that first year.
So somewhat real and somewhat facetious
And I agree that it goes beyond Miller, but Miller is the guy putting a team on the court, and his teams do not perform like a Big10 team in the way they get lazy and do not play as a team.
IU's improved their win total every year under Archie. If not for KenPom showing analytical improvement, what more than actual wins and losses do you need? If you're looking strictly at W-L column you have no choice but to agree that IU has improved every year.
Look at their overall body of work before you declare those W & L's to be an accurate assumption of improvement. Yeah, they beat some good teams, but they've played one hell of a lot of cupcakes during Miller's tenure, and they've lost to some absolute fugly dogs.
Hey moron. IU and Purdue beat the same number of cupcakes in the non-conference this year. Difference is that IU had a winning record against their Q1 and Q2 opponents and Purdue didn't.
And Archie hasn't lost to a Q3 or Q4 opponent since his first year. Again, you know nothing.
Okay dipshit....who finished higher in the conference, using only conference games. I believe PU because they defeated IU twice again this season.
They TIED. Purdue got a higher seed in the BTT but that's irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. You were 16-15 and weren't making the tournament if there was one played unless you won the BTT.
- Status
