The #2 Movement
- Thread starter TC4THREE
- Start date
It used to be a joke when my friends and I were out - ask the question "Do you remember where you were when JFK was shot? If yes, hang with us, if not, you might want to check out that group over there. LOL
A couple thoughts:
"Value of scholarship at schools with lots of visibility now vs. 20 years ago" - If anything, with so many sports networks, conference tv channels, etc., one might think the number of transfers would go down because kids don't need to all migrate to a better program with improved visibility after 1-2 years to showcase themselves. Sure, maybe that exists a little, but certainly the exposure gap is much less so than it was 20-30 years ago. Penn State hoops has done nothing to warrant being on television for as long as I've been alive, but we can watch every painful, miserable second of every one of their games if we want to. So I'm not understanding your exposure/visibility thought.
"More at stake now" - for the 1-2% of D1 basketball players that actually make it to the NBA, yes there is more at stake. There is an absolute sh*%load of money to be made thanks to ridiculous TV contracts. But the number of transfers each year is 700-800 whereas less than 100 people get to the NBA any given year (draftees + unsigned free agents). So yes, there's more at stake, but when you look at the numbers, I don't think "more at stake" is driving the increased transfer because way more kids are transferring than would ever have a chance at making it.
You've got a whole slew of things in here, each one of which could be it's own topic in a now-vs-then discussion. But with respect to your opening question of whether teens and young adults have more pressures on them than that of generations ago, I don't know. The average person wants his/her kids to have a better life than they did. I guess because of that, you could argue that parents today pressure their kids to "do good" in whatever they're doing at a level that exceeds the previous generation, just as that generation did before them.
So it's plausible that youth today grow up knowing greater pressures, however as technology advances and cost of goods decrease in a more global economy, it actually becomes easier to accomplish a lot of the same things as done in the past. In other words, you can achieve more today with the same amount of effort as the generation before. Take a research paper for example. If you have 5 hours to write a paper, you can put almost the entirety of your time doing it; 30 years ago you might have lost an hour going to a library or finding a neighbor that had an encyclopedia collection you borrow. So today your work product should be better because you had more time to do it. Maybe not the best example, but you get the idea. The point being, the pressures might be greater in an absolute sense, but it's a lot more difficult to definitively prove they're greater relatively speaking.
Some of the other things you mentioned; I'm sure a case could be made that either younger or older generations had it harder. Civil unrest with a madman president vs. unrest caused by practically transparent injustices against the black community in a civil rights movement? Since you brought up the transgender thing, are there more men trapped in women's bodies than there were 30 years ago? I'm not pretending to know... but let's not throw in the kitchen sink with a basketball transfer discussion and make a six-degrees-of-separation connection between basketball transfers and the cold war.
Last edited:
They are part of today's generation of young adults, but they appear completely willing to take instruction, make thoughtful decisions, and gut it out in adversity. I do tend to agree that young people today seem to feel far more entitled than previous generations and we saw it in a couple of Painter's teams a few years back, but the core of last year's team seemed quite the opposite.
That's fair, but I wasn't talking about this Purdue team at all or anyone that didn't transfer from it.
Last edited:
I am with you on so many of these...damn near all. Except nam. I was the lotto age and they didn't reach my number. I went to the wall a few years ago and one of the guys with part of a bullet lodged in his head copied off 7 of his friends names in one battle I believe. Chicago as you mentioned.
The photo we remember... http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2...y_shootings_told_through_pictures_photos.html
I agree. I wasn't disagreeing with your point, but was just using it to highlight some of the guys.
Sorry if I seemed off base. I was only focusing my response on someone's response above about if kids have it harder or easier today than previous generations.
Not to get into a no win situation, but there are no more men trapped in women bodies than before. If more men felt they were trapped then it is not genetics and if not genetics, then there is no trap. You either have XX or XY.
I believe that studies with identical twins rules out the genetics hypothesis.
Here is the rub, I have nothing against people that think they are a different gender, their choices don't impact me at all.
But when they are dead and buried and in 1000 years when aliens dig them up and check for their gender, they will come back as whatever gender they were born with and not what they identified as.
Look up Atrazine and it's effects on male frogs. Atrazine is one of the most common chemical found in our water supply throughout the US, that and some other environmental factors in our control are the cause for the feminization of males across the Us.
Hey you get shot enough (thanks Army) things get put in perspective pretty quickly. If you wanna marry a goat, I couldn't possibly care less because as I said, your choices don't impact me one bit.
Win, lose... I don't care as long as I have a cold beer and my wife near by.
Good point. Similarly, hormones -- including estrogen -- have been increasing in our water supply and in the food chain after decades of manufacturing waste effluents have been accumulating. Many of these molecules are considered potent drugs that are fat soluble, so they tend to accumulate in the body and in the food we eat.
I have seen similar discussions about the causes of autism, which has been greatly increasing over the past decade.
Do Dah, I'm curious... is that your picture in your avatar?
HA! good one ... appropriate for our discussion!!! ... touche'
I've found a whip to be needed when getting players to play zone ....
You're so full of crap. What you fail to realize is that IU basketball is "just another program". I saw most of those five banners hung, and I haven't seen anyone close to hanging a real one since Knight left. Davis made a nice run with Bob's kids who had something to play for, and then went straight down hill. Don't count on Sean's little brother to be the one to bring true greatness back to what used to be a feared program. I doubt there's a coach in the league concerned about playing IU with Davis, Crean, or now Archie at the helm. Now go back to the pig sty.
Well, I would need to read the study and my money says that those with somewhat of a background in statistics would have many questions after reading what was intended for the masses. Sadly, in all facets of life many think a study says something it doesn't. Having a son in law that has two partners in their company doing pharmaceutical research on DNA no doubt would be interested in the findings they are unaware
TC4THREE; you are absolutely correct; Archie hasn't coached a game yet at IU. Of course there is no way yet to know how well he'll do.
However, the reason for IU optimism is warranted. Archie's relative success at Dayton (an elite 8 and four straight tournament appearances) was accomplished without one single top-150-composite recruit. Not one. Ever.
Rankings aren't everything, but they are an indicator of player potential, and starting with Crean's leftovers at IU, Archie will inherit a roster with seven top-150-composite recruits. He has also secured three top 100 composite recruits for '18 without having coached a game yet. Once again, that doesn't guarantee anything, but it's a very good sign. Add to that Schilling and Bruiser having reputations as pretty good development and skill guys and Archie's Dayton defensive efficiency, and there you have the optimism.
However (surprise, surprise) I find it really hard to believe Twin's statement. As for Twin's prediction; I'm more than certain that Twin dubbed Crean as a veritable imbecile and incompetent. (I get the Crean lack of defense and 'weirdness' criticisms, but he ran a good offense IMO). Now he's saying that Archie will be as bad as the guy he dubbed all but the worst coach possible? That's a stretch of a prediction, and I'm curious what basis he has for thinking that Archie and Crean are pretty much equals.
It was also accomplished in the A-10. And the years they won the A-10 it was without some of the better teams that moved on into the new Big East. The Big Ten is a step up.
The one E8 run at Dayton was the one impressive thing I see on the resume but one good tournament run doesn't seem to be much of an indicator to me. I could put together a rather unimpressive list of coaches who had one good run to the E8 or FF.
So yea he'll recruit at a higher level at IU compared to Dayton. No shock there. He will also be competing against a higher level of competition night in and night out. Maybe he'll be great. Maybe he'll be average. Maybe worse. If you asked me to guess I'd guess above average but if you're setting expectations at a Final Four within the next five years I think there's a great chance you'll be disappointed.
He may not have had top 150 kids, but his recruiting wasn't lacking behind other teams in his conference either. He has done a good job, but let's see what he can do against other top coaches on a regular basis. The University of Indiana (according to Anderson who just committed) has a depleted roster next year. They should struggle. If he makes the tournament, that would be impressive. If IU goes with Phinisee and he struggles against bigger more athletic guards in that system, it would set him back. Not to mention he doesn't have enough size at the 4/5 going forward currently. He signed three players at relatively the same height/weight/athletic ability. Great for depth, but it doesn't address the pressing needs. IU is rebuilding and I am curious to see if fans and the administration shows patience.
Miller likes the same type of players and he is willing to shop local. It is concerning for Purdue because historically, Purdue struggles in head to head recruiting battles with IU. That was why I like Crean. He would go all over the country dishing out offers and give Purdue a chance at local talent picked over by the blue bloods. Winning Williams straight up was a very good sign. Losing Anderson after one visit and a few weeks of attention by IU is a very bad sign. Overall, I think Purdue is on the upswing and Painter really only wants people willing to buy into his system, even if it isn't his first, second, third, or even fourth choice. With Carsen, the '17 class, and Williams there is more to be excited about for Purdue. I don't think IU will have a quick rebuild. I could be wrong, I just don't see it. If Purdue can land one or two of the Big guards they are targeting and Dowuana they will be in great shape. If Purdue can land Talen or Henry, in addition to the guards and Dowuana they would have a much more well rounded class and the nod would clearly go to Purdue over IU with their three wings (although one reclassifies so technically just two wings).
Last edited:
Great post. I would contest your low expectations for IU this coming year, in large part because I believe that the talent is there, and that IU had its talent underutilized by Crean. Yes, they lost three top scorers, but Anunoby was injured for the majority of their swan dive during the second half of last season, and Bryant and Blackmon are crap-ass defenders to say the least. Also, IU will defend better (if nothing else, because there's nowhere to go but up).
I love the part of your post about Crean's wandering shotgun recruiting having been good news for Purdue (and Butler, and MSU, and OSU, and Michigan, etc, etc). The converse is much better for IU. For instance; all three IU signees from last week had been on Michigan's campus, were offered in person while on their campus by Michigan, and were still being actively recruited by Michigan. Crean could get in the room with Midwest kids, but once they got to know him? Oh boy.
A little more: completely agree that Purdue is in good shape; Carsen Edwards should be all-B1G 1st team going forward. Also, though IU just signed three 6'7" - 6'8" guys, they are all completely different players. Anderson is a catch and shoot that doesn't defend much yet, Thompson is a true big at 6'8", and Hunter is a 6'7" skinny slasher with guard skills. So, to say that IU recruited three similarly sized guys is not to say that they only pulled one style of player last week.
Cheers
Please, keep facts as just that....When Crean was hired I made the same statement I made with Davis and Kelvin....that neither would take IU back to the promised land. You ridiculed that as you stated Crean would return IU to the land of Final Fours and banners. Well, you were right on one point....that Crean did hang a banner though it was for what...finishing fifth or sixth as a reward to "his" players. So, my statement about Two Tone's ineptitude as a coach has held true. Miller will not take IU back to the top either...I think the major difference is that he does teach defense and as one who believes defense wins games (See Bob Knight and Gene Keady) I think Archie will win a few more games but not enough to put IU at the top of heap any more than Crean did. The best of the four since Knight was Sampson but as I said when he was hired, he had IU on probation within two years. Again, as one who set his clocks to watch IU games for a long time, I can admit that IU isn't special in athletics anymore. Not even soccer. My prediction for every hire since Bob was canned has come true. Look for the same with Miller as he's no more special as a coach than IU is as a team. And the Voo Doo lady will get another check this fall.
I ridiculed that and I was the one who predicted final fours and banners?!?
Sweet argument tactic Twin! Attribute a statement to me that was never said, and then argue against it while portraying me as unreasonable. Did some IU fan somewhere predict that? No doubt and so what.
As usual, your credibility flies out the window and you are far beneath the many sane posters on this board.
Good day sir.
JM has been civil and respectful. I like his basketball knowledge. Let's not throw him into the same pile as LOLOLOLOL, or the rational guy.
At least I have creds to "fly out the window". Tell all to see that you didn't openly support Davis, Kelvin, and Crean and that you never said that you thought Crean would take the program back to it's glory days. Tell all what your former name was on Peegs.
I don't know that he's been civil and respectful. The only difference I can see between JM and those others you mention is that he can type a complete sentence.
What hasn't been mentioned about that Elite 8 run is right before the NCAA's, they lost to St. Joseph in the quarterfinals of the A10, and that they were ranked only two times in the season...#25 in week 5 and 18th in the final poll after the NCAA finals. They lost to St. Joseph's three times that year.
