I think Purdue vs us is based on how you prefer to lose and how much you value ‘how you finish’, and honestly i’d probably say us first, but get why its debatable given purdue had a great reg season (although if you use head to head as a tiebreaker…)
What is not debatable is that we are talking about those three teams and we are DEFINITELY not talking about Minn/NW/MSU/MD/etc.
Exactly the same. Purdue was the best team in the conference over the course of the season and that means way more than a single elimination tournament within a weekend IMO.
You can obviously make a case for Purdue, but I think we’re probably happier with our season right now than they are with theirs.
We peaked at the right time and played great basketball over the last seven weeks. Our only three losses during that stretch were by a total of eight points. We won the BTT, got revenge on Louisville and became a national storyline before finally losing a 50-50 game to Oregon.
PU on the other hand was looking like a Final Four contender in February but lost to us twice and then got embarrassed in the Sweet 16 - by a really good KU team, to be sure, but still, the Big Ten champ shouldn’t lose by 30. It felt like they gave up at some point in the second half.
As for UW, this whole year was close but no cigar - 2nd place in the regular season, 2nd in the BTT, lost the Sweet 16 at the buzzer. For them the season was good but could have been so much more.
Wisconsin sure feels like they had the Michigan football type year. Most experience and talent returning (talent relative to college, not NBA), high expectations but came up just short all the way around.
Pretty uncanny parallel, actually. They even faltered at the end of the season, after looking like a juggernaut throughout the first 3/4. Wisconsin’s perpetual top 4 finishes and strong showings are really amazing. I know the country was saying this after Kaminsky, Dekker, etc. left, but it surely seems like next year will be the stiffest test to their reign. Losing FOUR starters (though keeping their best player), and the returning bench really didn’t look like more than decent career role players. I guess that’s essentially what happened to Iowa, this year.
Archie Miller to Indiana.
Looks like Indiana is hiring Archie Miller. Seems like a smart choice. Some of the names mentioned like Stevens and Donovan were unrealistic but Miller appears to be a really good coach. How much of an upgrade over Crean as a coach and recruiter remains to be seen but no reason to think he won’t be successful there.
Nice hire. Thought it’d end up being Marshall but he’s a nice back-up option.
That’s a great hire. I’m not looking forward to life with him at Indiana.
Indiana did well hiring Archie Miller. I like thinking a Big 10 program of Indiana’s ilk chose to quickly hire a good, solid coach instead of dragging itself through the muck of trying to reach higher, only to be turned away.
This is how Buckeye Nation views Indiana’s hire of Archie Miller:
Hartman is a graduate of Ohio State & worked for at least two publications focused entirely upon Buckeye sports before hooking up with the Dayton Daily News.
During these past two seasons, as OSU’s quality of play visibly eroded, Miller was increasingly seen as Matta’s successor at Ohio State, and right soon.
Imagine Chris Mack would be high on the Buckeyes’ list now. With Miller going to Indiana, a clear cut successor is gone, but that doesn’t mean OSU can’t get a great coach. They have the resources to do so. It’ll just most likely be more of an unknown.
I think Miller is a great hire by Indiana. But I don’t see a situation in which Indiana runs rampant over the conference. Too many good coaches for that to happen.
I have no idea about Mack. Maybe so.
“Successor” = Life’s too short. People worry too much.
I thought OSU already has a coach.
One might think, you know?
$3M is fine. As long as you’re not out of step with the market, the price is irrelevant. The point is to get the right coach, not to shop as if you’re buying a TV.
You can’t placate the fans with how much you saved on the contract if the team doesn’t perform.
I absolutely 100% disagree with that statement. I guess it’s not worth debating because we’re on two sides of the spectrum, but it’s never good business to say price is irrelevant. You always get what something/someone is worth and nowhere does the market say he’s worth $3 million a year. He’s done nothing to prove he should be making that salary and it looks even worse when comparing him to coaches making around $3 million.
They had money to spend and just spent it. One can argue you might as well have paid $4 million for Miller than $3 million for Underwood. (If given the choice)
Disagree. Sports are not a customary business. The shelf life of a coach is short. You’re not going to entice many guys by offering them a $250,000 raise. Taking a new job often requires uprooting your family, and there is always a ton of risk as things may not work out. Moreover, this is a business where salaries are constantly escalating. Paying this guy $3 million right now may easily be a bargain in 4-5 years. And the return on investment can be exponential. Jim Harbaugh, for example, is probably worth 2-3 times what we pay him. If Brad Underwood takes Illinois deep in the tourney at some point in the next 2-3 years, or if they start competing for Big Ten titles, his salary is easily worth it.
Moreover, again, you have to pay a lot because it takes a lot to get coaches to move. If you’re Illinois, you’re not going to go out and hire a coach with a losing record, right? Why? Because you already have that. So you want a winner. That limits your choices. And guess what? The schools with winners usually pay to keep those guys. Moreover, when you’re winning, everyone is happy, right? So again, it’s asking a LOT for a coach to leave a good situation where the fans are happy, and come into a new situation where’s the no guarantee of success. So you have to pay for that to happen.
Moreover, Oklahoma State to Illinois is a lateral move. Maybe a school like North Carolina could negotiate a little more with a guy like Underwood, in the sense that the UNC job carries with it a ton of prestige, and a possibility of getting elite recruits and winning national championships, whereas the Illinois job really doesn’t. But even then, coaches working in the elite jobs expect, and get, top dollar.
Sure, you could always gamble on a small school guy like Bo Ryan and see what happens, but that’s exactly what it is, a gamble. And then you risk season ticket holders losing faith in the program, and not renewing. I like what they did, and think it makes sense.
See that’s exactly my point, all you had were a bunch of “ifs” in there. He has yet to actually do it at a power conference school. If you say he did at Ok St, I say Groce did the same at Illinois his first year. Groce was a bunch of “ifs” as well at half the cost. That’s been my point all along, you’re hiring a coach at $3 million with more questions than answers so far in his career. It’s hope and you don’t pay $3 million for hope.
Serious question, do we know if Underwood can recruit? What has he shown he can recruit at a power conference school, or even at SFA?
Also, have to pay a lot? You mean like $1 million it got him to move to Ok St? Tough to move a family? You mean like how he’s about to do twice in two years?
My point overall is this seems like a great move and flashy because it’s $3 million a year. The school is saying “see we’ll pay this much for success”. When really you could’ve gotten a similar coach for less cost. They’re just worried about being perceived as cheap. Instead, they overpaid as a “show” move to their fans.
Well, as soon as he does it at a power conference school, he’s not moving to Illinois. I mean, let’s say he reaches the Elite Eight or Final Four at Oklahoma State. They’ll pay him accordingly, and now the only move he’s ever going to make is taking an elite job, which Illinois isn’t.
To some degree, anytime you hire someone, it’s hope. Archie Miller is hope, too - he’s never won anything in a power conference.
As I see it, he was probably about to double his salary at Oklahoma State, and making $3 million at Illinois was more attractive. But I don’t think he makes that move for only $2 million.
And sure, you could pay less. For that, you’ll get another Groce - not particularly proven, not exciting to the fan base.
I guess our point of disagreement is whether they could have “gotten a similar coach for less cost,” as you suggest. Underwood was very good at Stephen F. Austin, and this year had the #1 Ken Pom offense in the country. I think for Illinois to get someone like him, it does indeed take about $3 million. But, let’s see who NC State gets, for example, and what they have to pay. That’s a solid barometer.
Exactly! They’ll pay him accordingly at around $3 million probably. He would have PROVED he can carry a team to that success to get that salary.
EDIT: MY APOLOGIES. I MIXED UP MILLERS! I WAS THINKING OF SEAN SO MY BAD!
I can see the same argument about Archie, so that’s definitely valid. My argument there, which isn’t overly strong, is he’s maintained consistent success at a strong mid-major program. He had Dayton turned into competing consistently for conference championships. They’ve had some success in the tournament as well. Overall, he’s proven he can be a legit tournament team and more importantly, an at-large mid-major that it’s good enough to make it without needing to win it’s conference tournament. That’s a solid, solid coach IMO.
I guess I don’t see what’s exciting about Underwood. Obviously the guy has had great success at SFA and a good year at Ok St, but he hasn’t shown he can win with his players or recruit. Do we all think Hoke is a bad coach? Well what would you think about him after his success at San Diego St and first year at Michigan? Don’t think about his years after with what we know, but how he’d be perceived at that time.
I also think the Illinois fans would be ECSTATIC if they were hiring Groce after his Ohio stint and a year from Ok St after making the second round and barely losing to the #2 seed. I think they want to say this is different, but it’s the same situation at $3 million a year. Will Underwood pan out? Absolutely possible, but I’ll tell you what, I’d prefer all the coaches making the same or near salary over him.