Could Mike Woodson be fired during the season?

On By Littum

game

BLOOMINGTON – It’s been a while since we’ve put together a mailbag, so we spared no expense this time.

You wanted to talk football, hockey (!), recipes from my favorite Indian restaurant in Liverpool (!!), winter barbecues and much more. But there was no way to avoid the #1 topic on everyone’s mind, so that’s what we’re going with. Here we go.

@Real_Jo_Li tweets: ‘Is a mid-season firing a possibility?‘

We will tear off the plaster. There is no way around the storm that is currently settled around the status quo for IU Men’s Basketball and we won’t pretend otherwise.

There is no denying the dissatisfaction associated with the direction of the program right now. Mike Woodson remains resolute in his belief that his team will come good, and his players cut a commendably defiant tone Tuesday night, as they both should.

That said, the kind of toxicity that pumped through Assembly Hall during the Illinois loss is enormously difficult to recover from. Historically, it is difficult to find many examples of situations like this that have been pulled back from these kinds of extremes.

Again historically, Indiana doesn’t have much of a track record for in-season coaching changes. Not that it’s never happened, just that when the motivations are largely performance-based, this place’s long-standing preference is to wait until the end of each season, fully assess the situation, and act accordingly.

Assuming for a moment that change is the chosen way forward (and it is really important to warn it as an if), the only issue worth considering would be the atmosphere. It took some pretty ugly turns on Tuesday night. If there is a fear that could become more normalized in the community center—affecting all parties involved and potentially the long-term health of the program—that needs to be factored into any decision.

IU2714 tweets: “NIL spring free agency has proven to be a high risk strategy. IU can’t seem to gain traction in high school recruiting. How does this program recover when both of these turn out to be true?”

I think, philosophically, both strategies can work fine. There are plenty of programs that are successful that lean into the portal process for significant roster needs, including programs in the Big Ten. And of course there are those who are able to prioritize and execute the same process primarily through high school recruiting.

For most, it’s a matter of balance. Indiana’s pre-Malik Reneau injury starting five, for example, included three players recruited out of high school and two transfers. It turns two and three as Luke Goode steps in for Reneau, but you get the point.

I guess what I’m saying is that both are completely viable route building paths. You just have to arrange the players you bring in correctly and get consistent performances from them. I’m not sure the roster building methods alone are the problem.

@wespratt tweets: “Is Quinn Buckner actually making as much of an impact as perception seems or is he a convenient scapegoat?”

As with many things, the truth is probably somewhere in between. My colleague and friend Gregg Doyel wrote extensively about this earlier this week. I highly recommend his column.

@Cabbyfromgreene tweets: “Your opinion on the future of the NIL … there should just be a college players association that has the power to have a collective bargaining agreement … there has to be a salary cap with some rules in place, correct?”

It is probably important to separate these thoughts, because there is a kind of salary cap. Revenue sharing is capped at $20.5 million for the first year, with increases pending. Athletic departments can be creative about how they move that money around (extra scholarships, Alston payments, etc.), but it’s effectively a cap.

The question is where NIL fits into a future of revenue sharing. It doesn’t go away. In the same way that Patrick Mahomes can still sell you insurance, college players will still make money from endorsements and commercial partnerships.

The hope and design (so far) is that channeling these NIL deals through the NCAA’s clearinghouse will weaken the field toward a more sensible marketplace, rather than one where NIL deals are artificially inflated as a means of acquiring talent.

Now will it last? I admit up front that I am not a legal scholar and I have my doubts. It’s not hard to foresee a fairly immediate challenge to the idea that the NCAA gets to determine someone’s fair market value in the NIL area.

The best chance, in my untrained mind, the clearinghouse has is if we can get 2-3 years of relative cooperation from all parties, such that we establish some accepted norms of what players should earn in revenue sharing plus NIL, and then the variances will be easier to locate when marked through the clearing house. But I’m skeptical.

As for a players’ union, it would be complicated by the different needs of different constituencies. Athletes in the Big Ten have dramatically different needs than those in the Big Sky, for example, just as football players will have different demands on golfers, for example.

That said, so much of the future of player compensation will be governed by two centuries of labor and tax laws in this country, it’s hard for me to imagine a future without some sort of solution that allows for productive collective negotiations. That will make a lot of sense of the rest of this.

@call67746 tweets: “Any word on the status of Jakai Newton and his injury? Played very limited minutes early and haven’t seen him since.”

In fairness, it aired before Newton played four minutes Tuesday night. All I will say is that when an athlete often has a long-term structural injury like Newton did with his knee, it’s not uncommon for the first few months or even year back in competition to be hampered with various injuries surrounding it first. . The body needs time to adjust to the restored structure of the original injury, if that makes sense.

@bcindiana99 tweets: “Given that the follow-up to IU football’s last good season was the team crashing back to earth in 2021, what should we expect in 2025? Would it be wrong to be satisfied with an 8-4 season and excited for 9-3?

Good question. While Curt Cignetti would probably say something akin to no turning back, as a longtime observer of this program, I’d put the bar for success in roughly the same place I did in 2021: not far off where you’ve got there, record-wise.

The priority for Indiana, fundamentally in football, must be to establish a pattern of long-term, consistent competitiveness. It’s OK if some years against a difficult schedule — like next year, when IU has five road games, including Iowa, Penn State and Oregon — that looks more like eight wins and a bowl berth. But then again, I guess Cignetti would reject both your and my definition of success.

Mark Hess, good friend of the podcast, writes in: “How different do you expect IU’s offense to look next year? Any insight into what coach Cig learned about his first year as IU coach? What additions could Chandler Whitmer make?”

Hi Mark! I merged these questions into one because I think it’s interesting. Truth be told, I’m guessing Cignetti would have a more comprehensive answer to that question by March, since he spends so much of his winter digesting film.

The Whitmer element is particularly interesting. When Cignetti hired Alabama’s Tino Sunseri to James Madison, he did so in part to pick up some of the concepts Sunseri had absorbed from Steve Sarkisian during their time together in Tuscaloosa. I’d be surprised if Whitmer’s hiring wasn’t motivated at least in part by a similar idea.

Obviously, there are things that I think Cignetti will always build his offense around – run pass option, specific route combinations, formations, etc. But he will certainly adjust to personnel changes, which means I think we’ll see at least some subtle differences in 2025. If his first year in the Big Ten has changed his thinking about anything, it will be fascinating to find out how.

Reed Ludlow writes in: “I think you predicted nine wins for IU football last year? Can you provide your premature 2025 predictions?”

Yes, as long as we all emphasize the premature warning:

Final record: 9-3

Winner: Old Dominion, Kennesaw State, Indiana State, Illinois, Michigan State, UCLA, Maryland, Wisconsin, at Purdue.

Losses: at Iowa, at Penn State, at Oregon.

In addition to the five road games, the difficulty of road trips this year will be an issue. I could see IU winning at least one of the three I have as losses, but I could also see, say, a home loss to what I think will be a good Illinois team. So, all in all, I’m going for nine wins, and reserve the right to change these predictions when I take a more in-depth look at them next summer.

@abeyedoc tweets: “Biggest need back in portal or high school class of 2025 for IU football?”

I think you’re looking at portal additions more by now than high schoolers, barring some unexpected options. My biggest goals would be help on the edge defensively, depth (or even starting-level impact) at safety and offensive line help, for depth at least. Needs can also always pop up in the spring season, but I’ll start with these three.

@hoosierstate100 tweets: “What would it take to get a real ice rink and a varsity hockey team here?”

A good question with an unfortunate answer. Without a major benefactor willing to provide the lion’s share of the cost — a la Terry Pegula’s eight-figure donation to Penn State more than a decade ago to build a new arena and support the move to Division I — that’s highly unlikely.

Indiana hasn’t been in the mood to add sports for about two decades now, the department pretty clearly comfortable with its current complement of 24 varsity programs. A sport like hockey would require a large outlay since, as you point out, it would require the construction of a new facility, as well as financing a fairly expensive sport. And it’s made even more difficult at a time when departments are digging a $20 million hole in their budgets for revenue sharing, which is now a permanent expense.

Short answer: A rig with the specific motivation to draw pretty much the whole thing. Other than that, it’s hard to see it happening.

@IUFaninTX tweets: “What’s your grilling in the winter? Or do you stop grilling?”

Chili on the smoker. Get a dutch oven, cook all your stuff (I like beef and chorizo) until you get to simmer time, then you can move it to the stove. Have even been known to mix in some Upland Dragonfly while cooking the meat for extra flavor.

@BuffKomodo tweets: “It’s been mentioned on the podcast a few times…what are your true thoughts on season one of Landman?”

really liked it. Are there parts that border on entertaining? Yes. As a father with very little free time, do I come to the television looking for entertainment and a leisurely watch? I do. It’s not for everyone, and that’s fine. But I enjoyed S1 and am looking forward to S2.

@braceywrong tweets: “Should I be worried about this Ranger from the North taking my job? He seems brooding and resistant to accepting any authority thrust upon him, yet there’s something special about him that I can’t place the finger on…”

You must not bow down to him. He is the last of a ragged house long deprived of dominion.

@Hoosier3345 tweets: “The one thing that can make us all happy: What’s the butter chicken recipe?”

Oh, I’m fine.

Mowgli’s mother butter chicken

The key is to find all the right spices, including fenugreek and tandoori masala. Garam masala is easier to come by but a poor substitute. Only tandoori will do.

@HoosierTrader tweets: “Besides Shalooby’s, what’s your favorite hangout in Bloomington?”

While of course nothing compares to Shaloobys, I’m partial to a few spots depending on what you’re looking for – Nick’s, Big Woods, Orbit Room, Uptown for a big football game. Needless to say, I don’t hang out as often as I used to, but these are a few recommendations. Also rest in peace Irish Lion.

Listen to Mind Your Banners, our IU Athletics-centric podcast, on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you find your podcasts.