A week or so ago fans were riding Crean hard on recruiting. I feel the interviews have shown that we are in the hunt for really good players with the top 25 programs in the country and the top 10 in the Midwest. We have also learned how important it is to get established early on the kid's radar ……….. something Crean is just now able to begin harvesting.

With some winning on the floor I think we will be in good shape talent wise. I am dramatically more relaxed and trusting the staff on recruiting .

I think a bigger unknown is “what are we recruiting for “? defense, offense, transition, shot makers, assist leaders etc to play what kind of schemes and roles ?

I agree with most of what you are saying, and I want to say that I am the eternal optimist; kind of like a Cubs fan (just wait til next year). I think with the amount of talent in the state, if we can keep a lot of them in candy stripes, that would make a good start. My favorite IU team was the 1991-1993 teams with Cheaney, Graham, Bailey, Henderson, and Nover. All Indiana kids. (I still contend that if Lawson and Funderburke had stayed, that was a National Championship team in '92 and '93, but that is another topic.) I used to follow High School basketball at that time, but have lost interest since the class system, but that is also another topic.

The thing I noticed was that the majority of these players shown on the interviews were very similar in height and build. I do not know about game, but outside of Zeller and Parea, all were guards/wings, with one other forward, Bryson Scott, mixed in (OK 2, but Kaminski is just a big shooter). Does Coach feel really comfortable with the “bigs” he has now? Does Coach go with the “best players available” philosophy? I realize that Coach Crean goes guard heavy, so I agree with you that an identity will have come out soon, but what will it be? When the tournaments come, when the half-court becomes crucial (or against the B10, or whatever), what will be the half court offense?

The other thing I have heard often, and was alluded to, was the reason/excuse that we are so far behind, recruiting wise, in 2010. Are you telling me that Crean and Co. were not recruiting the class of 2010 at Marquette? Are you telling me that they were not recruiting Indiana at Marquette? Neither of our 2010 signees are from Indiana. What are the major changes to the staff? Buzz Peterson and who else? Weren't these basic group of guys recruiting together at Marquette? Did McLeod put us that far behind? Did they just not understand what was the amount of devastation left from Denim Shirt? Did they assume there was going to be Crawford, Bassett, Holman, etc. in the cupboard? Was it the sanctions? What exactly was the issue? It's not that I think that they do not work hard and go after people, but where does that reason come from?

I agree that the future is definitely brighter than the past, and I don't want to be part of making sure the horse is completely dead. I am not one of the Crean Bashers Club members. I guess I was more wondering aloud why this class was the issue…..If there had been conversation on it in the past outside of one person saying “Crean sucks” and the other saying, “Crean is the next coming”, I must have missed it…….I apologize if I am re-hashing old material, I was really just wondering why 2010 was an issue, why that line was put out there. It seems to me like 2011 could be the biggest problem based on scholarship numbers alone, 2012 could be a banner year, and 2013 could bring the biggest haul of all. I am excited to see where things are going, so I did not want to seem like a negative Nancy, so I apologize for coming off that way…..It is just something I think about, like why is there Braille on a drive-up ATM?…..Why does McDonald's advertise their Braille menus on their drive-up window?……If there is a designated hitter, why not a designated fielder?….you know, stuff.

I don't know gents,…., talking to a 2013 recruit seems a bit early to me. I'm glad ITH is working hard but man 2013 recruits don't have much to say yet. I would focus on 11 and 12.

That's the name of the game. Coaches are contacting recruits, inviting them to camps and offering scholarships. If we don't cover this stuff, other outlets will and we'll lose readers.

Well I see your point. Thanks for the comment and keep going.

Do you think there should be any limits of coaching contacting players in terms of age?

Agreed. Seems to me you can take two paths when it comes to recruiting – cover it once they sign (a.k.a. don't cover recruits, cover commitments), or cover everyone the school recruits. There's not much room for in between, these days.

Didn't she sing “Sweetest Taboo”?