Crean handles questions about big men, officials

Even though a Tuesday game meant I had to write a preview on a Monday for the first time in a while, I had ambitions of making it to Tom Crean’s weekly radio show tonight. I really did.

But those ambitions died right about the time I got to the bottom of the hill at 17th and Walnut on the way back from Assembly Hall, started to fishtail and drove through a light that was turning red instead of spinning the whole car around. After two more instances of slippage on the way back to the H-T office, I decided that I was only getting in a car the rest of the night if it meant going home.

I still listened to the show on the actual radio, but I didn’t record it, so most of what I’m writing here is either paraphrased or quoted from what I twittered at the time.

Anyway, the callers are getting a little gutsier and certainly more intriguing as the year’s gone on, and they’ve brought up a lot of the same issues we’ve seen on the chats and blogs. As he almost is, Crean was asked about recruiting more big men, with a caller saying something along the lines of “I think the future of the IU basketball program is going to be built on aircraft carriers, what’s your comment on that?”

Crean responded that he certainly wanted to find more big men, but told the caller that there aren’t a lot of “aircraft carrier” types around the country and there aren’t any coming “on the horizon.” He said that programs are built on “multi-checkmark guys,” who can do a lot of things like shoot, pass and get the ball in the lane.

Crean was also asked about officiating and why he doesn’t sometimes try to get a technical to prove a point to officials. He said again that there have been times in his career when his language warranted a technical but he wasn’t given one.

“There’s many a time right now where I’d like to blow a fuse and get irate,” about the officiating, he said.

But there are times when he chooses not to because he doesn’t want a technical to end up determining the game. He said he has seen a coach’s reaction change the way the game is called, and he’s not against doing it if he believed it will make a difference.

There were two questions he mostly chose to avoid. He was asked if the quick handshake between he and Ohio State coach Thad Matta at the end of Wednesday’s game came from any bad blood. “Not that I know of,” he said.

He was also asked if he thought the offense ran more smoothly with Jordan Hulls at the point than Jeremiah Rivers. He said he would not answer questions like that about individual players on the radio show.


  1. Right before the game with Wisconsin ronb posted an analysis that so clearly anticipated the puzzled frustration with which Dustin Dopirak and Chris Korman (along with that indignant but quiet hotel lamp) tried in vain to dissect the Hoosiers’ game in Madison. Nobody commented on it. It was a long piece and I only read it now. He said:

    Some won’t like this but Rivers, Jones, and Watford are the 3 biggest reasons we are not better.

    And he explains why. I just want to thank ronb for taking the time to write that piece. It was a very clear exposition of reasons unique in the sense that it didn’t say to just wait another year, instead he logically argued that can be better NOW.

    Nobody said anything. It’s not much, but if it’s not too presumptuous I would like to sincerely thank to ronb for his outstanding post.

  2. I really liked what he wrote and wanted to thank him. I don’t understand why it is so hard to accept that. He wrote BEFORE the game and anticipated exactly the nature and content of the Dopirak – Korman video at the end of the game. Plus he wrote what is needed to be better NOW as opposed to 2012 which was most exciting and hopeful.

    You people are stonehearted, what’s the problem.

Comments are closed.