2018 Off Season Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#501      

Gunner23

Panama City, Florida
Watch Underwood make the tourney next year and everyone lose their minds.

If that happens, many will become worried about how we will be able to keep BU from taking the Duke job when Coach K retires...:D
 
#502      
Besides Ayo I'm not impressed by the replacements

I understand what you are saying adding AYO is a real key.

Factoring in Ayo with Trent Fraizer in the back court will be dynamic all in it's self.

Adding a few Bigs that can run could really change the landscape for Illinois
 
#503      
Underwood had concerns about our team culture the entire year. Multiple articles were written about it. This is just one of them. I wouldn't blame this issue on any one player. It's hard to change culture. On occasion, drastic measures are necessary to even have a chance.

When you have become totally irrelevant in college basketball it is very easy to say that a Illinois has a culture or perception problem but this is coach speak and has little to do with individual players. As much as disliked Weber, it is not that Weber or Groce were not tough or demanding on players or liked to recruit players who were soft.

Many Weber players were very tough on the court, Frazier, Mike Davis, Paul, etc. and some of the Groce players as well, Ray Rice, Nunn, and definitely Black (to the point of excess, picking up fouls). Problem is that neither coach was able to get the talent at B1G level, our talent level independent of rankings has been sub-par sans one year (2010-11).

Did BU like to recruit non-culture players? Was Matic a culture match? Wasn't Mark Smith the player who BU praised so much AFTER he arrived at UI for his work ethic and toughness, wasn't he the best freshman he had seen in that respect?

When you lose, the easy target is the culture, chemistry, etc. diverting attention from your own faults. People argued with me ad-nauseam before the season that a good coach like BU would make the tournament, it was coaching, not talent for many. Before the EIU game more than 75% of the fans voted that they thought we were making the tournament and more than 95% that we were making at least the NIT. Yet, analysts did not think so. And while I blame talent level mainly, that was definitely not a good coaching job by BU. We ended up even below projections.

At the end, it is not the players' fault. Unless we get the needed talent, it would be very hard to consistently bounce back and we will keep trying to find excuses, culture, lack of chemistry, etc. I like BU but his success/failure will depend on seriously elevating the talent on this team, more than the "culture" shortcomings of players like TJL, Finke, or Mark Smith.
 
#504      

EJ33

San Francisco
When you have become totally irrelevant in college basketball it is very easy to say that a Illinois has a culture or perception problem but this is coach speak and has little to do with individual players. As much as disliked Weber, it is not that Weber or Groce were not tough or demanding on players or liked to recruit players who were soft.

Many Weber players were very tough on the court, Frazier, Mike Davis, Paul, etc. and some of the Groce players as well, Ray Rice, Nunn, and definitely Black (to the point of excess, picking up fouls). Problem is that neither coach was able to get the talent at B1G level, our talent level independent of rankings has been sub-par sans one year (2010-11).

Did BU like to recruit non-culture players? Was Matic a culture match? Wasn't Mark Smith the player who BU praised so much AFTER he arrived at UI for his work ethic and toughness, wasn't he the best freshman he had seen in that respect?

When you lose, the easy target is the culture, chemistry, etc. diverting attention from your own faults. People argued with me ad-nauseam before the season that a good coach like BU would make the tournament, it was coaching, not talent for many. Before the EIU game more than 75% of the fans voted that they thought we were making the tournament and more than 95% that we were making at least the NIT. Yet, analysts did not think so. And while I blame talent level mainly, that was definitely not a good coaching job by BU. We ended up even below projections.

At the end, it is not the players' fault. Unless we get the needed talent, it would be very hard to consistently bounce back and we will keep trying to find excuses, culture, lack of chemistry, etc. I like BU but his success/failure will depend on seriously elevating the talent on this team, more than the "culture" shortcomings of players like TJL, Finke, or Mark Smith.

Mostly agree.

Yet, some of the kool-aid drinking crazies will go on comparing players like Georgie B. to Augustine and then blame culture or coaching when their Final Four dreams fail to materialize.
 
#505      
No, I honestly don't wonder that. I think all he has done is told these coaches that they have a fairly long leash and are free to play the long game and make it a full rebuild if they deem it necessary, and both have now deemed it necessary.

I'd be surprised if Whitman was the micromanaging type like that.

I agree that the AD Whitman is giving out a long leash, but wouldn't you in his role...turn the ILLINI around guys YOUR WAY, YOUR PLAYERS< YOUR PLAN, I will vet the process with you, but at the end of the day...your call.

If it doesn't come to fruition, then Whitman has some easy decisions to make..

Per Sinatra, You did it your way, it didn't work out, see ya!

I think any AD wants their input taken seriously, but the coaches are on the line ultimately and they cant be hand held.
 
#506      
When you have become totally irrelevant in college basketball it is very easy to say that a Illinois has a culture or perception problem but this is coach speak and has little to do with individual players. As much as disliked Weber, it is not that Weber or Groce were not tough or demanding on players or liked to recruit players who were soft.

Many Weber players were very tough on the court, Frazier, Mike Davis, Paul, etc. and some of the Groce players as well, Ray Rice, Nunn, and definitely Black (to the point of excess, picking up fouls). Problem is that neither coach was able to get the talent at B1G level, our talent level independent of rankings has been sub-par sans one year (2010-11).

Did BU like to recruit non-culture players? Was Matic a culture match? Wasn't Mark Smith the player who BU praised so much AFTER he arrived at UI for his work ethic and toughness, wasn't he the best freshman he had seen in that respect?

When you lose, the easy target is the culture, chemistry, etc. diverting attention from your own faults. People argued with me ad-nauseam before the season that a good coach like BU would make the tournament, it was coaching, not talent for many. Before the EIU game more than 75% of the fans voted that they thought we were making the tournament and more than 95% that we were making at least the NIT. Yet, analysts did not think so. And while I blame talent level mainly, that was definitely not a good coaching job by BU. We ended up even below projections.

At the end, it is not the players' fault. Unless we get the needed talent, it would be very hard to consistently bounce back and we will keep trying to find excuses, culture, lack of chemistry, etc. I like BU but his success/failure will depend on seriously elevating the talent on this team, more than the "culture" shortcomings of players like TJL, Finke, or Mark Smith.

Loyola is doing fine with what I would assume many would consider sub par talent. In a couple of years Underwood will have a team of players he recruited for his style of play. If he isn't able to make them go, then we can have this discussion.

We will never know how Groce would have done had he had the same group as Underwood. But we talk much about the eye test. And I saw a team that was overmatched much of the time, and couldn't hit open shots but never gave up. I don't think the same group under Groce would have faired any better, with probably quite a few blow outs to add to this years resume.
 
Last edited:
#507      
When you have become totally irrelevant in college basketball it is very easy to say that a Illinois has a culture or perception problem but this is coach speak and has little to do with individual players. As much as disliked Weber, it is not that Weber or Groce were not tough or demanding on players or liked to recruit players who were soft.

Many Weber players were very tough on the court, Frazier, Mike Davis, Paul, etc. and some of the Groce players as well, Ray Rice, Nunn, and definitely Black (to the point of excess, picking up fouls). Problem is that neither coach was able to get the talent at B1G level, our talent level independent of rankings has been sub-par sans one year (2010-11).

Did BU like to recruit non-culture players? Was Matic a culture match? Wasn't Mark Smith the player who BU praised so much AFTER he arrived at UI for his work ethic and toughness, wasn't he the best freshman he had seen in that respect?

When you lose, the easy target is the culture, chemistry, etc. diverting attention from your own faults. People argued with me ad-nauseam before the season that a good coach like BU would make the tournament, it was coaching, not talent for many. Before the EIU game more than 75% of the fans voted that they thought we were making the tournament and more than 95% that we were making at least the NIT. Yet, analysts did not think so. And while I blame talent level mainly, that was definitely not a good coaching job by BU. We ended up even below projections.

At the end, it is not the players' fault. Unless we get the needed talent, it would be very hard to consistently bounce back and we will keep trying to find excuses, culture, lack of chemistry, etc. I like BU but his success/failure will depend on seriously elevating the talent on this team, more than the "culture" shortcomings of players like TJL, Finke, or Mark Smith.


I think you're conflating a whole bunch of things here. "Culture" "toughness" "perception" "chemistry" those are all very different things.

What Brad Underwood said, in refreshingly frank terms, was that the team had a losing attitude. That they expected to lose, they accepted losing, that losing had become ingrained in the way they do things. That's not general boilerplate coachspeak, it's a very specific accusation. A tough to quantify accusation, but a very specific one.

What is easy to quantify is that Illinois has extracted less out of more talent than just about any program in the country (non-Lorenzo Romar division) over the past decade, an avalanche of failure that now very much includes Underwood himself. Illinois players have systematically not reached their ceilings, not made expected improvements over the course of their careers, not created cohesive units on either end of the floor, not executed reliably, not been deployed in ways which highlight their strengths and disguise their weaknesses, not gotten better as seasons have gone along, generally been weaker in the more heavily-scouted and prepared conference season, and on and on.

And I know the recruiting-obsessed, religiously Rivals stars determinist, the-key-is-always-the-current-HS-junior-class mantra Illinois internet fanbase can never accept this, but it's the things in that previous paragraph that are prerequisite to the pretty girls wanting to date us, not the other way around. If "culture" is the word you want to use for that, so be it.
 
#508      
Loyola is doing fine with what I would assume many would consider sub par talent. In a couple of years Underwood will have a team of players he recruited for his style of play. If he isn't able to make them go, then we can have this discussion.

LOL on Loyola, everyone's favorite prime example of doing well and culture change. Loyola would not be in the tournament with that sub par talent in a major conference. And Porter Moser is 70-126 (35% winning percentage) in 11 years, a great "culture" builder.

BTW, I hope we don't have this conversation in a couple of years (i.e., evaluating results with subpar talent) because I unfortunately did have it multiple time in the last 12 years and this past summer/fall and it did not end up very well despite winning the argument.

I'd rather have the conversation of what happened when BU actually greatly improved the talent at Illinois at a B1G upper echelon level :thumb:
 
#510      
I think you're conflating a whole bunch of things here. "Culture" "toughness" "perception" "chemistry" those are all very different things.

No I don't, I just think they are all different excuses for not getting the talent level at where it should be to consistently compete in the B1G.

I think the notion that we will consistently outsystem and outcoach the Izzo's, the Beilein's, the Painter's, the Turgeon's and the rest of the top programs in the B1G with sub-par talent based on "culture", "chemistry", etc. is just hogwash. JMO.
 
#511      
It'll be interesting to see what our team looks like next year on offense and defense. Think the defense will be much better with centers in the paint that will prevent giving up 60% field goal games. The better question will be where are our points coming from. I can't see our post players averaging much other than putbacks and outrunning opponents down the floor. Ayo and Trent will get there's, but they're young, and will have off nights (and have defenders focus on them). Going to need to see one or more of Damonte, Kipper, Jordan, or Griffin step up (or a TBD recruit).
 
#512      
I think the notion that we will consistently outsystem and outcoach the Izzo's, the Beilein's, the Painter's, the Turgeon's and the rest of the top programs in the B1G with sub-par talent based on "culture", "chemistry", etc. is just hogwash. JMO.

Beat them all consistently with sub-par talent? Of course not.

Be competitive with them with respectable talent? That happens all the time. Painter and Beilein themselves have done that to varying degrees at various times.

And there's a scouting aspect to this too. As Illinois fans know all too well, the quality of the players you get and their fit for what you're trying to do doesn't map onto recruiting rankings perfectly. But it's only ever the other team who has the NBA talent who wasn't thought of that way in high school. Winning programs with winning cultures are able to develop players in that way.

Everyone will cling to their chosen narratives of course, but every damn one of us knows in our hearts what would have happened if Ethan Happ went to Illinois and Michael Finke went to Wisconsin. THAT is reality, naming two uncommitted 16 year olds as the sole determinant of your coaches' future over and over and over again is fantasyland.
 
#513      
THAT is reality, naming two uncommitted 16 year olds as the sole determinant of your coaches' future over and over and over again is fantasyland.

Fantasyland is doing the same thing and not significantly improving the talent level and expecting to consistently compete in the B1G with the top coaches and programs with that magic dust consisting of "system" and "culture." That is indeed fantasyland.
 
#515      
not significantly improving the talent level

That is something no one is proposing. Obviously you go get the best guys you can with the resources you have allotted to recruiting.

This ain't our first rodeo Obelix, we surely both know where each other are on this.

You argue the conventional wisdom persuasively, and things become the conventional wisdom for a reason, there is a nugget of truth there.

But I just don't know how you can be an Illini fan the past 15 years and still cling to the idea that college basketball is largely single-factor determined according to talent levels. I was on your side of this once, but everything I have seen here and nationally points me in a different direction.
 
#516      
I hate to be simplistic but we are trying to find overly complex ways to say we haven't recruited or coached well enough to succeed.

Culture, toughness, system are just other ways of saying that since 2006 we haven't had good enough coaches or talent to be consistently good.

In different ways but all succeeding Henson, Kruger and Self were able to put the right formula of recruiting + coaching to be successful. Weber and Groce couldn't find that balance.

Underwood? The jury is still out. He clearly didn't like the talent he was left with and knew that he needed an upgrade. Now we start to find out whether he is importing the sort of talent he can win with.
 
#517      
He did have a player who tied his roommate up and burned him with cigarettes. But what coach hasn’t.

And Art Long was found not guilty of punching that police horse.

Huggins also had Danny Fortson, Rueben Patterson and VanExel at Cincinnati. The NCAA finally stepped in and put them on 2 year probation for lack of institutional control. The final blow was when the university President said to Huggy you have 24 hours to resign or be fired.
 
#518      
But I just don't know how you can be an Illini fan the past 15 years and still cling to the idea that college basketball is largely single-factor determined according to talent levels. I was on your side of this once, but everything I have seen here and nationally points me in a different direction.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, I've actually been an avid Illini fan for the last 35 years :D

I have never claimed that talent level is the single-factor, that is not correct, and have never claimed that, so you are incorrect.

Just that talent level is the most critical factor and necessary, but not sufficient, condition for consistently competing in the B1G.
 
#520      
Culture, toughness, system are just other ways of saying that since 2006 we haven't had good enough coaches or talent to be consistently good.
One of the most frustrating things from the past few years is that the lack of athleticism which made it a pretty boring brand of basketball under Groce. I'm sure I'm forgetting a player or two, but it seemed like the only above average d1 athlete we had was Nunn. Even when we played cupcakes, we seemed to be outmatched physically despite Fletcher's effort to make below average athletes look menacing. We've lost a lot in the past decade but my concern wasn't with the lack of talent when it came to stars and rankings but the terrible blend of athleticism and skill.
 
#521      

sacraig

The desert
I agree that the AD Whitman is giving out a long leash, but wouldn't you in his role...turn the ILLINI around guys YOUR WAY, YOUR PLAYERS< YOUR PLAN, I will vet the process with you, but at the end of the day...your call.

If it doesn't come to fruition, then Whitman has some easy decisions to make..

Per Sinatra, You did it your way, it didn't work out, see ya!

I think any AD wants their input taken seriously, but the coaches are on the line ultimately and they cant be hand held.

Oh certainly. That's how an AD should operate, ideally. You give your coaches freedom. Give them enough slack to build their own successful program and support them in carrying out their vision. It just so happens that you've also given them enough slack to hang themselves if they botch it up.
 
#522      
One of the most frustrating things from the past few years is that the lack of athleticism which made it a pretty boring brand of basketball under Groce. I'm sure I'm forgetting a player or two, but it seemed like the only above average d1 athlete we had was Nunn. Even when we played cupcakes, we seemed to be outmatched physically despite Fletcher's effort to make below average athletes look menacing. We've lost a lot in the past decade but my concern wasn't with the lack of talent when it came to stars and rankings but the terrible blend of athleticism and skill.

I agree, although Kipper can certainly be viewed as above average d1 athlete.
 
#523      
I'll be honest...I'm not even sure what is being argued here.

We need better talent for high major college basketball.

Most of the time high school rankings are a solid indicator of a player's talent level when they reach college, but not always.

Guys who share the same "playing philosophy" as their coach will probably be looked at more favorably than those that don't. When you have a coaching change, sometimes you have players with a different philosophy in the holdovers.

We expect our student athletes to be good citizens in the community and willing students. Sometimes they disappoint us. We like to point out when student athletes at other schools make missteps. That's a little hypocritical, but we do it anyway.

Some seasons don't go like we hope.

Some fans seem to revel in misery and "I told you so"
 
#524      
One of the most frustrating things from the past few years is that the lack of athleticism which made it a pretty boring brand of basketball under Groce. I'm sure I'm forgetting a player or two, but it seemed like the only above average d1 athlete we had was Nunn. Even when we played cupcakes, we seemed to be outmatched physically despite Fletcher's effort to make below average athletes look menacing. We've lost a lot in the past decade but my concern wasn't with the lack of talent when it came to stars and rankings but the terrible blend of athleticism and skill.

100% agree. Our athleticism is the lowest I have seen it since 1980. Even during the probation years.
 
#525      

mattcoldagelli

The Transfer Portal
Even when we played cupcakes, we seemed to be outmatched physically despite Fletcher's effort to make below average athletes look menacing.

I may be in the minority, but the Fletch stuff...is a bit much. I know strength and conditioning is important, but basketball is also a skills game and some of this stuff can get in the way of behaviors learned over the course of a decade.

I would say it's been less a matter of our being out-athleted and more a matter of us being out-skilled. Over the last 10 years, almost regardless of competition, how many times have we been able to say with conviction that we have the best shooter on the floor? Best dribbler? Best passer? It's rare. And that speaks not just to who we are recruiting but what we are doing with them once they get here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.