Football Coaching Staff / Coaching Carousel Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
#52
I don't think it's pointless at all. There's a better than 0% chance that Lovie gets fired if this season continues the way it has been so far. How many people were calling for Beckman's head after one or 2 years? Probably a lot of the same people that are calling for giving Lovie 5 years. When you know, you know, and we're getting dangerously close to knowing on Lovie.
So what do you propose? If we jump ship on Lovie, I can guarantee we dont make a bowl for another three years, barring a literal football genius gets hired in his place, we will not only lose some talent we currently have, we will more than likely lose the talent we have coming in.

If this season continues the way it has, that means we have signs of competitive play. There's gonna be ups and downs with young teams, we've witnessed a team capable of beating a top 25 team, played another close for over half a game, and won every game we should've so far. If we lose out, and dont come close to sniffing another win (which honestly is hard to foresee happening, Lovie wont get fired for performance related issues, I'm willing to bet a lot on that.
 
#53
Chicago
I should have prefaced all my posts with this. I am completely fine with our record. That is not the reason for all my "negativity." And for the most part I'm fine with the youth excuse, but only to a certain extent.

Take our offense for example. There is evidence of improvement, and for the most part we pass the eye test. And we're accomplishing all of this with completely inexperienced QB's (looking like MJ will start here on out as a true frosh), a first year OC, a very young O Line, and basically no quality WRs.

If the defense performed like the offense, almost everyone would be 100% on board, but our defense is just so bad that I can't see any way of it getting good enough to turn this program around. Defense is Lovie's specialty, Hardy is his hand picked DC, and Lovie is basically choosing the scheme. Yet, we don't see anything close to the improvement or competency level that we see on the offensive side on the ball. Age and experience level are similar on both sides of the ball. The difference is the offensive system is in its first year while the D is in its 3rd. Both have a "rookie" starter, but on offense is the QB (most important player on field), while defense it's the safety. Our defense this year is performing like the offense of last year. They're just not even giving us a chance.

Us "negative" posters are not asking for much. Just give us something watchable, some signs of legit improvement, something where we actually hang around a game against some good teams. Stop getting steamrolled for 500-600 yards every game. In his 3rd season, that is not too much to ask. We are now 7 games into the season and rank in the 100s in S+P. Barring some miraculous turnaround, I just worry that we already have our answer to the Lovie era.
 
#54
Honestly, you have to let this season play out obviously. As a fan I can vent here, but an AD should not fire a coach mid season barring a scandal. Our schedule may be bad enough to steal a win, which would be good. If we can steal 2, Lovie stays obviously. If he wins 3 more, believe it or not, I will be beyond happy. I just don't see that happening without some insane luck. There's a lot of time left for a turnaround. I guess I'm just venting because there have been absolutely no signs of it yet.

My thoughts now are similar to when Beckman was hired and everyone pointed out that he's a defensive coach with bad defenses. Lovie is in that same territory now, but with even far worse defensive statistics and rankings. If he wants to become more CEO and find a guy to turn the defense over to, that could work, but by that time, is it worth it?
Great post, now I get your point. For me, I look at turnovers. This defense was hyped as a bend but not break defense. We have definitely broken, but three of our losses are to teams that we can’t quite compete with yet. Penny state, Wisconsin, and this Purdue team are much better than us at this point. I will move closer to you if we aren’t competitive in Minnesota, Maryland, or northwestern. But I still think the product is improved and think we have another win or two in us this season
 
#55
If the defense performed like the offense, almost everyone would be 100% on board, but our defense is just so bad that I can't see any way of it getting good enough to turn this program around. Defense is Lovie's specialty, Hardy is his hand picked DC, and Lovie is basically choosing the scheme. Yet, we don't see anything close to the improvement or competency level that we see on the offensive side on the ball. Age and experience level are similar on both sides of the ball. The difference is the offensive system is in its first year while the D is in its 3rd. Both have a "rookie" starter, but on offense is the QB (most important player on field), while defense it's the safety. Our defense this year is performing like the offense of last year. They're just not even giving us a chance.
I just want to point out that Lovie and Hardy did A LOT of different things to be competitive defensively over the last few games. They are changing schemes and personnel to compete. But in the end, your swapping players that are not up to snuff just yet. And with the D-Line, we have no depth to give our best players breathers.
Also, they actually played pretty decent vs Wisconsin at the beginning of the game. No defense is going to withstand that Wisconsin offensive line when your offense has 5 turnovers in one half. Is the defense good? Absolutely Not! But when they are constantly on the field, with no depth for rest, they are going to get trucked.
 
Likes: KevinC
#56
On Monday morning qb wdws radio show this morning, a caller reported that he 'heard' from a local 'prominent banker' that there was a post-purdue game dinner for recruits and lovie was a no-show. I know, 2nd hand info, but if true, hmmmm...more proof lovie is mailing it in, took the gig for the money. But, he's here thru year 5 due to the prohibitive buyout. Lovie was a splashy hire, and who knows, lightning could still strike in the next 2 1/2 years, but if i'm josh, i'm starting to peruse the college fb coaching ranks and assembling a list of possible hires.
Any dinner for recruits that were not on an official visit would be illegal. Any recruits on an official visit would have been out with Lovie and other members of the coaching staff.
 
#57
I don't think it's pointless at all. There's a better than 0% chance that Lovie gets fired if this season continues the way it has been so far. How many people were calling for Beckman's head after one or 2 years? Probably a lot of the same people that are calling for giving Lovie 5 years. When you know, you know, and we're getting dangerously close to knowing on Lovie.
Beckman took over a team loaded with talent. Lovie took over a team that in all probability was a lower MAC level team. These kids are still mostly freshmen and sophomores. Give it a break.
 
Likes: Dbell1981
#58
On Monday morning qb wdws radio show this morning, a caller reported that he 'heard' from a local 'prominent banker' that there was a post-purdue game dinner for recruits and lovie was a no-show. I know, 2nd hand info, but if true, hmmmm...more proof lovie is mailing it in, took the gig for the money. But, he's here thru year 5 due to the prohibitive buyout. Lovie was a splashy hire, and who knows, lightning could still strike in the next 2 1/2 years, but if i'm josh, i'm starting to peruse the college fb coaching ranks and assembling a list of possible hires.
Heard the same.....around CU....doesn't seem to matter....Lovie stays regardless of record, progress,etc. Too bad it didn't work as good as the other former NFL coach... Herm Edwards/ASU...
 
#59
Any dinner for recruits that were not on an official visit would be illegal. Any recruits on an official visit would have been out with Lovie and other members of the coaching staff.
This. Exactly why people calling into radio shows are the worst. Have something to say but no idea what it means.
 
Likes: KevinC
#60
Decatur, IL
Exaggerate much? It was clear that Beckman inherited a better team than Lovie, but let's not get carried away. Also, Lovie is responsible for the roster. He chose to run off the majority of Cubit/Beckman players, even those that were quality contributors.
Not exaggerated. What's exaggerated is the expectations of winning B10 football games with a secondary of mostly freshmen. I'm not writing this team off until Rountree and the rest of that class are seniors. Even that class was middle of the pack B10 recruiting wise so I'd be happy with 7-5 or 8-4 even that year. Expecting B10 west titles before Beason and Williams are juniors would still be exceeding recruiting results. This years team is still 80% underclassmen. Beckman left this program in shambles, no exaggeration.
 
#61
Based on the light schedule next year I am suggesting that it is bowl or bust. If Lovie can't get that done then it is time to talk about a new coach. Now is not the time however. Halfway through the season in what is "figuratively" year 2 is a little early for my taste.
I agree with this. To make such a huge hire in terms of name recognition and money and fan excitement and then to fire that person before anyone he recruited is an upperclassman would be a rash decision and a mistake in my opinion. And if AJ Bush is benched going forward, it's down to Nick Allegretti and Del'Shawn Philips among seniors who are making a significant contribution. We're going to be a very experienced football team next year, and whatever level we establish in these last 5 games, we should expect to be even better in 2019.

But there is still no sugarcoating how bad we have been throughout Lovie's tenure as both the W/L record and advanced stats make clear. You're right about the easy schedule next year, especially early, and if we can't turn an experienced roster and a soft schedule into wins in Year 4, the decision is going to become pretty clear.

But I'm cautiously optimistic that performances like the one against Purdue are going to be a thing of the past very soon.
 
#64
Carbondale, IL
We are better than last year.

Does anyone disagree with that statement?
We finished #119 in the F/+ Combined Ratings last year. We currently sit at #118. The offense at least has something to hang its hat on this year, but is overall still severely limited by personnel. The defense looks more ghastly somehow. To me, so far this is unsatisfactory progress. Still five games to show it though.
 
#65
We finished #119 in the F/+ Combined Ratings last year. We currently sit at #118. The offense at least has something to hang its hat on this year, but is overall still severely limited by personnel. The defense looks more ghastly somehow. To me, so far this is unsatisfactory progress. Still five games to show it though.
That's fair. But I think we should also agree that the first half of the B1G schedule this year was a lot tougher than the rest of it appears to be -- especially considering what Purdue did last weekend to tOSU.
 
#66
The offense is better this year, both running and passing (which honestly says more about how awful the latter was last year, compared to how much better it is this year). MJ needs to be our QB, I love AJ, he has all the makings of a leader and exceptional running ability, but the ball looks so lame coming out of his hand.

The defensive is very alarming--words that should never been spoken about a team with Lovie Smith as their HC. We really need another interior linemen or two and a couple LB's in this years class.
 
#67
Carbondale, IL
That's fair. But I think we should also agree that the first half of the B1G schedule this year was a lot tougher than the rest of it appears to be -- especially considering what Purdue did last weekend to tOSU.
That's certainly true, but those ratings also include games against KSU, WIU, and Rutgers, teams that are all significantly worse than those remaining on the schedule.
 
#68
The offense is better this year, both running and passing (which honestly says more about how awful the latter was last year, compared to how much better it is this year). MJ needs to be our QB, I love AJ, he has all the makings of a leader and exceptional running ability, but the ball looks so lame coming out of his hand.

The defensive is very alarming--words that should never been spoken about a team with Lovie Smith as their HC. We really need another interior linemen or two and a couple LB's in this years class.
Just remember, next year we will get Camilo Eifler on the field. SHOULD be a huge addition to a bleak position group
 
Likes: KevinC
#69
Just remember, next year we will get Camilo Eifler on the field. SHOULD be a huge addition to a bleak position group
Yup, not 100% sold he sticks at LB (given his size and speed, SS might be a better fit), but either way, adding two more LB's would really help.
 
#70
We finished #119 in the F/+ Combined Ratings last year. We currently sit at #118.
Not to nitpick, but we're 115th. Plus there are 5 more games of data to come. The question of whether we're better than last year remains unanswered at this point.

Firing Lovie sets us back. His first recruits are only sophomores at this point.
I think it would be a mistake to give up on Lovie at this point, and doing so would not send a great message to the tightly knit coaching fraternity about the level of support a coach can expect at Illinois which could hurt our chances of attracting a great replacement, but when you've been one of the very worst teams in all of FBS for three years running, one silver lining is that making a change doesn't set you back.

It's hard to do big things with an inherited roster without great talent, but for a good coaching staff a competitive team within the first year or two is basically universal among rebuilds that ended up going anywhere. That's what things like the F/+ rankings are so good for, seeing the underlying team quality behind the record.

For example, people may look at Scott Frost's rocky start this year as an example of a program needing to go backward to go forward, but F/+ reveals that they are actually much improved, they've just lost some unlucky close games against a tough schedule.
 
#71
Gilbert, AZ
That's fair. But I think we should also agree that the first half of the B1G schedule this year was a lot tougher than the rest of it appears to be -- especially considering what Purdue did last weekend to tOSU.
These last 5 games are going to be huge for building momentum for next year and improving on our 14 out 14 BIG recruiting ranking.
 
#72
when you've been one of the very worst teams in all of FBS for three years running, one silver lining is that making a change doesn't set you back.
I agree with everything in this post, except this line. Whenever there are talented, P5 level players on your team and you fire a coach, you can lose them. Obviously the record might remain similar, but overall team talent will take a hit if we were to cut ties. That's just how all takeovers are, transfers will happen, recruits will decommit, and there's a large possibility schemes change and therefore players don't fit with what the new coach stands for.

This team will be worse off next year, and at least the year after if we cut ties with Lovie, full stop.
 
#73
These last 5 games are going to be huge for building momentum for next year and improving on our 14 out 14 BIG recruiting ranking.
The 14/14 is based off of numbers just as much as it is quality, though. We don't have many commits, as this is (now was) a small class. I am concerned with how long it has been since they have gotten a commit, but the ones they have gotten are solid for a team that is pretty bad over the last few years.
 
#74
This team will be worse off next year, and at least the year after if we cut ties with Lovie, full stop.
If the baseline of the previous coach is F/+ ratings in the -30% range, there's no reason to think that's the case. The Purdue case is a rare one where the change was huge and overnight, but coaches who are going to improve wasteland jobs show much more competitiveness immediately. Mike MacIntyre at Colorado, David Cutcliffe at Duke, Mike Leach at Washington State and Mark Mangino at Kansas would be some examples. None of them set the world on fire early, neither on the field nor in recruiting, but they all markedly improved what they inherited right away.

Also, roster turnover during a coaching change is usually less than you'd think. If we fired Lovie right now that would probably cost us IW and Beason, which would be bad and is one reason it's a bad idea, but mass exodus of players is pretty rare. Players on low-talent losing teams don't have a ton of other great options.

It's kinda two sides of the same coin, a coaching change shouldn't be irrationally feared, nor should a new coach being a total disaster early be written off as the cost of doing business. I remain hopeful about Lovie, but if it doesn't work out, it was a very significant clue that he inherited a team that was +0.2% in 2015 and had the floor fall out on him in year 1 to -25.3% with a fairly veteran team operating with a full compliment of scholarship players.
 
#75
The 14/14 is based off of numbers just as much as it is quality, though. We don't have many commits, as this is (now was) a small class. I am concerned with how long it has been since they have gotten a commit, but the ones they have gotten are solid for a team that is pretty bad over the last few years.
I think we need to really focus in on LB Shammond (duh), DE Okpala, and DE Randolph. I feel as if we have to land these guys to keep this class moving forward
 
Status
Not open for further replies.