Illini Football 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
No. Winning football games defines what makes a successful coach. Not eye tests. Not moral victories because we only gave up 63 points once instead of 3 times. Not subjective statements like "well they were competitive for a half in most of their games"

Winning as many games as you lose is the barest of bare minimums in this case. That means 6 wins and that means a bowl. Which means better PR for the program than sitting at home. Which means more practices with which you can help drive more learning, more instruction, and better preparation for the following year. Which mean you can tell recruits you went to a bowl game. And if you can't get to a bowl game by year 4, then you aren't a successful coach.

And, coaches that are obviously better than Lovie Smith can accomplish this minimal feat well within 5 years elsewhere.
Brohm takes Purdue Bowl games in years 1 and 2
Campbell takes Iowa State to bowl games in years 2 and 3
Mendenhall takes Virginia to bowl games in years 2 an 3
Babers takes Syracuse to a bowl game and 10 wins in year 3
Leach took WSU to a bowl game in year 2

All of those programs were in as bad of shape or worse than Illinois. They made good hires, and those good hires won on the field. They aren't still looking for people to make rationalizations like "Well, we only allowed 2 games of 50+ points this year, so that's good enough for me" in year 4.


Yes.
You wrote no about the large number of bowl games defining for you what makes a successful coach, but then went on to explain how a bowl helps with PR, and how a bowl gives more practice time, and how a bowl helps with recruiting. Then you wrote about all of these coaches who took their teams to bowl games. And to top it off, recruiting could tank, the team get blown out in seven games by 40 points or more (which means losing more games than they won), yet, you would retain Lovie since he led the team to a bowl game. You wrote no, but I'm pretty sure you meant yes.
 
Gurnee
Wow, the tone around the program has suddenly turned so negative. I really hope we are able to make a mega-leap this year and compete hard in every game, and get on a roll win-wise. Last year, Akron beat NW and EMU beat Purdue, so gotta come out of the gate fired up.
 
The problem with this posts is it presumes all programs were down due to the same set of issues. Depending upon the deficiency, each program could revive itself at a different rate. For example, if you literally just had bad in-game coaching and/or preparation, a different mind can improve your program in year 1; however if there is a talent deficiency, you will more than likely be 3 plus years away from results. Needless to say, I haven't assessed every single aforementioned program in depth for the past 10 years, but I'd bet my Spaceship there was both a myriad and varying degrees of deficiencies at each locale.
The thing I keep coming back to is the fact it is clear Lovie went in with a strategy as far as his coaching and the players. I didn't work. This is his first run at running a college program. He was wrong. He fixed himself. So the four year deal doesn't fit. It is more like year 2 for his new strategy. Now I am not saying he needs 2 more years regardless. But if the arrow keeps pointing up, and we keep improving, ride it out. If we get dominated by Wisconsin/Northwestern talent this year... Got to start looking. But I don't think Whitman is going to be put in that position
 
The problem with this posts is it presumes all programs were down due to the same set of issues. Depending upon the deficiency, each program could revive itself at a different rate. For example, if you literally just had bad in-game coaching and/or preparation, a different mind can improve your program in year 1; however if there is a talent deficiency, you will more than likely be 3 plus years away from results. Needless to say, I haven't assessed every single aforementioned program in depth for the past 10 years, but I'd bet my Spaceship there was both a myriad and varying degrees of deficiencies at each locale.
The only one of those programs that had anything in the cupboard talent-wise was Virginia. Purdue and Wazzu were particularly barren, clearly objectively worse than us.
 
South Carolina
I'm just going to sit back and watch this team surprise all you negative Nancy's(Get over not getting Mookie)... Yes I do drink the koolaid and believe in the process
Us negative Nancys will save you a seat in case things don't work out like you hope
 
Likes: LFOD
No amount of quasi-religious incantation of this can make it true.
I'm sure I missed a post somewhere in the last three years where you laid out the argument that the situation Lovie inherited wasn't that bad. Can you point me to it. Coming off the Cubit extension, the Timmy B scandal, the timing of Lovie's hiring, and the resulting roster I struggle to see how they could be. If you want to put up historical records (thank Jiro) that's not a particularly sound argument, as BackThatPassUp pointed out. Not saying Lovie is a better CFB head coach I am saying none of those coaches take us bowling by year two, and only a couple get us there by year three depending on who they can get admitted to the University and a little bit of luck.

None of them get us their by going the play the kids route in the Big Ten, which was a decision Lovie made and remains to be seen if that was the correct approach.
 
I think this team will surprise this year. Peters was pushed out at Michigan due to a change in Philosophy and by a guy that transferred into that program. Which I find interesting. We added two very highly rated WR's. Sidney was expected to contribute a lot more at USC this upcoming season. The improvement he brings to that spot is going to be blatantly obvious. Yes, these guys did not light the planet on fire, but, they were not fighting for PT with a bunch of three star WR's. We also add three HS guys where I can see all three playing as they all have needed skill sets. Put Cumby in the slot, Campbell on the other side, pull the trigger on the starting gun, maybe put Norwood out there as well, and loft it to one of them. Put it in the end zone up high and let Washington fight for it. Campbell as well. We will look like we have a solid P5 offense and they will help the defense by being on the field more and allowing them to rest. The season needs to start soon.
 
I'm sure I missed a post somewhere in the last three years where you laid out the argument that the situation Lovie inherited wasn't that bad.
Here's the problem.

The situation was bad, something no one has ever denied. And was made particularly tricky by the late hire which meant that Lovie's "first class" was a particularly weak group that he had no hand in recruiting.

The frustration is, what a lot of folks are obviously doing is telling taller and taller fish stories about what an irradiated Chernobyl the situation was as it becomes necessary to justify the worse and worse outcomes under Lovie. That is not sound reasoning. The situation was bad in a way most Power Five doormat's situations are bad.

As I have laid out using hard data many times, there is no precedent for three seasons this bad turning into anything meaningful over the long term. Doesn't mean it can't happen, but reference to empiricism will not get you there.

Having said all of that, I still honest to goodness believe we're winning six this year. 60/40 confident.
 
I'm sure I missed a post somewhere in the last three years where you laid out the argument that the situation Lovie inherited wasn't that bad. Can you point me to it. Coming off the Cubit extension, the Timmy B scandal, the timing of Lovie's hiring, and the resulting roster I struggle to see how they could be. If you want to put up historical records (thank Jiro) that's not a particularly sound argument, as BackThatPassUp pointed out. Not saying Lovie is a better CFB head coach I am saying none of those coaches take us bowling by year two, and only a couple get us there by year three depending on who they can get admitted to the University and a little bit of luck.

None of them get us their by going the play the kids route in the Big Ten, which was a decision Lovie made and remains to be seen if that was the correct approach.
I agree with most of this. Actually, the kids were a lot better than the guys they replaced.
 
Likes: the national
I'm genuinely curious what this "fix" you're referencing is. The change in OC?
He filled his coaching staff with coaches. Now he has recruiters. It is up in the air if they can coach as well.
 
Shammond being effective at LB would be gigantic for this team.
A true freshman not being good enough to break the 4 deep would be even better. Especially one that as talented as Shammond
 
He filled his coaching staff with coaches. Now he has recruiters.
He hired his own kid! Gill Byrd is still here. Liggy Stardust is still here.

With the resources he was given initially, the composition of the coaching staff going into Year 4 is a damning indictment of Lovie, there are no two ways about it.

Do you know how many of our 11-man staff have been either full recruiting assistants at other Power Five schools or position coaches or higher in the NFL under a non-Lovie head coach?

Three. Rod Smith has an extensive major college background, Ligs was an NFL special teams coach as well as ST coach at Pitt a million years ago, and Gill Byrd spent one season as the Bills DB coach. That's it.

The collective resume of this staff is shocking.
 
He hired his own kid! Gill Byrd is still here. Liggy Stardust is still here.

With the resources he was given initially, the composition of the coaching staff going into Year 4 is a damning indictment of Lovie, there are no two ways about it.

Do you know how many of our 11-man staff have been either full recruiting assistants at other Power Five schools or position coaches or higher in the NFL under a non-Lovie head coach?

Three. Rod Smith has an extensive major college background, Ligs was an NFL special teams coach as well as ST coach at Pitt a million years ago, and Gill Byrd spent one season as the Bills DB coach. That's it.

The collective resume of this staff is shocking.
Did he hire recruiters? Yes or no. The answer is yes. He of course is going to keep the best coaches/people on board, like Gil Bryd. He now has a good mix of coaches and recruiters. Point to his kid all you want. That doesn't negate what the other staff brings/does.
Seriously about the experience of CPatt and AClark? Are you trying to tell me they have not done a good job?

So by your post, you think this coaching staff is crap? Yes or No?
 
Likes: KevinC
Well you really showed me there. That 3 commitments totally trumps everything that has ever happened.

When you make intelligent post, I'm all about having conversations with you. But it is quite clear when you are just trolling, I'm out
 
Last edited:
You wrote no about the large number of bowl games defining for you what makes a successful coach, but then went on to explain how a bowl helps with PR, and how a bowl gives more practice time, and how a bowl helps with recruiting.
Pointing out the benefits that a successful coach that wins (or in the case of a 12 game schedule at least the same) more games than they lose gets? Crazy talk!

Then you wrote about all of these coaches who took their teams to bowl games.
I wrote about good coaches that have proven that you can take a doormat program that was in as bad, if not worse, shape than Illinois, and win at least the same or more games than they lose. And those coaches have proven that you don't need the 5 you are more than happy to let Lovie and Whitman take.

And to top it off, recruiting could tank
I hate to be the one to break it to you, but...

you would retain Lovie since he led the team to a bowl game. You wrote no, but I'm pretty sure you meant yes.
Again, I don't know why this confuses you so. Yes, If Lovie Smith gets to 6-6 I think he should be retained. Anything below that and he should be fired. And, yeah, a great benefit of going 6-6 in the regular season is getting to go to a bowl game.

Look, if you want to say that simply getting to a bowl game these days is meaningless, then say it. But, while you're saying that, please be sure to remind yourself that Lovie hasn't even been able to meet that lowest of low expectations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.