2020 both started and finished slow. I don't think you can fault anyone if they are skeptical a high caliber class will suddenly materialize late in the cycle.
Illinois Football Recruiting Thread
- Status
if we lived in or next to Texas, Florida, or California, I would have been disappointed with the class. But we don’t live in fertile recruiting territory and, in comparison to every peer school in competition for our recruits, we have not only not been a good football team this millennium, we have been atrocious.
To put things in perspective, in basketball, you can recruit an Ayo or kofi and be good. In football you need 40 - 50 comparably talented players that fit a system, to account for injuries. Add to it that for basketball, Chicago has the most talented recruiting base in the nation. If Illinois, ever in its history, had pulled its own in-state talent consistently, we would have won at least a dozen national championships. But we haven't pulled the talent and we rarely even qualify for final fours. For perspective 54 Illinois players played in the NCAA tournament last year, none went to Illinois.
Despite the missed in-state talent, in Basketball, for some reason, making the tournament seems to be sufficient for most fans. But in football, which we have almost never been consistently good during the bowl era, the expectation is 10 win seasons.
we aren’t and won’t be competing for loads of top end talent. We are competing for talent that wins 6 games. Once we have done that, we will see a natural uptick in recruiting.
We will have the talent to win bowl games in this class. we have the talent to win bowl games in the last class. We won some big recruitments with very talented players. Not Alabama talented, but rather with 8 or 9 win season talented. That’s how football recruiting works. It is a border state game and we don’t border the top states.
Winning back to back bowl games, in Illinois history, is almost unheard of. I recommend recalibration expectations until we do that. I think starting to expect us to qualify for bowls almost yearly is the direction we are headed. This has not been done by many coaches (maybe 1 coach) In the bowl era of college football
This is good perspective.
TMC999
- Not Iowa
Is this the thread where refer to growth plates or hip swivel on this guy? I just need to have my excuses down in the remote chance he doesn’t sign with us...
I don't think anyone is expecting 10 wins. Nobody expects us to compete with UM/OSU/PSU/UW. A reasonable expectation is that in year 5 of the Lovie Smith era we recruit at a level that allows us to win 5-8 games/year consistently and that gets us to bowl games more years than not. I just don't see that happening. I don't expect to get 5 of the top 10 out of Illinois, but wouldn't it be nice to get at least 1 of the top 20? I get that Illinois isn't Texas, but it also isn't Iowa or Minnesota when it comes to HS talent.
sure, this is a different point than the basketball comparison that the original poster made.
To your point, which is fair, I think, assuming we have a season this season, we have a bowl eligible team in 2020. I think 2021 and 2022 we have bowl eligible talent (definitely 2 of those 3 years we should qualify for a bowl based on talent and seniority). The current class only starts to impact 2023, at the earliest. true freshmen and sophomores are unlikely to make significant impact.
Most people, don’t think the system or coach will work in college. The truth is, it has not been validated. If your argument is that we don’t have the talent or coaching to qualify for bowls in the next Three years, then this class is irrelevant. And, a lot will get sorted out when it comes to coaching and system before then. Most people are not convinced by Lovie, if he is going to get fired, it will be from lack of performance over the next 3 years. Those classes are already set. There will be very little effect from this class. If he proves out his system and ability to make it in college, then this class will be important for 2023,
I would argue that if he was successful doing it his way before, this class will be more of what he did the first 4 years. If he shows to be ineffective, then this class will likely be more of the same and he will have been fired. Either way, there’s nothing that going to change.
the good news... the foundation is much better than it was when he got here, regardless of what happens with this class.
My expectation was that recruiting would improve after showing some progress on the field (and I'm pretty confident this was the general consensus here). I don't see any signs of the materializing.
I looked back at the recruiting thread from last April, and that place was buzzing. People were getting excited about Mookie Cooper and AJ Henning. Right now it's crickets
Not sure I follow. So because last year people were excited and talking about two players Illini didn’t get, recruiting is destined to not be improved this year? I think the pandemic and its impact are to blame somewhat combined with Lovie’s low key approach. That said a few signings would be nice.
I think you misinterpreted my origiinal post. Just wanted some excitement like there is in basketball. I agree with most of your points. Just would like to see a commit since we seem to be behind again.
Isn't it likely that the pandemic would impact all B10 teams equally?
Eh, I don't buy this. Pandemic wouldn't impact us any more than anyone else.
I understand. I want to see commits too. Unfortunately, every time I see something, it’s something or someone I never knew we were recruiting up to that point. We are looking good with some Illinois linemen. Our staff is just not pushing commits.
illiniCA
- DC Area
definitely a case of “one of the these teams is not like the others” but it’s still news for us. Sad to see this thread so dead lately.
there’s more happening, but I’m hearing most of it second hand and on Twitter. So nothing particularly telling.
I think there are teams that will be better off during the pandemic. Money, technology already in place, and willingness to accept changes are the big factors.
Whether or not we are on that side or the other I dont know, but some teams will handle this better than others.
Whether or not we are on that side or the other I dont know, but some teams will handle this better than others.
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
Unfortunately, right now, the world is crickets.
Not at other big ten schools. I think Rutgers has over 10 kids already.
But I agree with the sentiment that life is boring right now
Deleted member 716187
D
Guest
NCAA should cancel the 2020 season so Lovie and Co. have more time to try to fill the 2021 class with 10 commits
I think this is a good point. But it is crickets because we just don't know what is happening. I have a twitter that only follows Illinois football and I can see that there is a lot of activity on twitter. I think this class gets filled with power 5 talent. I would never say that recruiting rankings don't matter because a 5* is way more likely to contribute at a high level than a 2*. Having said that, I think the way fans use recruiting rankings is way off base from what statistics and scouts are even capable of.
If we look at average statistics below for a OSU 91.8 vs. Michigan 90.35. What is the difference between those scores? 1.45, but does that 1.45 represent anything? Not really. Turning players into numbers is inexact and then comparing the numbers is not even possible. We can say that 91.8 is greater than 90.35, but in what way? We can't really say. All we can say with confidence is that Ohio State is more likely to have better recruits than Michigan and more players will get drafted (or something like that). We can't say that class is more impactful or more important. We can't say that in general the players are better in any way other than likelihood of getting drafted, and that number gets even more cloudy when you look at UM vs Penn State. The difference is negligible and likely unimportant and insignificant. Now, I wouldn't argue that 91.8 is insignificant in comparison to 84.9. The magnitude is great enough that it could be argued that the difference is substantial and almost certainly going to lead to a W if both teams play (from the standpoint of talent). But that is if those 25 players played against our 13 players. But thats not how football works. Our 13 fit into a team that has a comparable number of players. That number will contribute to a much different starting lineup. Those OSU players will replace other players with similarly high scores. But the Illinois players will be more likely to be used in a different capacity. But even then, it would be safe to say that OSU vs. Illinois would lead to a W for OSU 9+ out of 10 times, given all else equal.
Now, things get murkier when you compare Illinois to Minnesota. 84.9 vs 85.8. Is there a difference? I'm not sure. Whereas I can say, with near certainty that OSU has a much better talent base than Illinois because the level of variance is great, the difference between Illinois and Minnesota scores are too small to make any conclusions. This is exacerbated when you take into account transfers and creaning players (freshmen won't contribute like seniors). Further, fewer eyes are on a 2* than a 5*, which makes scouting reports less accurate. And less attention is paid to 3* players, so scouting becomes much more important (which is one thing that we do well). Also, on a team like Illinois or Minnesota, how the players fit into their role is much different than a team like OSU, where almost every player on the field is contending for the NFL. Similarly, finding good players in positions of great need (receivers) and using fillers for positions with great uncertainty (linemen) can make recruiting rankings for all mid or low tier schools difficult to interpret.
Ultimately, I'm not saying that we are crushing it in recruiting. We are not. What I am saying is that the talent we have on the roster and that is being recruited to the program is good enough to win games in the Big Ten, as seen last year. We don't have the talent to be a contender and we may never get there with this administration. But going from the worst football program in college football to a consistent bowl contender is a good first step. And we have the talent to accomplish that. Now will the team be put together that way is yet to be seen. I believe we are in position to qualify for bowls three out of 4 years (including the past bowl). If we don't then we find a new coach. One that will start with a solid team that can build them to be better.
This idea that Fleck would be doing well at Illinois is not known. He has done well at Minnesota, but they also have had a history of qualifying for bowl games this millennium (I think 15 since 2000), which is maybe roughly 3 times what we have done since 2000. I think we got the coach we needed to climb out of the hole. We just peeked out of the hole. If our head doesn't come up over the next few seasons, we will be starting over. But I still think that once we get our heads out, things begin to turn and I think we are right at the fulcrum point. Time will tell. But I think another few years of bowl success will start to see the local view of the Illini start to shift. But, who knows.
Ohio State
25 Commits
91.80
295.08
Michigan
23 Commits
90.35
256.34
Penn State
27 Commits
89.55
256.05
Nebraska
24 Commits
88.38
240.27
Wisconsin
20 Commits
87.82
225.54
Maryland
27 Commits
85.62
209.67
Purdue
21 Commits
86.64
208.38
Iowa
21 Commits
86.45
203.81
Minnesota
24 Commits
85.80
199.35
Michigan State
22 Commits
85.68
193.32
Northwestern
17 Commits
86.50
190.69
Indiana
19 Commits
85.00
177.39
Rutgers
20 Commits
84.18
170.14
Illinois
13 Commits
84.90
152.90
Off topic a bit, but remember Kraig Appleton who Zook chased a little bit before he went off to Wisc for one year.
Well, he just got arrested today for first degree murder. As Garth Brooks would say "Thank God for unanswered prayers".
Well, he just got arrested today for first degree murder. As Garth Brooks would say "Thank God for unanswered prayers".
Sad to hear. He had a promising athletic career and was kicked off the Wisky team and now this. Wasn't he in trouble a couple of other times before this? I do remember him getting shot at some point.
Shot multiple times but survived.
1.45 is bigger than the difference of being a top 500 recruit and a top 750 recruit.
Oh, I have some pretty little charts coming that I think will help you be a little more sure. Sure, we can question the scouting and ratings, but unless you are going to watch film on each player, it's the best we have to work with.
1.45 at that level is the difference between 275 and 335. And that is exactly my point. Being the 275th best player vs the 335th best player is being equated to 500 vs 750. What do those differences mean? Absolutely nothing. I did quite a bit of analysis with the nfl and drafting. and what the data shows is way different than what it means on a case by case basis. Or what it means beyond high and Low levels or large differentials.
Having data is better than not having data. I agree.
I like charts, so I’m happy you are producing them. I use them just like everyone else. There’s just too much inconsequential information in middle tier recruits (few eyeballs and greater variance in scores, amount of tape, etc.).
Also another question is how do you use the score. Is a .9 Difference much different? Difference score analysis, which is not even being used, is plagued with errors when used to compare numbers as people. Is a 6 point difference between a player that is 88 vs 82 the same amount of difference as 88 be 94. you can’t say. The data produced through assessment isn’t linear.
The data on the high end is much more accurate than the middle rated players because of film, number of eyeballs, etc. we also know a 90 is better than an 80. Is an 85 much different than an 86? Not known. Is an 88 linebacker different than a 90 receiver? The positional ranking would say the linebacker is way more important. But statistical analysis would indicate stacking a team if receivers would be better.
now, I’m Not saying data is worthless far from it. I make a lot of money because of data. I’m just saying the difference between teams with less than a point difference in overall score doesn’t really mean anything when it comes to talent. But when it comes to coaching, starting lineup scores, scores of the weakest link on the field, then they start to have more relevance
- Status