That's not what people are saying, at least not me. If the results continue to be this bad, JW will make a change. But IF the results improve and we make the NIT (not likely IMO), then JW may not make a change. It is not an argument of should or shouldn't.
2017 Coaching Carousel
- Status
That's not what people are saying, at least not me. If the results continue to be this bad, JW will make a change. But IF the results improve and we make the NIT (not likely IMO), then JW may not make a change. It is not an argument of should or shouldn't.
If we have a depleted roster in the first year or two, we'd have empty seats as well. Probably even more empty seats than what we'do see if we kept Groce for year.
Also, I think there's a false belief that Illinois basketball couldn't get worse. A new coach could put us in a much worse state. At the very least, the AD will think about what is necessary to put a new coach in a position to succeed. That may mean keeping Groce another year, or it may not.
Last edited:
JW may make a change if we make the NCAA's. He may not make a change if we don't win another game.
I am not alone in not being JW and not being able to state such things to a metaphysical certainty.
What I would say, however, is that you really shine a spotlight on the size and scope of the problem when you make it seem like an NIT berth is something that Illinois Basketball should ever care about.
The NIT is failure. Period. John Groce believes that, Josh Whitman believes that, every donor believes that, and the former occupants of the empty seats at SFC sure as heck believe that. If the belief that the NIT is failure ever changes, we've got bigger problems than our coach.
I actually really doubt that. Nothing reinvigorates a college program like a new coach. They are the ultimate draws. We saw it with Lovie this year and ironically John Groce was once proof of that.
Sunk cost.
I categorically reject the idea that there is some double-secret master plan that is a sure bet to maximize the talent that gets handed off to the next coach. That sounds and feels smarter than it is. And when it blows up in your face, you're left that much further behind the 8-ball.
Lovie was a homerun hire just due to his name and Groce inherited a pretty good team in his first year. If we don't get a homerun hire or keep the 2017 class intact, it'll be a tall task to expect attendance to go up right away. It could happen, but that's not my point.
And as long as we're psychoanalyzing JW, how much does wasting a year of his athlete's blood sweat and tears in service of a dead end coach that no longer has his confidence sound like the Josh Whitman we know?
Look at what he was willing to do to Bill Cubit in order to give his kids the leadership they deserve.
We can argue all we want about should or shouldn't. I would bet a pretty penny that the NIT doesn't save Groce.
(Our loss in the First Four just got carved into stone, didn't it? :tsk
Look at what he was willing to do to Bill Cubit in order to give his kids the leadership they deserve.
We can argue all we want about should or shouldn't. I would bet a pretty penny that the NIT doesn't save Groce.
(Our loss in the First Four just got carved into stone, didn't it? :tsk
JW may make a change if we make the NCAA's. He may not make a change if we don't win another game.
I am not alone in not being JW and not being able to state such things to a metaphysical certainty.
Time to quit drinking...
LOL... I thought I had seen everything on this board, until I saw your post accusing me of believing that NIT is something UI basketball should ever care about. Maybe you should explain how you reached that conclusion and use a lot of quotes.
I disagree. Firsthand, a sunk cost has already been incurred meaning looking back retrospectively. You can't just assign something in the future as a sunk costs to help prove a point. Secondly, many of coaches have had recruiting classes to save their jobs. If this didn't happen, Juwan Evans might be at U of I instead of Oklahoma St. Many wanted Ford gone after the 2015 year. This isn't some hard-conniving plan that is far-fetched or not thought about by administrations. This is simply viewing 5 birds in hand are better than 0.
Tevo
- Wilmette, IL
Anyone feel like Groce may be (may have been) coaching a little scared -- as in, playing the experienced guys because they are experienced and that seems like a safer bet, even if that isn't necessarily the best bet for the longer term this year or next? Maybe I'm looking for things that aren't there, but it kind of reminds me of the old adage: Nobody gets fired for going with IBM. Meaning, if you go with the safe option -- the seniors, the experienced guys -- you'll get fewer surprises, more predictability. Less upside, maybe, but if you have to win RIGHT NOW, and win as many games this season as you can, it may feel like the better option. But if you're trying to simply be the best team possible by the end of the season, and develop all of your players to the maximum, you may instead choose to play the young guys early, when they have time to learn and gain experience. It may cost you in the short term, but the hope is that is pays off at the end of the year or at least next year when you have to rely on them.
Groce must know he's on the hotseat, so he may be going with a strategy that says "Getting to the post season is the #1 goal" -- ride with the known players, the experienced guys, and hope they can win as many games as possible. Whereas if his goal was program building, and thinking forward to next year and the year after (the way a newly hired guy, or someone secure in his job might), he might opt to spread out playing time, give the younger guys a chance to show what they can do, etc.
Another analogy might be the team that is in "Win it this year" mode vs. "Build for the future" in baseball. Playing veterans day in and day out might give you the best chance to win each game, but after the year is over, you need to start again. Playing the talent rookies may result in mistakes and losses, but next year, and the year after, it pays dividends.
Long winded way of saying it, but maybe the temperature of Groce's seat drove him to play Tate and Abrams, rather than TJL and JCL.
Yes? No?
Travis Ford made the tournament the year a recruiting class allegedly "saved his job".
Listen, I've made my point. You can listen or not. But John Groce is going to be fired if we're not in the NCAA's. I guarantee it.
(I knew we were going to be the test case for a hot seat coach and the First Four from the very instant it was announced. This is our destiny.)
Tevo
- Wilmette, IL
If all the good recruits and existing players transfer or opt out, that can be very bad. However, the possible upside to that is that the new coach would likely have the opportunity to quickly remake the team with his own players. If that new hire has the recruiting chops, and connections, that we'd all want him to have, he may be able to sell playing time to a good sized class, and within two years, have a whole roster full of his own players, with the skills, makeup and characteristics he wants. That might work out better, in the 3-4 year timeframe, than if a guy came in to an inherited team that had to be convinced to follow his new direction.
I can understand not "building for the future" as in next year, or even later in the season, but Groce's choices were neither better nor safer for right now IMO.
I was very surprised to see both Tate/Abrams in the starting lineup, given how badly we got beaten the previous day by WVU.
Time to quit drinking...
LOL... I thought I had seen everything on this board, until I saw your post accusing me of believing that NIT is something UI basketball should ever care about. Maybe you should explain how you reached that conclusion and use a lot of quotes.
But do you agree with that statement? Because my opinion would not change if we had made the NIT last year, or if we make it this year, unless perhaps we were an obvious tournament snub.
That said, lets go get NC State and take it from there.
If UI misses out on the NCAAs for the fourth straight year, JG will be fired, and I personally know one major donor, my cousin, who would contribute generously to help pay the contract of a new coach, and his major donor friends feel the same way. (Donors, like the rest of the fan base, are tired of the losing and dearth of postseason success, particularly after ponying up huge dollars for the SFC renovation.)
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
This is why I would retain Groce with any semblance of a competitive team this year. He is an above average to good recruiter and there is GREAT talent coming up through the pipeline. I'm really hoping the humiliating losses are behind them and they can string together enough success to save his job. Losing the 2017 class would be a disaster.
The Worm
- CHICAGO, IL
I personally think the team will absolutely be competitive, and that this past week will be the lowest point of this season.
No PG=no offense. TJL starts from here on out, and Tracy backs him up. Tate is relegated to spot duty.
While Groce is ultimately responsible for the void that has existed on the roster, it's clear that a competent playmaker makes this offense work.
He made a massive error rolling the dice with the two seniors thinking their experience would be enough to overcome the talent gap while TJL recovered.
Despite a horrific week by UI bball standards, I think he can get it done assuming the talent continues to roll in.
We'll see. I think there will be a rotation shakeup, but I'm betting that Tracy will slide over to PG and start, TJL will get ~15 mpg backing him up, JCL will start, Hill obviously stays the same, Black will start, and Thorne will either start or at least get as many minutes as his knees/diabetes permit (18-25, depending on the game). I think DJW will split with AJ depending on match-ups (i.e. do we need prototype SF athleticism and length, or do we need shooting), Mav will get less, Finke will get ~20 mpg but be deployed based more on match-ups. I think Tate falls to the 9th spot in the rotation and only gets in if the team is melting down and needs a steady hand or it's a blowout. Not sure what happens when Kipper takes the court.
I agree that we've likely reached our nadir. As another poster mentioned somewhere along the way, if we'd just hung on against Winthrop there wouldn't be much gnashing of teeth. We'd be saying, "we've got questions to answer - we let a low-major stay close, got blown out against a top-20 team and hung in there against #25," but no one would be calling for heads to roll. We desperately need to win 3 of 4 against NC State, VCU, BYU, and Mizzou. Goes without saying that we need to take care of business against IUPUI and CMU. If we emerge from non-con at 9-4 and show signs of improvement, we may still be in line for a solid year.
JW may make a change if we make the NCAA's. He may not make a change if we don't win another game.
I am not alone in not being JW and not being able to state such things to a metaphysical certainty.
What I would say, however, is that you really shine a spotlight on the size and scope of the problem when you make it seem like an NIT berth is something that Illinois Basketball should ever care about.
The NIT is failure. Period. John Groce believes that, Josh Whitman believes that, every donor believes that, and the former occupants of the empty seats at SFC sure as heck believe that. If the belief that the NIT is failure ever changes, we've got bigger problems than our coach.
Well said. That the NIT may be used as evidence of anything other than failure would have been laughed at as recently as three years ago.
I hate unknowns, and the idea that we are going to land a coach who will turn things around immediately are not likely. What we know so far is that we have 3-4 very good recruits coming in next year that I want to have them suit up for the Illini. Look at some painful rebuilds and redos that Iowa, Indiana, and Michigan went through. The Illini team that beat Iowa last year in the Big Ten Tourney was much better than the team early in the season, improvement is likely. I believe changes will be made with TJL, Black, and possibly Kipper getting more minutes.
Last edited:
Of course, the flaw in your logic is that he didn't play Nunn and Hill as freshmen until we had lost enough to leave making the tournament as unrealistic.
His reliance on older, less talented players is a flaw in his approach and not a symptom of his seat being warm.
So you seem to me to have the opposite outlook from me. I hate sitting with a situation that I believe is very unlikely to produce the results I am looking for. When I have decided that a project will fail, or in this case when a coach is unlikely to be an annual Big 10 factor, I move on. I appreciate the cautious approach, but I think that ultimately you end up in a worse situation more often than you will see the situation resolve itself.
I'm looking at it from watching the Illini and college bb religiously for 30+ years. I have seen a pattern of "the new college coach doesn't land a dream team class in year 1 or 2 so he is gone in year 4-5". Knowing how instate AAU and hs coaches treat new coaches + outsiders it will be a couple of years before there is a breakthrough in recruiting. Read my post regarding the "tools of basketball", Groce needs to land more of those multi-faceted players.
Groce has lead us to the following:
-Biggest tournament drought in 37 years.
-Lowest attendance mark (despite very expensive new-ish stadium) in 35 years.
Unless these two facts are quickly solved in the next few months, this is a total no brainer.
-Biggest tournament drought in 37 years.
-Lowest attendance mark (despite very expensive new-ish stadium) in 35 years.
Unless these two facts are quickly solved in the next few months, this is a total no brainer.
- Status