On occasion? They sold more than 13,000 just for Central Michigan. They'll be back when we start winning, whether it's with Groce or not. It's that simple.
Pregame: Illinois vs BYU (United Center), Saturday, December 17th, 8:30pm CT, BTN
- Status
On occasion? They sold more than 13,000 just for Central Michigan. They'll be back when we start winning, whether it's with Groce or not. It's that simple.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
Well, the overly simple answer is to schedule more ambitiously. We used to play the likes of Arizona, Kansas, Duke, and Arkansas there (and at least to me, even a less-than-stellar Arkansas is a more compelling draw than a non-basketball school like Georgia or Oregon).
I know that at some point we enjoyed such an advantage in the UC that it was tougher to get marquee opponents - "not-even-close-to-neutral neutral site game" is kind of a tough sell, I suppose. But hey, we shouldn't have that problem any more, amirite?
Much like it's hard to find an upside in an underwhelming matchup there (we played Bradley at the UC once. Gross.), I struggle to see the downside in an impressive one. So we play UCLA and get boatraced. Who cares? At least you get people in the door. And if you win, or play above your head, you get a real coup. What's the argument against this?
mhuml32
- Cincinnati, OH
CMU just shot 35% from three, not terrible but not good
I'd be fine with the UC game being a home-and-home (or sort-of-neutral-site-and-sort-of-neutral-site, like playing in Chicago and Seattle). Schedule a few and put them in opposing years so you don't miss a year, or even skip a year at the UC if we have to.
It's a no-brainer in a vacuum. The problem is when you start to zoom out.
First of all, to schedule a premier opponent in Chicago, you need to schedule a return game. So you're either doing an awkward neutral site elsewhere, or a true road game to balance what is an ostensible neutral court. And since you need a UC opponent every year, that means you're heading to one of these monster road games every year too.
Add that to the Gavitt Games, the ACC/Big Ten Challenge, the Braggin' Rights game, and a Maui-type Thanksgiving tournament, and it's just too much. Even Tom Izzo wouldn't schedule a buzzsaw like that.
And the other big problem is that you don't know the locations of the ACC/Big Ten games or if you're even going to be involved in the Gavitt Games until too late to make these decisions far enough in advance to have your choice of opponent and make sure an individual schedule isn't too tough.
Here's the best idea I can come up with: get a warm weather team to agree to a home-ish neutral for home-ish neutral deal with us (say, Florida with a return game in Orlando or Arizona with a return game in Phoenix?), and go as weak sauce as possible for our Thanksgiving tournament, or even eschew them altogether like Ohio State does.
Events like Maui are awesome, but if getting rid of that element makes all the other pieces fall into place? Maybe that's what we have to do as a school in the unique position of having two off-campus markets it needs to serve in its scheduling.
What would be an incredible help would be if the conferences were willing to let the schools know a year or two in advance whether they would have having home or road (or none) games in the ACC/B1G Challenge and the Gavitt Games. And better still if the Big Ten office could swing it so that teams would be relatively assured of one home game in those two series every year. Then it becomes easyish to fit the rest of the puzzle together.
But that is not the world we're currently living in.
But that is not the world we're currently living in.
frozenrope9190
- Aurora, IL
I was at the Illinois / Auburn game a couple of years ago, before Bruce Pearl slimed the team with his presence. I can't remember how good the crowds were, and it was a lot more close than I remember it being. They're not traditional basketball, but it can't be too hard to find a warm-weather team to do a 2 year return trip series with. Texas, maybe? Georgia Tech? Heck, schedule UCF next year just to see the big 7' 7" guy mix it up with Tillmon. I'd pay to see that.
The ideal UC opponent would be akin to the Braggin' Rights game, i.e. a local rival where you don't have to do a return game. I believe Notre Dame was contacted but wasn't interested. Plus there is potential conflict with the B1G/ACC challenge event. DePaul generates a lot of interest from a small group of vocal Chicago fans, but beyond some initial novelty, I don't think that game really does much for anyone. Marquette might work, but they already have an annual game against a more natural rival (Wisconsin). I'd also heard/read that DePaul has some kind of veto power over other Big East teams playing games in Chicago. Maybe Butler? Despite their recent success, not sure if it's really a big draw or if they'd want to give up a return game.
That would be cool, but yeah, Notre Dame is really the only school that makes sense for that kind of scenario.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I say absolutely no "local" teams in an ideal situation. We gain more than MU does from the Braggin' Rights Game, IMO, as they are elevating our status in the STL market by allowing it to be a true neutral status on what is more their turf than ours; college basketball fans growing up would associate the event as a battle of two popular teams in a city that's up for grabs fan-wise. It's kind of true, of course, as is true with other big cities. However, I think such an arrangement is always less-than-ideal PR for the top dog in the market, which we are in Chicago. Why give Notre Dame that platform in our most important geographic area? Makes zero sense to me. Sure, it'd help ticket sales initially, but I don't think we should plan for this event with the assumption we won't return to form as a program.
I honestly believe it is imperative that this remain an ILLINI thing with the flavor of us reminding everyone they're in Illini country. I'll admit it's hard being bad, but I don't think we'll be bad in the future.
I honestly believe it is imperative that this remain an ILLINI thing with the flavor of us reminding everyone they're in Illini country. I'll admit it's hard being bad, but I don't think we'll be bad in the future.
FeelYourPaign
- So Cal
I would rather have a great series with some history and all that jazz than try to build a perpetual advantage. Because I don't think those exist. My model for a great series is either the Missouri / Illinois Braggin' Rights Game or the rotating Kentucky / Indiana series. I rarely agree with Vitale, but that is a series that should be resumed. People who don't even like either school watch that game. That is what we want, imo.
It's not just about the quality of our teams, we've been having trouble getting quality teams to come to the UC for a long time. We went from getting Duke, UCLA, Arizona and Kansas to UNLV, Arkansas, Temple and Xavier instead.
Also Groce has been outspoken about wanting more home games, so he's probably pushing for teams that don't require a return visit. That means either the local option or second tier teams like BYU and double headers with Northwestern.
Illini1221
Peru,IL
And they already play in that Indiana classic thing with Purdue, Butler, and Indiana.
Illinicpa14
- Chicago
I think an underrated part of the scheduling is these can be used as recruiting pitches to kids as well (ex. you live on the east coast, we get to play in Barclays next year). Also for the local/midwest kids, a lot of times its an opportunity to tell them they get to play on a historic/NBA floor (ex. playing VCU where the Heat play).
Playing in the tournaments like the Bahamas, Florida, Maui also give the kids somewhat of a vacation (packed with games but still)
Agreed. The UC was rocking when we were good and were playing good teams. It was truly a home away from home. I don't want to play an opponent in the UC where the fans are 50/50. That ruins the "home away from home" tradition.
As far as scheduling good teams right now, which good teams would want to play us the past few years? If they beat us,it doesn't really do anything for their resume and if we win it's a borderline bad loss. When we are good again we will get good teams because it's a no-lose situation.
Here's who we played from 2000-2011, when we were pretty good.
2000 - no game (played UIC at the Pavilion)
2001 - Arkansas
2002 - Temple
2003 - Arkansas
2004 - Oregon
2005 - Xavier
2006 - UIC
2007 - no game
2008 - Georgia
2009 - Gonzaga
2010 - UIC
2011 - UNLV
As I mentioned above, it's been tough to get a decent team to come to the UC for a long time, regardless of how good we've been.
We played Arizona at the UC in both 2000 and 2007.
Nice post. I did not realize it was that bad. I was thinking the Arizona/Duke type opponents were in the early 2000s.
I do agree with Second and Chalmers that a big problem is having too many set contracts/games already. Not just for us but for many other power 5 teams. Between rivalries, early season tourney's, conference vs conference battles, etc. their just isn't a lot of wiggle room for another tough game.
But Whitman has pushed most of the right buttons so far. Hopefully he can get creative to make this a marquee game again. Maybe we have to sacrifice and schedule a return game that is a true road game. That isn't really fair but if it turns the UC back into a see of orange then I'm all for it.
Good catch, sports-reference has those listed incorrectly. Doesn't change the point, though.
No doubt we're not the only ones having scheduling issues and are more hampered than other teams with this game + Braggin Rights + ACC game and now sometimes a Gavitt Game. Plus the other assorted exempt tourney events.
Doubtful they would need a return game for the players in the Chicago recruiting scene (ie Kansas, Duke, UK). Not really sure UI wants those games though.
I have no input for the day so I'll just say this...Cleveland blew a 3-1 lead.
I was at the United Center in 2004 for the Oregon game. The tight rims did not bother the Illini on that occasion.
Please tell me we continue to wear the throwbacks. They just scream ILLINOIS basketball so much more than any of the others. I'd love for them to come out with the orange version as well as the true road blue as well. Such a sweet look. And we are 3-0 I believe in the whites!
Always interested to see the new players, so I hope Kipper gets minutes early. I think he is closer to the real deal considering what Groce has said and what is available on video. Kipper is a hard worker, you don't get that built by not working on it. Would love to see Kipper at the SG, Malcolm at SF and Black at C, DJ at PF.
Mika is the only player over 6' 8" that plays meaningful minutes (25 mpg) so this is a game you could do that.
I doubt all 4 you mentioned play at the same time, but I think 3 of the 4 at the same time (2 - 4, or 3 -5) could be pretty effective. Based on reports and what I have seen Kipper, Hill, Black at 2 - 4 would clearly be our best defensive team. If TA is playing the 1, there would be good spacing, even if Kipper can't shoot from distance.
- Status