Apart from the run on sentence (as someone else pointed out), what Jiro said is what I have been beating the drum about since at least last year. I do disagree with the "silly" but on the other hand there seem to be some people who adhere to an absolutist stance in regards to winning, that is, they are absolutely convinced that winning will solve recruiting problems. While I agree that it is important and will certainly help, I don't see it as an either/or situation. I do not see the evidence that only by winning will Illinois get good recruits. Actually, on second thought, in Illinois' case, that may be the only way now but I don't see that as being the case for all basketball programs in general. Look at Hardaway's class. Some say it is the number one class; it is at least in the top five and he has yet to even win a college basketball game as a coach. I am also not sure what the point about Will Wade is being made. He was successful recruiting without a particular stellar winning record, it's just that he may have done so, uh, how to phrase it?, not exactly above board. And yet, so far he is still the coach at LSU (at least unless things have changed again. He was removed then reinstated last I heard) and although he may have lost a recruit or two (Quinones for one) he may still end up coaching one of the better recruiting classes next year. The FBI investigation does not seem to have had much of an impact, at least yet, but that is a discussion for the FBI thread. So bottom line, I just don't think it is just about winning and I don't think the evidence points to that. I agree, winning is important, just not the only thing.