Illinois Hoops Recruiting Thread

#476      
21ChampaignSt
Second place is 1st loser said:
It is. Without the fans funding the sport given the entertainment value....all of the ancillary stuff is moot. Without the fans, there's no NIL, no TV money, no jersey sales, no concessions....nada.

The players benefit from the entertainment they provide. No more, no less.
Click to expand...
The vast majority of sports played on earth at any given time are played in front of zero fans. So, the premise that sports only exist for fans or that athletes are just like these implements toiling around on display solely for the enjoyment of strangers is silly.

Would this particular version of this particular sport exist without fans? No. Would there still be college basketball without fans? Yes.

Why? Because sports don't exist because of fans. Fans exist because of sport.
 
#478      
doowink
Poe's Law said:
So we’re going to 76 teams in the tourney for entertainment value?
Click to expand...
Music Video Throwing Money GIF
...idk...but counting money can be entertaining
 
#479      
From the cheap seats
If not for entertainment, why do people (other than family and friends) watch? If not for people watching, why is it on TV? If not for TV, there would not be billions of dollars to spread around. I think I just described Division III. So yes, sports would still exist. In their purest form. I just wouldn’t be watching. My loss for sure.
 
#482      
the juiceman cometh
bavanga3 said:
Musselman has twice as many 2nd weekend appearances in less years,
Click to expand...
Does recency not matter at all? If you were an AD and could hire anybody in the universe, would you hire Cal over Hurley right now?

If recency matters at all, then consider that Muss has missed the last three tourneys, and in the same time span BU has both an Elite Eight and Final Four run.

bavanga3 said:
a better winning percentage,
Click to expand...

I'm not sure where you're getting that tbh. As already pointed out, BU has a higher % than Musselman overall. If you want to take out their non-power conference stats (SFA for BU and Nevada for Muss), that puts Muss at 0.616 for Arkansas + USC, and BU at 0.634 for Ok. St. + Illinois.

bavanga3 said:
never had any of his seasons vacated,
Click to expand...

BU had some seasons vacated a lifetime ago at SFA for stuff his assistant did. Never got tied to him personally. There has not been a whiff of NCAA enforcement issues in the decade since.

bavanga3 said:
and at his 3rd school has started out better in his first two years at a football school than Underwood did at a basketball school.
Click to expand...

Pre-NIL vs post-NIL comparison is like apples and oranges, but worth pointing out that USC made the tournament in 3 out of the 4 seasons prior to Muss's arrival, and missed out on the tournament both of Muss's first 2 seasons. Meanwhile, BU was taking over a program that had missed the Tournament for 4 straight seasons, and had not made consecutive Tournament appearances in a decade. The USC program Muss inherited was both in better shape, and playing in the NIL-era where programs can turn things around lightning fast if they make the right moves.

By the way the guy Muss replaced managed to get another "football school" to the Tournament this season, for its first appearance in nearly a decade, while Muss was watching it at home.

bavanga3 said:
Don't get me wrong, I'll take Underwood as my coach, but Underwood is not objectively better. That's your opinion and maybe your as guilty of being prisoner of the moment as the people who insist on being critical.
Click to expand...
Unless your only criteria is the outcome of the R32 game in the Tournament, then yes, Underwood is objectively better. Even then you have to completely discount the fact that BU's recent tournament results are much better than Muss's (non-existent) recent tournament results.
 
Last edited:
#483      
Second place is 1st loser
21ChampaignSt said:
The vast majority of sports played on earth at any given time are played in front of zero fans. So, the premise that sports only exist for fans or that athletes are just like these implements toiling around on display solely for the enjoyment of strangers is silly.

Would this particular version of this particular sport exist without fans? No. Would there still be college basketball without fans? Yes.

Why? Because sports don't exist because of fans. Fans exist because of sport.
Click to expand...
Ok, are we talking about the vast majority of sports or the mega revenue generating ones? Yes, if I'm watching my kid play, it's not about me whatsoever.

The second I put money down to watch a professional athlete play, the same money that pays their salary/NIL, yes.....I'm paying for entertainment. When the commercials are purely based on viewership, our time watching, and this money goes into lining billionaires pockets....I have a vested interest. We all do.

Furthermore, the entities running the events are entertaining us as part of getting us through the door, whether that be shooting t-shirts into the crowd, putting up kiss cams, playing music during intermissions , etc.....the whole thing is part of a show for the fan experience.

Now, if you're saying that it's free, I don't have to buy tickets, the concessions are free, I have absolutely no skin in the game and it's 100% outcome based... where the fans showing up have absolutely no impact on NIL, multiple million dollar salaries, etc and it is limited to players playing the sport for sport....it's not about us anymore. At that point us, as fans, are of no relevance. It's a glorified YMCA game at that point. At that point, it's not about any of us.

How many times have our insiders referred to ROI based on paying our players based on wins and losses? Is that just about the sport? No, the current product doesn't exist without us. Our entertainment and money is mandatory to the products current existence.

If the players don't want to be paid, we're just showing up for support and our existence is meaningless....it's all about the game. In all other instances, the entertainment value and our players deciding to play where they want to play based on our participation....I want my money's worth.

Can't move the goalposts and lump high D1/professional sports in the same category as a High School gym on a random Tuesday night.
 
#485      
21ChampaignSt
Second place is 1st loser said:
Ok, are we talking about the vast majority of sports or the mega revenue generating ones? Yes, if I'm watching my kid play, it's not about me whatsoever.

The second I put money down to watch a professional athlete play, the same money that pays their salary/NIL, yes.....I'm paying for entertainment. When the commercials are purely based on viewership, our time watching, and this money goes into lining billionaires pockets....I have a vested interest. We all do.

Furthermore, the entities running the events are entertaining us as part of getting us through the door, whether that be shooting t-shirts into the crowd, putting up kiss cams, playing music during intermissions , etc.....the whole thing is part of a show for the fan experience.

Now, if you're saying that it's free, I don't have to buy tickets, the concessions are free, I have absolutely no skin in the game and it's 100% outcome based... where the fans showing up have absolutely no impact on NIL, multiple million dollar salaries, etc and it is limited to players playing the sport for sport....it's not about us anymore. At that point us, as fans, are of no relevance. It's a glorified YMCA game at that point. At that point, it's not about any of us.

How many times have our insiders referred to ROI based on paying our players based on wins and losses? Is that just about the sport? No, the current product doesn't exist without us. Our entertainment and money is mandatory to the products current existence.

If the players don't want to be paid, we're just showing up for support and our existence is meaningless....it's all about the game. In all other instances, the entertainment value and our players deciding to play where they want to play based on our participation....I want my money's worth.

Can't move the goalposts and lump high D1/professional sports in the same category as a High School gym on a random Tuesday night.
Click to expand...
I believe the discussion started around the idea (maybe not these exact words) that the only purpose of sports (in this instance college basketball) is to entertain fans.

So then think about what I said. Doesn't the fact that people have basketball hoops in their driveways and wiffle balls and bats in their garages show that sports have purpose beyond the entertainment of others? Perhaps that the participants derive some value from athletic competition that doesn't require a fan to validate?

The college basketball players we pay to be entertained by didn't start by playing in front of thousands of fans. They started playing in front of no one. And they did it anyway. Because they liked it and they were good at it. It was fun. It's not like that part of them dies as soon as they sign an NIL deal. They are still getting value from competing in the game that doesn't require fans to be realized. The game still serves a purpose to them.

So, the only reason sports (this one or that one) exist is not for fan entertainment. That is just one significant reason among several others.
 
#486      
ChiefGritty
21ChampaignSt said:
I believe the discussion started around the idea (maybe not these exact words) that the only purpose of sports (in this instance college basketball) is to entertain fans.

So then think about what I said. Doesn't the fact that people have basketball hoops in their driveways and wiffle balls and bats in their garages show that sports have purpose beyond the entertainment of others? Perhaps that the participants derive some value from athletic competition that doesn't require a fan to validate?

The college basketball players we pay to be entertained by didn't start by playing in front of thousands of fans. They started playing in front of no one. And they did it anyway. Because they liked it and they were good at it. It was fun. It's not like that part of them dies as soon as they sign an NIL deal. They are still getting value from competing in the game that doesn't require fans to be realized. The game still serves a purpose to them.

So, the only reason sports (this one or that one) exist is not for fan entertainment. That is just one significant reason among several others.
Click to expand...
We're saying the same thing from different angles. What fan entertainment value is, at base, is the ability to stir that internal passion and love for the game in all of us, the participants and spectators alike.

The point is that to the extent sports is a money-making enterprise, that is solely and entirely due the interest and passion of the fans. Every red cent in the industry flows based on that.
 
#488      
hangdog
ChiefGritty said:
No, that is the powers that be violating the core purpose of the exercise, which is to provide the best entertainment. That's my whole point.
Click to expand...

The purpose of the powers that be in professional sports is to maximize profit to benefit the stakeholders. The core exercise of the sport has long been abandoned to achieve that end. The core purpose of the fans is to transfer their earnings to the stakeholders. "No more, no less."
 
#489      
RollChief
the juiceman cometh said:
Unless your only criteria is the outcome of the R32 game in the Tournament, then yes, Underwood is objectively better. Even then you have to completely discount the fact that BU's recent tournament results are much better than Muss's (non-existent) recent tournament results.
Click to expand...
I don't want to dogpile because this is the recruiting thread and it seems like you guys have already covered this pretty thoroughly, but Underwood is objectively better, and the only argument that isn't flat wrong (but very thinly veiled) is second weekends, which is meaningless, because Underwood has more tourney wins overall.

Please tell me that Underwood isn't objectively better, finishing 10 of 13 seasons with a better-ranked team at the end of the season compared to the start, where Musselman has only done this 4 times in 11. Underwood has 6 top 25 finishes in KP (4 in the last 6, with 3 in the top 10), where Musselman has 4 top 25, and none better than 18.

Tournament performance is absolutely important and a key indicator for success for any NCAAB fan, but can also be relatively anomalous (one way or the other). If you look at success as an aggregate and not cherry-picked, then it's clear that BU has and is capable of achieving more. I'm not saying Muss is a terrible coach and should be fired, but I'll take consistent success over a few good consecutive runs, if that makes me a homer so be it.

1781103707679.png
 
#490      
NarrowJ
RollChief said:
I don't want to dogpile because this is the recruiting thread and it seems like you guys have already covered this pretty thoroughly, but Underwood is objectively better, and the only argument that isn't flat wrong (but very thinly veiled) is second weekends, which is meaningless, because Underwood has more tourney wins overall.

Please tell me that Underwood isn't objectively better, finishing 10 of 13 seasons with a better-ranked team at the end of the season compared to the start, where Musselman has only done this 4 times in 11. Underwood has 6 top 25 finishes in KP (4 in the last 6, with 3 in the top 10), where Musselman has 4 top 25, and none better than 18.

Tournament performance is absolutely important and a key indicator for success for any NCAAB fan, but can also be relatively anomalous (one way or the other). If you look at success as an aggregate and not cherry-picked, then it's clear that BU has and is capable of achieving more. I'm not saying Muss is a terrible coach and should be fired, but I'll take consistent success over a few good consecutive runs, if that makes me a homer so be it.

View attachment 50541
Click to expand...


Brad has nearly as many tourney wins the past three seasons (8) as Musselman has in his entire career (10)

Ok, but agreed on the dogpiling -- maybe there will be some recruiting news to get us back on track (paging @Joel Goodson lol)
 
#491      
ChiefGritty
hangdog said:
The purpose of the powers that be in professional sports is to maximize profit to benefit the stakeholders. The core exercise of the sport has long been abandoned to achieve that end. The core purpose of the fans is to transfer their earnings to the stakeholders. "No more, no less."
Click to expand...
The point is, a sports industry that fails to entertain fans is a sports industry that is turning off the money spigot that makes the rest of it go.

We're addicts that will keep buying a watered down product, sure. But not forever, not without limit.

This industry grew and sustained by fostering passion and tradition that masses of ordinary fans loved and cared about. That is the crop that is being harvested with every TV deal.

RollChief said:
I'm not saying Muss is a terrible coach and should be fired
Click to expand...
We're one more shaky November away from USC fans saying that though.
 
#492      
21ChampaignSt
ChiefGritty said:
We're saying the same thing from different angles. What fan entertainment value is, at base, is the ability to stir that internal passion and love for the game in all of us, the participants and spectators alike.

The point is that to the extent sports is a money-making enterprise, that is solely and entirely due the interest and passion of the fans. Every red cent in the industry flows based on that.
Click to expand...
Agree w/ this 100%. I may have jumped in to the convo at an awkward moment and misinterpreted it. But yeah, the business of sports cannot exist without fans who are willing to buy the product.
 
#493      
hangdog
ChiefGritty said:
The point is, a sports industry that fails to entertain fans is a sports industry that is turning off the money spigot that makes the rest of it go.

We're addicts that will keep buying a watered down product, sure. But not forever, not without limit.

This industry grew and sustained by fostering passion and tradition that masses of ordinary fans loved and cared about. That is the crop that is being harvested with every TV deal.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with anything you've said in this post. But that doesn't also mean that player competition is the actual point of the sport, not fan appreciation. They are 2 sides of the same coin.

But by your own admission, many of the factors you've pointed out have a way of diminishing the game in pursuit of generating fandom/$. It will always tickle me when fans believe they play a significant part in the sport simply because they voluntarily give up time and money to be entertained by that sport.
 
#495      
Emerson Bigguns
21ChampaignSt said:
I believe the discussion started around the idea (maybe not these exact words) that the only purpose of sports (in this instance college basketball) is to entertain fans.

So then think about what I said. Doesn't the fact that people have basketball hoops in their driveways and wiffle balls and bats in their garages show that sports have purpose beyond the entertainment of others? Perhaps that the participants derive some value from athletic competition that doesn't require a fan to validate?

The college basketball players we pay to be entertained by didn't start by playing in front of thousands of fans. They started playing in front of no one. And they did it anyway. Because they liked it and they were good at it. It was fun. It's not like that part of them dies as soon as they sign an NIL deal. They are still getting value from competing in the game that doesn't require fans to be realized. The game still serves a purpose to them.

So, the only reason sports (this one or that one) exist is not for fan entertainment. That is just one significant reason among several others.
Click to expand...
I can get on board with this argument, but I think we can all agree that the reason we pay a college coach millions of dollars is for entertainment.
 
#496      
wc_illini
RollChief said:
I don't want to dogpile because this is the recruiting thread and it seems like you guys have already covered this pretty thoroughly, but Underwood is objectively better, and the only argument that isn't flat wrong (but very thinly veiled) is second weekends, which is meaningless, because Underwood has more tourney wins overall.

Please tell me that Underwood isn't objectively better, finishing 10 of 13 seasons with a better-ranked team at the end of the season compared to the start, where Musselman has only done this 4 times in 11. Underwood has 6 top 25 finishes in KP (4 in the last 6, with 3 in the top 10), where Musselman has 4 top 25, and none better than 18.

Tournament performance is absolutely important and a key indicator for success for any NCAAB fan, but can also be relatively anomalous (one way or the other). If you look at success as an aggregate and not cherry-picked, then it's clear that BU has and is capable of achieving more. I'm not saying Muss is a terrible coach and should be fired, but I'll take consistent success over a few good consecutive runs, if that makes me a homer so be it.

View attachment 50541
Click to expand...
I personally value final KenPom as the single most important metric (unless a coach consistently over/underachieves in the NCAAT after taking into account opponent quality). By that, Brad has clearly been better. I even lean towards wanting excellent seasons (ideally in whatever is the very top tier in a given year) more than I care about a better average, and that still puts Brad way ahead. That's even more true if you ignore both coaches' first two seasons at a new school.

Finishing better than they start is a way to separate recruiting from coaching, but the end result is all I care about. Theoretically I'd be fine with a better recruiter/worse coach if it meant more team success, but Musselman hasn't had that success.

Tournament wins could be seen as a toss-up since Brad has more years (and more years in power conferences), so wins/year are close enough. Even if you could show that Musselman has a better track record of over-achieving in the tournament, I don't care about over-achieving. I care about success, and Musselman hasn't been better unless you grade on a curve.

All this could change in the future, but the past favors Brad over Muss.
 
#498      
Bbuck21
21ChampaignSt said:
The vast majority of sports played on earth at any given time are played in front of zero fans. So, the premise that sports only exist for fans or that athletes are just like these implements toiling around on display solely for the enjoyment of strangers is silly.

Would this particular version of this particular sport exist without fans? No. Would there still be college basketball without fans? Yes.

Why? Because sports don't exist because of fans. Fans exist because of sport.
Click to expand...
Beautifully stated. You need to copyright this! Reminded me of Terrance Mann at the end of Field of Dreams (y)
 
#500      
hangdog
nichi said:
Professional and major NCAA sports certainly exist as is for the entertainment value of the fans.

Some other sports exist for the recreational value of the participants.
Click to expand...
Now who is being naive? Professional/NCAA sports are sold/marketed/hyped to us fans as entertainment and exist as is purely for $$$.
 
Back