The last play surely involved luck, and we'll never know if coaching made any difference in how it played out. But even without the last sequence, they would have beaten the spread by 2.5, so there's some credit/blame to be had regardless.
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
- Status
The last play surely involved luck, and we'll never know if coaching made any difference in how it played out. But even without the last sequence, they would have beaten the spread by 2.5, so there's some credit/blame to be had regardless.
I think it’s perfectly okay to say Hurley coached well, and they were lucky to win haha.
We have a tendency, especially on this board, to think every win is good coaching, and every loss bad coaching.
The mistake: made by a player, not the coach
The extra pass: made by a player, not the coach
The 40 foot heave: made by a player, not the coach
Nobody has denied Hurley is a great coach, we all think he is (at least that I've seen)
There is no secret magical divinely-intervented tactical play that automatically gets you the ball back and a 40 foot shot to go in with 5 seconds left
If that wasn't a lucky play, can you show me one that was?
"coach up your kids to be ready for anything" <-- all you are saying is he happens to coach the team that got lucky
Agreed on the great coaching. The sequence at the end of the game was lucky for them, though.
Last edited:
I think we should kick Loyola's butt then start checking off other offenders...
the amount of ifs, buts, and if only's when talking about UConn is just too much. I'm all for analytics and predictive metrics but man at some point you just to have know an outlier when you see one and stop calling it luck. 3 finals games in 4 years and 3 !!! whoopings our beloved specifically taking away the thing we are elite at. results matter.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Literally, no one is arguing against Hurley as a coach.
The conversation is about that one specific play.
The collapse against Houston was worse - I think Duke could have simple stalled and won that game. They were up 9 with a little over 2 minutes to go and gave Houston 3 offensive rebounds in one possession. A rebound there and they win it.
Teams often resemble the calm their coach provides in preparation and how they conduct on the sidelines. They trust that coach, they execute when it matters. Scheyer's teams win with talent, but when they need him in tight ones, they look lost.
I think Duke was the better matchup.
You can look at it two ways:
1) Outcome was the product of one lucky play. If so, then sure there was a good amount of luck that went into that. Boozer could have chosen about 4-5 different options and they would have won that game. He could have just throw it out of bounds, and odds were better. Someone said 25% from the logo under those elements, that is generous.
2) Outcome was the product of 40 minutes of basketball, where one coach blew a big lead and the other found a way back in. Then it's not luck - it's great coaching.
I honestly only really think that about this year with UConn. I’m not sure anyone here is saying they got lucky at all in their 2 team steam rolling national titles
Tracing this thread back, it mostly started with:
BretMyBeachHouse even clarified that this statement wasn't about one game (much less one play), but Hurley's overall tourney success. I still wouldn't necessarily prefer to have faced Duke, but the piling on about the luck on the last play seems a bit like a straw-man or at least a deflection from having to give Hurley any credit.
Last edited:
Crazy to me there's this many Hurley supporters on IllinoisLoyalty.
Supporters? We all hate him and/or his antics. But I don't believe anyone who isn't envious of his results.
Agreed, guy is a great coach but a giant tool bag. But our fanbase seems to worship him for some reason.
Brad got lucky that Florida lost to Iowa, but is that an indictment on his overall coaching ability? Of course not. And you don’t see me running around here forcing everyone to say he’s a great coach in response.
I don't think it's a "deflection from having to give Hurley any credit."
What's resulted in this pile up is the claim that facing Duke would've been better for our chances of victory than UCONN (there's been numerous posts asserting that).
The reasoning for that claim has been Scheyer's an awful coach and Hurley's an awe-inspiring coach.
To that, people are just pointing out the final play of the Duke game didn't have anything to do with Scheyer or Hurley, and was just a fluky sequence of events in the most pivotal moment.
3 shots in that f4 game he made that clanked off back iron and somehow found the net.
Then Mullins banking a 3 when we were making a run. Smh
And on top of that Mullins was 4-23 in the tourney and 0-4 in that very game on normal threes before swishing a 40 footer. Lucky af
Personally, I was jumping for joy because I was cheering for UConn (so we wouldn't have to see Duke).
Lol. Can you ever make an argument that doesn't introduce a strawman?
No one is saying Scheyer's awful.
The results right now point to Hurley being better.
Wonder if Williams would've gotten minutes over Lee.
Illini in Italy
- Illini HQ, Florida Panhandle
Wagler + TSJ = Plenty of comps.
Kofi + Plummer= No player in the history of the world like him. Closest would be Patrick Ewing. Embiid would be another reasonable comp.
Coaching or not, there is hard data over three games showing that system they run has us by the balls defensively. 3 lowest scoring games over three years isn't coincidence.
RabidDawgClassic
- Los Angeles, CA
*sigh* I never would've guessed I'd long for the days when the Loyalty board debate was about USC's bench prowess... yet here we are.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Who’s better, UConn’s coach or USC’s 9th man? It’s closer than you’d think.
- Status