If Hurley/UConn's tourney results vs the spread are a measure of the magic, it was strongest in 2023 & 2024. It's apparently come back down to earth since then, but it's still positive. I've included their results vs Tovik's margin to show that bettors haven't deviated much from the computers.
Illini Basketball 2026-2027
- Status
Correct, but if you don't think Hurley's coaching got them to the point that a bonehead mistake by Scheyer would win UCONN the game, then I don't know what to tell you. Hurley can flat out coach.The offensive player could've just launched the ball in the air and the game is over. He made an error by throwing it where a player could easily reach it.
It was 100% an error by Boozer, that's not really disputable.
There is no way to give Hurley credit for this. Having a player on the other team make a dire mistake and then banking in a 40 foot heave isn't something you draw up on the clipboard.
Yea not gonna lie KJ cost us some games with his wildness
Throughout this entire conversation we've given Dan Hurley his flowers. He's been called a great coach more than several times.
It is also okay to know that they were handed that game by Duke via an inexcusable mistake by Cayden Boozer and the ensuing scramble that led to a 40 foot heave at the buzzer.
Was not aware the Illinois message board had such a large contingent of Dan Hurley stans.
Last edited:
Do you think the outcome of a 40 minute game is reliant on one play that determines the winner? C'mon. Might as well roll the ball out there with 60 seconds and give each team one possession. It's like saying one bad reffing call mid game was luck/not luck and determined the game.
I'd personally prefer beating UConn as well as in this sport, coaching is what wins. Players come and go. Their system is our kyrptonite. In three games, where we had very good teams and the #2 and #3 offensive kenpom teams, we have scored an average of 58 pts a game. I believe it's our three lowest scoring games in the last three seasons. We break that rut, I'd say it shows this team is different.
I also watched that NC game - Michigan was a far better team on paper, yet if not for a really favorable UM whistle (check the box on fouls/free throws), UConn may have won that game. There were 5-6 WTF calls on UConn that looked like the refs were being paid off, most involving Cadeau.
The fact that you say it was a bank shot tells me you didn't even watch the play or the situation, it was nothing but net from a player that can shoot the lights out. Defense applied pressure, Duke made a mistake.The offensive player could've just launched the ball in the air and the game is over. He made an error by throwing it where a player could easily reach it.
It was 100% an error by Boozer, that's not really disputable.
There is no way to give Hurley credit for this. Having a player on the other team make a dire mistake and then banking in a 40 foot heave isn't something you draw up on the clipboard.
Many of us that watch college basketball just don't have a problem stating the facts about whether a coach is great or not.
You are correct, and I don't think its close.
UConn stayed in it.
But I’ll go to my grave thinking if we could buy like a single layup against UConn we would have spooked Michigan.
A) even though they beat us in Champaign, they were rolling then and we were probably at our worst of the season, I still think a slight mental advantage of Brad owning Michigan
B) Yaxel was very clearly hurt, really hurt. And no Cason.
C) That crowd would have been 85% orange
In this case? Yes, and it’s not even arguable.
Really depends on how you look at it - some may say Duke should have never been in that position. Saw a stat were overall 1's were 134-0 when leading by 15 at the half prior to that game, Duke had a 99% of winning when it was up 17 in the second half.
Last edited:
Yeah never know - conference opponents have a funny way of playing out in title games(Gtown/Nova 1985, Kansas/OU 1988). Both times it happened in the modern era, the dog won in big upsets.
Michigan didn't play particularly well in that final. They got UConn on 22 to 13 personal fouls, and FTs were 25-12.
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
pruman91
- interviewing new NL's daily....I really really am
wettsten
- Chicago
this is an internet message board in the offseason. everything is arguable.
Agreed. It’s why the coaching and in-game adjustments thing is tough, because you can get so granular you end up lost in space.
Technically, do I blame his coaching for getting behind by 17?
Partly why the Rutgers thread was such madness last year - it was “Brad can’t coach cuz we lost the second half by 1” and it’s like what about the part where we got up 30 lol
No it's not!!!
No it's not.
Yes it 'tis!
You can choose to look at it however you’d like to, but Hurley did not draw that sequence up as it transpired. We can agree on that, hopefully.
“Okay, Boozer is gonna screw this up. All you have to do is heave a 40 foot shot. Guaranteed win. Break!”
That isn’t what happened.
Yes.
When it’s a close game, the outcome is ALWAYS reliant on the plays at the end.
What you did prior to that is just putting yourself in position for those final moments. BUT — what happens in those final moments determine whether what you did prior, is looked at as a failure or masterpiece.
If that 40 footer didn’t go in, the narrative would be “why did you get down 19 points.”
Because it went in, everyone will say “what an amazing effort to come back.”
Same thing with our UCLA play at the end.
Last edited:
Of course. You can't anticipate a broken play, you can only coach your kids up to be ready for anything. The extra pass was almost as impressive as the shot.
lstewart53x3
- Scottsdale, Arizona
Yeah, let’s start here.
Let’s imagine for a sec that the steal with a few seconds to go was defensive skill, not luck. Arguable for sure, but let’s stick with that.
Let’s focus solely on the shot. A shot from 40 feet out. What percentage of the time does that shot go in? Maybe 25% of the time?
Which means there’s a 75% chance he misses that shot. Had the shot not went in, they of course would have lost the game. Therefore, they were decently lucky to win that game.
I'm looking at it like good coaching isn't all about drawing up sequences. Illini fans should appreciate that.
I look at it like UCONN was down by 10 with under 7min again the #1 ranked team. Somehow they found the fortitude to get within 2 with time on the clock, when anything can happen. Looks like great coaching to me.
I'd rather have played Duke.
I think the issue is two sides are arguing against something the other side isn't even saying.
When I say it was lucky they won, people respond "but Hurley's a great coach"
When they say Hurley's a great coach, I respond "He is but that sequence was still luck"
Everyone is correct here. If that wasn't a lucky play/sequence, then someone should show me one that is.
- Status