Illinois Football Recruiting Thread
- Status
Count me in for this as well. I’ll be happy to be part of the group of Orange in the stands. Would love to be there to help show our support.
We should probably get to more than one bowl game in a row to nail this down as a success. If we go 5-7, sit at the bottom of the conference and don't make a bowl ...let's see how the reaction is. BU consistently has top 15/top 20 recruiting classes, consistently has us in the top 5 of the conference, has won championships, but because he hasn't won a tournament game....some want his head and he took over just as much of a trainwreck as BB did.
I think that BB needs to have BU's record of success and not only get to 4 bowl games in a row, but win a couple as well. Then, we can say that BU should take notes. Until then....
Edit: Ron Zook had PHENOMENAL recruiting classes, got us to a Rose Bowl and it wasn't good enough for the natives to get restless and want his head.
Last edited:
Zook was an unreal recruiter. He was also probably the worst coach we have had in terms of player development, game planning and in game coaching. Well, maybe Lovie was as bad or worse, but that's about it
Tim Beckman would like a word.
And that word is WINT.
God, that guy was such an embarrassment.
But at least he is not like Pat Sandusky at NW.
You’re correct on the winning consistent part but BU couldn’t get a commitment from RayJ after his OV but BB got a commitment from Valentine before he left campus, just saying. Credit to BB, Thad, and everyone involved!!!
Last edited:
I think Lovie was actually very good at player development. But atrocious at everything else.
I agree with all you said, except for the player development.
Lovie was good at character development. Let's make sure we understand character development and player development are two different things.
Lovie was perfect for what we needed when we hired him.
If only we could have done it for about a fifth as much money and for about a fifth as long as we had him.
Lovie was perfect for what we needed when we hired him.
If only we could have done it for about a fifth as much money and for about a fifth as long as we had him.
Additionally, he was outstanding at getting unqualified family and friends on the payroll.
I wouldn't say that. I'd say his staff was good at identifying NFL traits as far as body types. I would also say that the staff he had was much better at evaluating defensive players that had those traits but needed coached up. Offense was terrible under his regime from top to bottom. Especially the line. You can't recruit MAC level linemen and expect them to do their job against B10 defenses.
Offensive Line wise, he did the same thing with the Bears, always 7th round draft choices at left tackle, and un drafted free agents to fill it out.
Im a Steelers fan at heart but the Bears are my 2nd favorite team. I hated Lovie as the Bears coach. Don't know why I was excited when Whitman made the hire. I should have known better. Either way, without the Lovie disaster we most likely would not have coach B if we went a different direction in 2017 or whichever season that was we hired Lovie.
one again, Lovie was NOT a disaster. Beckman was a disaster that left us as potentially the worst program in P5.
Lovie brought respectability. Some decent players. A bowl game. And restored Illinois as a decent place to be, both as a player and a coach.
Was Lovie good enough for the long term? No. But people need to reminder that he came in to a dumpster fire that had been nuked.
The fact that Beckman was a disaster does not mean that Lovie wasn't also (in different ways) a disaster. He was an overpaid, overhyped, boring, stubborn, unsuccessful coach. The U of I and its fans did not get what they thought they were "buying" when he was hired.
redwingillini11
White and Sixth
- North Aurora
For me the Lovie downfall was all about recruiting. Yes, his and the staff's coaching left a lot to be desired. But the theory of hiring Lovie was that he should be able to walk into any high school or living room in the Chicagoland area and beyond and command respect and admiration based on his track record and reputation. Turns out he didn't want to make any effort whatsoever in recruiting. I think we could have made a couple more bowl games if he actually tried to keep some in-state talent from leaving. We'd probably not be as well off as we are now with Bielema, but it should have been better than it was.
Lovie absolutely was a disaster. Shoot, even Beckman made it to a bowl game, so Lovie making one is no great achievement. Beckman was a clown but don't kid yourself, the stuff he was fired for occurs at every school; it just provided a good excuse for us to get rid of him. Lovie's positive impact was to find a few under the radar players, and that's about the extent of it. He didn't coach them up or use them properly - that fell to Bielema and his staff. Lovie seemed to view his job here as providing jobs for his family and cronies, which I find disgusting.
SampsonRelpenk
- Edwardsville, IL
What's odd is that there were several difference makers in those first two full classes (Palcho, Lowe, Green, Pearl, Kramer) and then nothing.
He put effort into recruiting at first, and then he didn't. That's the Lovie era in a nutshell.
My view is that Lovie could recruit decently, but could not develop players or properly implement scheme at the college level. Sure, he wasn't bringing in the plethora of 4 and 5 stars and building the in-state connections that we hoped he would, but I think that he and his staff had an eye for talent. They just didn't know how to develop that talent and get it to mesh with their scheme. I think you could also argue that he was too stubborn to consider adjusting his scheme when things weren't working.
pruman91
- Paducah, Ky
Lovie has run the same defense for over 20 years now. A high school coach could scheme against it.
Both can be true…..and are.
- Status