If you want to hear Tay & Jay talk about the coaching search.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoh2OKpRR0DSQ2WJBeZZ7Pg/live
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCoh2OKpRR0DSQ2WJBeZZ7Pg/live
The Illinois Coaching Search
- Status
Probably right! I can see the Sleeping Giant argument and I so much want to believe it to be true. I fear it is more of the first perception though
haasi
- New York
IMO the truth has yet to be determined and depends on this coming hire.
If the right person sees this as #1 and brings us back to success, everyone will see the past 10 years as us being a sleeping giant. If we hire someone meh who keeps us in bubble territory or not much better, people will retroactively see us as #2 and will think everyone who believed #1 was delusional.
Is this heaven? No, its the 2-1-7.
(Can't take credit, I've heard or seen that somewhere before. But has a nice ring to it.)
Great fanbase, great recruiting, great facilities, great conference, big money if we want to, great history, lowered expectations - Illinois is a Top 25 job at least and likely higher. We made two terrible hires in a row, but everything above still exists
And really, how much daylight is there between the two? Not much.
It is patently clear that one can both succeed at Illinois and fail here. The job Bill Self took and the job John Groce took are the same job.
Whoooa, Nelly. I'm sorry that got my attention in a "you are joking, right?" kind of way.
I'm thinking he'll be asking guys like jerry colangelo before he comes digging on a fan board for leads (or having somebody doing it for him as you suggest).
No disrespect intended, but this is primarily a place for speculation and opinion versus real and actionable information and data. Shouldn't factor into any type of a sound, reasonable search strategy.
It takes a village, folks.
I would think and hope the trip to DC was to speak with Will Wade rather than JT3. I think Wade is an undervalued option.
TMC999
- Not Iowa
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
All these comments about what it's like in Champaign, IL REALLY show that reality takes a while to catch up with perception! Champaign in 2005 is nothin' special. Champaign in 2017 is regularly making top college town lists, has exploded in new commercial growth and is the fastest growing community in the state besides the newer Chicago suburbs.
mattcoldagelli
- The Transfer Portal with Do Not Contact Tag
RichBradIllini
- Peoria
Wow. There's been some odd mentions on here but this takes the cake.
Kind of the opposite of our basketball team, huh?
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
Yes, you got it!!!
:thumb:
Last edited:
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
Unfortunately, yes. It's been really depressing to watch the community, facilities, marketing and branding get SO much better over the last several years while the teams have sucked. Hopefully that's starting to change for the better, too.
I think there are two very different and equally fair ways to view the job:
Version 1: Illinois is a top-15 all-time program in one of the most talent-rich states in the country. We have been nationally relevant for long stretches in the past (our all-time peer programs are along the lines of Arizona, Syracuse, Michigan State, Maryland, Villanova, Georgetown - the current situation is anomalous). We recruit the St Louis area as well as anyone and have strong regional connections to Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Chicago is a top-5 media market and St Louis is big enough to generate plenty of visibility. We are a major research university with abundant resources, top-notch athletic facilities, and a vast network of powerful alumni. This is a job where the right coach can become a legend. We were on the cusp of elite status from 1980 to 2007 - constantly on ESPN, perpetually sold out arenas, pulling in top-50 recruits regularly. So there's a precedent.
Version 2: Illinois is a difficult job. Fans have outlandish expectations due to the Henson-Kruger-Self stretch and won't settle for even brief stretches of mediocrity. The brand has eroded to the point where schools like Northwestern, Minnesota, Texas Tech, and Colorado are seen as more reasonable program peers by national observers. The state itself is a financial and administrative disaster, the university is in the rural Midwest (the picture of cultural desolation according to many), the Big Ten is an annual bloodbath with strategically brilliant coaches and brutally physical play, Chicago recruiting is at best difficult to break into and at worst rife with corruption. Maybe 10-15 years ago the Illini brand had enough sex appeal to overcome the cornfields and bitter winters, but not now. While the program's past success represents a sort of proof-of-concept, the expectations now are a millstone.
I don't think that either viewpoint is wrong, per se. I think it's complicated and ultimately a matter of perspective. We all tend toward the former view, while most people around the country likely lean toward the latter (or somewhere in the middle). The right coach will embrace the glass-half-full version and relish the challenge.
Version 1: Illinois is a top-15 all-time program in one of the most talent-rich states in the country. We have been nationally relevant for long stretches in the past (our all-time peer programs are along the lines of Arizona, Syracuse, Michigan State, Maryland, Villanova, Georgetown - the current situation is anomalous). We recruit the St Louis area as well as anyone and have strong regional connections to Ohio, Indiana, and Wisconsin. Chicago is a top-5 media market and St Louis is big enough to generate plenty of visibility. We are a major research university with abundant resources, top-notch athletic facilities, and a vast network of powerful alumni. This is a job where the right coach can become a legend. We were on the cusp of elite status from 1980 to 2007 - constantly on ESPN, perpetually sold out arenas, pulling in top-50 recruits regularly. So there's a precedent.
Version 2: Illinois is a difficult job. Fans have outlandish expectations due to the Henson-Kruger-Self stretch and won't settle for even brief stretches of mediocrity. The brand has eroded to the point where schools like Northwestern, Minnesota, Texas Tech, and Colorado are seen as more reasonable program peers by national observers. The state itself is a financial and administrative disaster, the university is in the rural Midwest (the picture of cultural desolation according to many), the Big Ten is an annual bloodbath with strategically brilliant coaches and brutally physical play, Chicago recruiting is at best difficult to break into and at worst rife with corruption. Maybe 10-15 years ago the Illini brand had enough sex appeal to overcome the cornfields and bitter winters, but not now. While the program's past success represents a sort of proof-of-concept, the expectations now are a millstone.
I don't think that either viewpoint is wrong, per se. I think it's complicated and ultimately a matter of perspective. We all tend toward the former view, while most people around the country likely lean toward the latter (or somewhere in the middle). The right coach will embrace the glass-half-full version and relish the challenge.
The Worm
- CHICAGO, IL
IMO, the coach is what defines a program when it comes to maximizing the full potential of the job. See Billy Gillespie vs. John Calipari. Brad Daugherty vs. Roy Williams. Steve Lavin vs. Ben Howland. Bruce Weber vs. Bill Self. Our facilities, built-in proximity advantages to Chicago, etc. mean nothing without a top coach that has a proven track record. As my examples above show, even blue blood programs fall on hard times when they don't have a premier coach in place.
Chicago will always be a national recruiting landscape, and it will take a proven coach to win talent over the nationally recognized programs. Had Bill Self stayed, we likely would have started regularly reeling in said talent, but we let him get away. Find our next great coach, pay him like elite schools pay their coaches, and we don't have to worry about losing them.
No to all 3
I'd pass on all three of these guys especially Masiello his teams have stunk the past two years. Go after Archie, Marshall and have Keatts as the fall back 3rd option.
I'd pass on all three of these guys especially Masiello his teams have stunk the past two years. Go after Archie, Marshall and have Keatts as the fall back 3rd option.
Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I wouldn't say most people around the country lean toward the latter view ... read other message boards. Listen to *most* commentators. I live in a town with tons of fans who hate Illinois a LOT, but about 75% of them would admit Illinois is a great job with lots of potential. I think a lot of people forget how people talked about us as a program during the mid-2000s.
Because I honestly believe that if you take him out of Manhattan that he will be a better recruiter and develop into a potential long term coach. Personally I don't think he would leave if offered. That said, I certainly don't think there is as big of a talent gap between he and say Bryce Drew or any of the other younger coaches named that people are kicking around.
People laughed when Pitino Jr was hired at Minny. That seems to be working out. Just because someone isn't the hot name, doesn't mean it won't work. And lets be honest... is this hire going to be the one that turns the program around? Seriously? What are the chances that if they hire Buzz, Bryce, Cunzo, Kryastowiak, etc... that they are A) going to succeed or B) Stick around. Don't overestimate the program's value to other coaches. Some of the names thrown around will use this as a stepping stone. Id prefer to hire someone who at least has potential not to jump ship after 3 years.
- Status