Who are the other teams?
USF 47, Illinois 23 POSTGAME
Who are the other teams?
Cmon man. Every team in the country is start ten true freshman and playing 17 total. :crazy:
Some people really just don't get it. One of our best guys is 17 and could be a senior in high school right now. He's about 30 lbs (at least) undersized for his position. And he was one of the lowest rated players in our class. Other programs redshirt 5* guys, were playing 2* guys. For people to have no perspective, no concept of reality, is just mind boggling to me.
Rebuilding
We've been in the early stages of rebuilding for the better part of 50 years. Valek lasted 4 years, Blackman 6, Moeller 3, White 8, Mackovic 4, Tepper 5, Turner 8, Zook 7, Beckman 3, Cubit 1. Most of them needed to rebuild in their first few years. Few did.
We've been in the early stages of rebuilding for the better part of 50 years. Valek lasted 4 years, Blackman 6, Moeller 3, White 8, Mackovic 4, Tepper 5, Turner 8, Zook 7, Beckman 3, Cubit 1. Most of them needed to rebuild in their first few years. Few did.
BZuppke
- Plainfield
With all due respect to your history there are circumstances which you omit. Valek took over after the Slush Fund scandal and had no chance. Blackmon plateaued but might have gotten beyond if given more time. Moeller was a disaster as a coach both here and in Ann Arbor. White truly built something and landed his best recruiting class prior to his 'resignation'. Mackovic won big with White's talent but left for Texas where he was fired before going to Arizona where he was also fired. Tepper was not rebuilding but had no concept how to run a big time program. Turner just didn't like to recruit. Zook
was a good man but flawed and that's why he was fired not only at Illinois but at Florida and no one has hired him since. Beckman? Ugh.
You seem to suggest Illinois can't succeed. They thought that at Wisconsin before UW alum Pat Richter became AD and hired Alvarez and Bennett. The rest is history. I'm hoping JW is our Pat Richter and Lovie our Alvarez. Time will tell but the past has absolutely nothing to do with what our future will look like. In JW I trust.
was a good man but flawed and that's why he was fired not only at Illinois but at Florida and no one has hired him since. Beckman? Ugh.
You seem to suggest Illinois can't succeed. They thought that at Wisconsin before UW alum Pat Richter became AD and hired Alvarez and Bennett. The rest is history. I'm hoping JW is our Pat Richter and Lovie our Alvarez. Time will tell but the past has absolutely nothing to do with what our future will look like. In JW I trust.
For the people surprised and disappointed by the game, I'm really not sure what you were expecting out of this team.
I saw a defense that was initially making good reads and tackles, but quickly wore down after it got tired and started making mistakes of fatigue. There were several plays where the Illini defenders did everything right, but were simply not strong enough or fast enough to make the play.
I saw an offensive line that was entirely overwhelmed by a stronger, faster defensive line to such an extent that nothing worked on offense until the other team called off the dogs late in the third quarter.
Both of those issues will get better as the young players get bigger, stronger and faster. The Illini were essentially a juco team trying to play with a top 25 team. The results were to be expected.
The penalties - maybe people didn't notice, USF was getting called for a ridiculous amount, too. Part of it was the lack of practice time and the uncertainty of the game being played and the disruption in the game routine due to the weather delay. Part of it was the officials just plain not having a very good night, perhaps due to the same factors.
Nebraska isn't anywhere near as good as USF and the Illini have two weeks to prepare. Better times ahead.
I saw a defense that was initially making good reads and tackles, but quickly wore down after it got tired and started making mistakes of fatigue. There were several plays where the Illini defenders did everything right, but were simply not strong enough or fast enough to make the play.
I saw an offensive line that was entirely overwhelmed by a stronger, faster defensive line to such an extent that nothing worked on offense until the other team called off the dogs late in the third quarter.
Both of those issues will get better as the young players get bigger, stronger and faster. The Illini were essentially a juco team trying to play with a top 25 team. The results were to be expected.
The penalties - maybe people didn't notice, USF was getting called for a ridiculous amount, too. Part of it was the lack of practice time and the uncertainty of the game being played and the disruption in the game routine due to the weather delay. Part of it was the officials just plain not having a very good night, perhaps due to the same factors.
Nebraska isn't anywhere near as good as USF and the Illini have two weeks to prepare. Better times ahead.
Ransom Stoddard
Ordained Dudeist Priest
- Bloomington, IL
:tsk:
In addition to the youth (UI is the 2nd youngest team in the country per the ESPN crew), there's a depth issue. Beckman/Cubit weren't recruiting at a high level, so even though we're starting 3* frosh, there aren't 3* upperclassmen behind them, there are 2* frosh and soph.
I'll echo what a lot of folks have said--give these kids another year in the program, another year of conditioning, and we should be looking at a solid improvement curve over the next few years.
As for a fail by the coaches--playing a top 25 team on the road, the week of a hurricane (where many of the players families were affected) with the uncertainty about if or where the game would be played...I don't know what I can tell you. A more experienced team would have responded differently, but this is what we have this year.
Soxfreak64
- Bloomington
I'd recommend you find another team then, unless you've got some Captain America growth serum hidden away...
IlliniKat91
- Chicago, IL
When you've got 17 year olds who only have a summer with access to a D-I program's resources going up against 22 and 23 year olds with years of access, it really is.
I get being disappointed. I don't get the Chicken Little mentality. The panicking and hair pulling is a bit ridiculous given that they're so green. Bottom line, these are kids. Literal kids, with most of the roster being under 20. They're doing well, despite that. The ceiling hasn't been found yet. Give it time.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
Well said. A month ago we were all saying how this would be a 3-4 win year. We all thought we would lose this game before the season started. The fact that we were highly optimistic going into it says just how much improvement we have already had. We are allowed to be let down by this one, but it is preposterous to act like things aren't still looking up.
I didn't have as much trouble with the play calling as some because it seemed apparent right off the bat to me that we weren't going to be able to run with any sustained success. We needed to pass to at least open up some running lanes.
As to the Duke coach's quote, kind of an apple to oranges thing. First off, Duke had run for 200 plus yards their first two games and weren't starting two freshmen on O-Line against a better team. Baylor was 0-2 and had given up over 200 yards rushing to UT-San Antonio in its last loss. And that 50 yard run came on the 2nd series, so they had a good inkling they could run on Baylor.
I was disappointed in the outcome of the game, but not that discouraged. I was and am ready for a long rebuilding. Illini were completely overmatched and out played, but I saw enough good things to stay positive. I can tell you that I'm much more positive about the team and the future after this loss than I was after last season's lost to NC, which had almost identical scores.
Deleted member 590820
D
Guest
That's not the truth. It's a cliche. There are plenty of starting QB's that fan bases are happy with. Do you know the meaning of ALWAYS?
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
I can't remember the last time that both lines were so dominated. There are not a lot of offensive play calls that work when the defense in 3 yards deep in your backfield. Not a lot of defensive schemes work when the you cannot tackle. That may have been the most disappointing thing about the game to me. They tackled so well against WKU, and missed so many last Friday.
icengineer
- Southern Illinois
That's the difference in the quality of the opponent. That half a step can make a huge difference between making the tackle and just getting your hands on them.
Illwinsagain
- Cary, IL
You are likely correct. Some were saying that USF would be the 3rd most talented team we would face. I hope they were the 2nd (tOSU).
IlliniKat91
- Chicago, IL
What "era"? It's been a year. And even that's truncated by the fact he was a late hire, relatively speaking. The only point on which we agree is confusion over offensive play calling, but even that can be chalked up to not having the talent they want at the moment.
Good things are in the future. We just have to give it time.
Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk
kcib8130
- Parts Unknown
Carroll Phillips had 9 sacks. Smoot had 5. Clements had 3.5. Throw in Gimel President's 4.5 and you have nearly 2 sacks/game.
The rest of the post, just not really sure how to convince you that Lovie is doing right. I will ask this, who do you think would do a better job that we could have realistically gotten instead? I don't think that question gets answered nearly enough when coaching situations are discussed.
Most analysts I have heard claim this really is Lovie's first season, with the late start on 2016.
EfremWinters84
- S. Carolina
Great comment here. I also enjoyed reading this entire page of historical commentary (on page 4). Really valid points made.
And for the record, we did get totally blown off both lines of scrimmage vs. USF! It wasn't even a fair battle for 2-1/2 quarters while all the starters were playing.
I did think that this was a very interesting development to watch. I kept waiting for us to push back, on both sides of the ball, but it never materialized.
The announcers said they had 17 returning starters, ALL UPPERCLASSMEN!!
I would say USF played as expected. Don't know what the breakdown was between SRs v JRs of those 17. With Echard gone for the season, that leaves us with 8 seniors. Maybe our seniors should play both ways.
First series: Epstein 1 yd gain, Epstein 4 yd loss, incomplete pass, punt
Second series: Crouch 13 yd run, Crouch 5 yd run negated by holding penalty, didn't have another rush attempt until 39 seconds left in the quarter.
Is there a successful offense out there with two starting freshmen on the offensive line that we should be comparing to? Can we only listen to coaches with equally anemic offenses? Duke also passed for over 280 yards their first two games and Baylor gave up 447 passing yards in their first game to Liberty(!), so I think Duke could have moved the ball either way.
It seems the coaches are purposely limiting Crouch's rushes, which is his strength. However, he's healthy, so maybe I shouldn't complain.
Same here.
Thats like having Barry Sanders and only rushing with him 10 times a game in hopes of him not getting hurt... Well not exactly but the underlying point is the same. Maybe they need him to be a little less aggressive at the end of runs.
Oldtoysrock
- Sarasota, Florida
Given the history it seems that there have been problems with the type of coaches we have hired. I hope and pray that this group will succeed, but if three or four years down the road a change has to be made, I hope we go big and get a proven winner, or just stay home. I think the fans deserve it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
I am not sue that is a fair criticism of our defense. Their QB was extremely shifty in the option running offense. From a defensive standpoint, you are often better off not penetrating and playing the line of scrimmage, especially if you are the player being optioned. Make the QB take a lot of time to make his decision to allow the off the ball players to get you help. Add to this that the defense was on the field for more than 2/3rds of the game IIRC. That translates into a tired defense. Time on the field is much more exhausting for defenses than the offense. Had the offense done more than 3 and out on a lot of their possessions, the defense would have performed better and the game would have been a lot closer. I think our D can compete if given the chance.