IlliniHQ 2
General Category => Fighting Illini Basketball Forum => Topic started by: Reacher on April 19, 2023, 11:18:32 AM
-
If you answer the first choice you’re either dumb or trolling.
-
If you answer the first choice you’re either dumb or trolling.
What does "provides a competitive advantage" mean?
-
What does "provides a competitive advantage" mean?
You’ve been disqualified from voting
-
jesus christ is this pathetic as fuck.
-
It’s pathetic that this seems to be a debate
-
PAMan just disproved the notion that “there’s no such thing as a dumb question.”
-
It’s pathetic that this seems to be a debate
It's only a debate in your mind though, Tempo. Literally zero people have said the first thing, and if you think I did I've somehow been giving you too much credit.
-
PAMan just disproved the notion that “there’s no such thing as a dumb question.”
Well, the poll is not well worded. That is not the fault of the public.
-
This reminds me of the old days. This is fantastic! I feel alive!
-
This reminds me of the old days. This is fantastic! I feel alive!
I do not understand what you mean. You misconstruing others' arguments occurs on a daily basis here....
-
Same.
I spend a lot of time making reasonable arguments, and then you misrepresent them and claim victory.
Some things never change, I suppose.
-
Put Bill Self at Minnesota.
If you think he has the same level of success there as he had at Illinois or Kansas, you’re an idiot
-
Bill Self won 75% of his games and won four tournament games in three seasons at Tulsa.
-
Sparks’s “Good coaches win everywhere because they are good coaches”.
Yeah, I’m sure if Ryan Day left Ohio State and came to Illinois, he’d have the exact same team.
I mean, we’ve already done this.
Gary Moeller (according to Nichi) was one of the worst coaches Illinois ever had. Yet he won a national title at Michigan. So you tell me. If good coaches win everywhere, explain Gary Moeller
-
Bill Self won 75% of his games and won four tournament games in three seasons at Tulsa.
So Bill Self would have taken the Minnesota Gophers to 4-5 Final 4s and multiple national championships.
-
Gary Moeller won a national title?
Ignoring that you're literally talking about a different sport.
-
So Bill Self would have taken the Minnesota Gophers to 4-5 Final 4s and multiple national championships.
Certainly he'd have had big success there, yeah. He's a great coach, and great coaches win wherever they are.
Do you really think Bill Self would get mediocre results at Minnesota because of their history?
-
Well one thing we know is true.. it doesn’t matter what Illini message board Truth goes to, he still is a dumbass.
-
Sparky,
Put Chris Collins at Kansas.
Put Bill Self at Northwestern.
Do you really believe Northwestern would be better than Kansas after 4 years of them switching jobs?
-
Here is the simplest way I can explain this. Brad Underwood is Brad Underwood, right? Put him at ASU and does he lead them to a 1 seed? Based on their history I find that extremely unlikely. Thus it stands to reason that a coach’s ceiling is almost certainly higher at Illinois than it is at ASU. I don’t see how that’s a controversial hot take.
That doesn’t mean Brad Underwood couldn’t be “successful” at ASU. I imagine they’d be over the moon with a season like we just had.
-
Do you really believe Northwestern would be better than Kansas after 4 years of them switching jobs?
Yes.
-
Here is the simplest way I can explain this. Brad Underwood is Brad Underwood, right? Put him at ASU and does he lead them to a 1 seed? Based on their history I find that extremely unlikely. Thus it stands to reason that a coach’s ceiling is almost certainly higher at Illinois than it is at ASU. I don’t see how that’s a controversial hot take.
That doesn’t mean Brad Underwood couldn’t be “successful” at ASU. I imagine they’d be over the moon with a season like we just had.
Who are his assistants at ASU? How much cash being paid out?
-
Certainly he'd have had big success there, yeah. He's a great coach, and great coaches win wherever they are.
Do you really think Bill Self would get mediocre results at Minnesota because of their history?
Would he win two natties and like 18 conference titles in 20 years? Methinks not. He’d definitely be in the tourney every year, because he’s a HOFer.
-
We’ve employed 4 coaches in the last quarter century or so that have guided our program to a 1 seed. And we know it’s not because we’ve had the smartest ADs .
-
Well, the poll is not well worded. That is not the fault of the public.
How would you choose to word it?
-
Sparky,
Put Chris Collins at Kansas.
Put Bill Self at Northwestern.
Do you really believe Northwestern would be better than Kansas after 4 years of them switching jobs?
Duke was/is not Duke without coach K…
-
Who are his assistants at ASU? How much cash being paid out?
Two words: competitive advantage
-
Sparky,
Put Chris Collins at Kansas.
Put Bill Self at Northwestern.
Do you really believe Northwestern would be better than Kansas after 4 years of them switching jobs?
Well I think Collins is at least a halfway decent coach but if you switched their schools it seems very likely the one with Bill Self coaching it ends up better regardless of the name on the jersey, yes.
Bill Self had more success at Tulsa than Collins has had at NW.
-
How would you choose to word it?
Crazy thought probably but I’d probably at least make both choices a thing someone has said instead of your viewpoint vs. a complete strawman.
-
I think Collins vs Self is a bad example. But I do think it is safe to say that Collins would have better results than he gets at Northwestern, and Self would have worse results than he gets at Kansas.
-
I think Collins vs Self is a bad example. But I do think it is safe to say that Collins would have better results than he gets at Northwestern, and Self would have worse results than he gets at Kansas.
Billie Gillespie disagrees…
-
Crazy thought probably but I’d probably at least make both choices a thing someone has said instead of your viewpoint vs. a complete strawman.
OK I’ll ask you as well. How would you word it?
-
Because the way you talk, seems to imply you think they are equal playing fields
-
How would you choose to word it?
Depends upon what you are trying to communicate.
-
Two words: competitive advantage
If he has the same assistants, I am thinking the same pre-NIL cash would be thrown around. I think that it is more attributable to Underachiever than "Illinois" or else Groce would not have sucked here.
-
Matt Doherty says hi, too.
-
Depends upon what you are trying to communicate.
Haven’t seen a dodge that big since I left Kansas.
-
OK I’ll ask you as well. How would you word it?
I just answered that.
I’d change it so that both options were something somebody actually said instead of one option being your viewpoint and the other being something you made up that nobody’s saying.
-
Matt Doherty says hi, too.
There’s nothing that says a coach can’t fail in a place that’s hard to fail at.
-
Because the way you talk, seems to imply you think they are equal playing fields
Equal playing fields? Yes. They’re both major universities that play high major basketball, both had been similarly mediocre when the current coaches were hired, etc. There’s nothing stopping ASU from hiring a good coach and getting good results, and as we’ve seen first hand there’s nothing stopping Illinois from hiring a mediocre coach and getting mediocre results
That notably isn’t at all what the poll says.
-
Haven’t seen a dodge that big since I left Kansas.
Like I said, I am having a tough time comprehending your point in order to come up with something else.
Are you saying that Illinois inherently has advantages that ASU does not?
-
One is a football school, the other is a basketball school
-
One is a football school, the other is a basketball school
Which one is which?
-
Which one is which?
You should start a poll
-
Equal playing fields? Yes. They’re both major universities that play high major basketball, both had been similarly mediocre when the current coaches were hired, etc. There’s nothing stopping ASU from hiring a good coach and getting good results, and as we’ve seen first hand there’s nothing stopping Illinois from hiring a mediocre coach and getting mediocre results
That notably isn’t at all what the poll says.
Do both have equal histories? Equal facilities? Equal budgets? Equal conferences? Equal local talent pools? Etc?
-
Like I said, I am having a tough time comprehending your point in order to come up with something else.
Are you saying that Illinois inherently has advantages that ASU does not?
In basketball, yes. And I’d say history shows that. Either that or they’ve been incredibly unlucky.
-
Do both have equal histories? Equal facilities? Equal budgets? Equal conferences? Equal local talent pools? Etc?
Definitely don't have equal weather or ladies.
-
Equal playing fields? Yes. They’re both major universities that play high major basketball, both had been similarly mediocre when the current coaches were hired, etc. There’s nothing stopping ASU from hiring a good coach and getting good results, and as we’ve seen first hand there’s nothing stopping Illinois from hiring a mediocre coach and getting mediocre results
That notably isn’t at all what the poll says.
So now things like history, talent pools, conference, and allocated resources don’t matter? I wish we’d make up our minds here…the fact that Illinois has CONSISTENTLY outperformed ASU over the last 50 years says…Advantage: Illinois. There is no other logical conclusion.
-
I just looked it up. Illinois’ basketball budget for ‘23 was almost 9 million. Almost twice that of OSU, which ranks like 87th. But no competitive advantage there, amirite?
https://theresourcenexus.com/budget/
Edit: my bad, don’t know why I looked at Oregon State. Meant Arizona State. Still a healthy 25%+ more budgeted at Illinois.
-
Kentucky basketball budget 17.6 million. Memphis, 6.4. But Calipari can be just as good at Memphis as he’s been at Kentucky, right? Doubtful.
-
Kentucky basketball budget 17.6 million. Memphis, 6.4. But Calipari can be just as good at Memphis as he’s been at Kentucky, right? Doubtful.
Except he was. And whose point are you now trying to prove?
-
I probably did that because literally no one cares about Arizona State Basketball and there’s little difference between them and Oregon State.
-
Not to mention alumni support. I guarantee you Illinois alumni/fan support dwarf that of ASU. But none of that matters, amirite?
-
I just looked it up. Illinois’ basketball budget for ‘23 was almost 9 million. Almost twice that of OSU, which ranks like 87th. But no competitive advantage there, amirite?
https://theresourcenexus.com/budget/
Edit: my bad, don’t know why I looked at Oregon State. Meant Arizona State. Still a healthy 25%+ more budgeted at Illinois.
You were a big fan of Craig Robinson, and Reggie Theus, at one point.
-
Do both have equal histories? Equal facilities? Equal budgets? Equal conferences? Equal local talent pools? Etc?
I have no idea about facilities. Equal histories isn't at all relevant when comparing their coaches' results. Yes equal conferences. Both are relatively close to multiple major talent hubs, but not 'in town'.
-
Not to mention alumni support. I guarantee you Illinois alumni/fan support dwarf that of ASU. But none of that matters, amirite?
Unfortunately, it does not really seem to have mattered in the grand scheme of things.
-
Not to mention alumni support. I guarantee you Illinois alumni/fan support dwarf that of ASU. But none of that matters, amirite?
In terms of evaluating a coach?
Nope, not even a little bit.
Illinois' athletic budget dwarfs all the schools we talked about earlier too, Iona and UMass and Memphis. Doesn't matter, when they got great coaches they got great results; when we got mediocre coaches we got mediocre results.
I understand you think that's just a coincidence, but it isn't.
-
A good coach is a good coach. And come overcome a good handful of things. No coach overcomes everything. Unless he’s literally a top 10 all-timer type coach.
-
In terms of evaluating a coach?
Nope, not even a little bit.
Illinois' athletic budget dwarfs all the schools we talked about earlier too, Iona and UMass and Memphis. Doesn't matter, when they got great coaches they got great results; when we got mediocre coaches we got mediocre results.
I understand you think that's just a coincidence, but it isn't.
Again. You confuse the great results of Memphis with the great results of Kentucky. There’s a huge gap between those “great results.”
-
So now things like history, talent pools, conference, and allocated resources don’t matter? I wish we’d make up our minds here…the fact that Illinois has CONSISTENTLY outperformed ASU over the last 50 years says…Advantage: Illinois. There is no other logical conclusion.
History doesn't matter, no. Obviously. Our success in the 1980's isn't relevant to our program right now. Look at the tournament results the last few years and explain the correlation between the best programs now and their success in the 80's-90's-early 2000's.
Talent pools and conference are pretty close between the schools.
I'll take your word on allocated resources, but both have high major budgets.
-
Calapari’s run at Memphis gets you recognition and paid well. Calipari’s first 6 years at Kentucky alone gets you in the HOF.
-
History doesn't matter, no. Obviously. Our success in the 1980's isn't relevant to our program right now. Look at the tournament results the last few years and explain the correlation between the best programs now and their success in the 80's-90's-early 2000's.
Talent pools and conference are pretty close between the schools.
I'll take your word on allocated resources, but both have high major budgets.
That’s bullshit. Players like Ayo, Brandon Paul, and Jereme Richmond (sure he didn’t pan out but was highly recruited) cited the history of the Illinois program and their interest in bringing it back as reasons for coming there. Try again.
-
Again. You confuse the great results of Memphis with the great results of Kentucky. There’s a huge gap between those “great results.”
There really isn't a big gap. Well, except that he arguable never had a stretch at Memphis with results as mediocre as his last three years at UK.
He had very similar winning percentages and conference winning percentages - 2% better overall at Kentucky, 4.5% better in conference at Memphis. His ceiling at Kentucky has been one extra tournament round than he won at Memphis (although using the Lon Kruger logic, he obviously had built a juggernaut at Memphis was likely to have won a title there if he'd stayed; he was literally one point away).
Ignoring the programs he inherited at each place, he won about 1.6 tourney games per year at mid-major Memphis, and about 2.3 tourney games per year at blue blood Kentucky. Pretty comparable. Certainly notably more comparable than the results of Brad Underwood and Bobby Hurley.
-
I could be wrong, but I don’t think Arizona produces the kind of basketball talent Illinois historically has.
-
That’s bullshit. Players like Ayo, Brandon Paul, and Jereme Richmond (sure he didn’t pan out but was highly recruited) cited the history of the Illinois program and their interest in bringing it back as reasons for coming there. Try again.
LOL. Man, you're really grasping here.
I promise you that Ayo wouldn't be able to tell you who Bruce Douglas was. It's a nice thing to say from a Chicago kid, but the notion that they came here because we were good before they were born is a joke. You're smarter than that, I think.
-
I could be wrong, but I don’t think Arizona produces the kind of basketball talent Illinois historically has.
Is Illinois a more desirable program than UA?
-
Is Illinois a more desirable program than UA?
No, but you can mostly thank top 10 coach of all-time Lute Olsen for that.
-
According to this list, I personally know the greatest basketball player from the state of Arizona. I’ve had dinner at his house, and met his mom (didn’t fuck her).
https://www.ranker.com/list/best-nba-players-from-arizona/ranker-nba
-
LOL. Man, you're really grasping here.
I promise you that Ayo wouldn't be able to tell you who Bruce Douglas was. It's a nice thing to say from a Chicago kid, but the notion that they came here because we were good before they were born is a joke. You're smarter than that, I think.
I’d be pretty fucking shocked if Ayo spent 3 years at Illinois and didn’t know who Bruce Douglass is. And disappointed. Ayo specifically mentioned how he wanted to bring Illinois back. It was his #1 stated goal.
-
There really isn't a big gap. Well, except that he arguable never had a stretch at Memphis with results as mediocre as his last three years at UK.
He had very similar winning percentages and conference winning percentages - 2% better overall at Kentucky, 4.5% better in conference at Memphis. His ceiling at Kentucky has been one extra tournament round than he won at Memphis (although using the Lon Kruger logic, he obviously had built a juggernaut at Memphis was likely to have won a title there if he'd stayed; he was literally one point away).
Ignoring the programs he inherited at each place, he won about 1.6 tourney games per year at mid-major Memphis, and about 2.3 tourney games per year at blue blood Kentucky. Pretty comparable. Certainly notably more comparable than the results of Brad Underwood and Bobby Hurley.
There is absolutely a big gap between one title game appearance in 8 years, and 4 Final Fours and a title in 6. You smoking crack?
-
Top-50 recruits since we hired Underwood:
Arizona: 15
Illinois: 9
-
Again. What Calipari did at Memphis was outstanding. What he did at Kentucky only Wooden and K have surpassed.
-
There is absolutely a big gap between one title game appearance in 8 years, and 4 Final Fours and a title in 6. You smoking crack?
Per year, there isn't that big a difference. Half a tournament win per year. He's had more mediocre or bad seasons at Kentucky than at Memphis, as well as more F4 seasons.
-
Again. What Calipari did at Memphis was outstanding. What he did at Kentucky only Wooden and K have surpassed.
But use your Lon Kruger logic, and he almost certainly wins a couple titles at Memphis right?
The kids he got to Kentucky that won him titles were going to Memphis before he left.
-
Top-50 recruits since we hired Underwood:
Arizona: 15
Illinois: 9
Kewl. Now do ASU.
-
Arizona is a rarity. UConn is the only real comp that I can think of.
-
I’d be pretty fucking shocked if Ayo spent 3 years at Illinois and didn’t know who Bruce Douglass is. And disappointed. Ayo specifically mentioned how he wanted to bring Illinois back. It was his #1 stated goal.
Would bet you money Ayo doesn't know who Bruce Douglas is, unless they've met - which is definitely possible. I'm confident that when he got on campus he didn't know.
Because believe it or not most 18 year olds, when they're picking a college basketball program, don't do it based on success the program had 20 years before they were born.
I don't think it took a genius to see what the 'main reason' Ayo picked Illinois was.
-
Kewl. Now do ASU.
That was the state recruiting rankings dude. Arizona State is in a state that's had almost twice as many top-50 recruits come from there since we hired Underwood. It also, obviously, borders California, one of the two or three most talent heavy states.
So you can stop guessing at the "Arizona doesn't produce talent like Illinois" talking point. Arizona has been producing more top talent than Illinois lately. Surprising it hasn't led to a bunch of wins for Hurley, huh?
I wish I could say it's surprising you didn't know that, but you've never been one to say, look it up before you state something.
-
Would bet you money Ayo doesn't know who Bruce Douglas is, unless they've met - which is definitely possible. I'm confident that when he got on campus he didn't know.
Because believe it or not most 18 year olds, when they're picking a college basketball program, don't do it based on success the program had 20 years before they were born.
I don't think it took a genius to see what the 'main reason' Ayo picked Illinois was.
I think it would be pretty piss poor leadership if the coaching staff didn’t make at least a half-assed effort to teach these kids about the program greats who came before them. I’d be utterly shocked if Ayo didn’t know who Bruce Douglass is.
-
I think it would be pretty piss poor leadership if the coaching staff didn’t make at least a half-assed effort to teach these kids about the program greats who came before them. I’d be utterly shocked if Ayo didn’t know who Bruce Douglass is.
LOL, talking to you it seems like you'd be utterly shocked about a lot of things about college basketball programs. But that's not a thing about those programs, that's a thing about you.
-
Top-50 recruits since we hired Underwood:
Arizona: 15
Illinois: 9
Does Underwood have to compete with Illinois State for Illinois players?
-
Don’t you think it’s kind odd that for this entire discussion you’ve been arguing what you FEEL is true - Illinois produces more talent than Arizona, Hurley is comparable to Underwood - and I’ve been arguing what actually is true - their actual results, the actual state recruiting rankings?
Is there never a point where you look at it and think huh, maybe my hunch wasn’t right in this instance?
-
Does Underwood have to compete with Illinois State for Illinois players?
Hahahahaha. It’s okay to just be like “oh I didn’t know that, I was wrong. my bad.”
Underwood, like Hurley, competes with a lot of top schools for his state’s top talent. He tends to actually get more of it though, and win more games.
-
That was the state recruiting rankings dude. Arizona State is in a state that's had almost twice as many top-50 recruits come from there since we hired Underwood. It also, obviously, borders California, one of the two or three most talent heavy states.
So you can stop guessing at the "Arizona doesn't produce talent like Illinois" talking point. Arizona has been producing more top talent than Illinois lately. Surprising it hasn't led to a bunch of wins for Hurley, huh?
I wish I could say it's surprising you didn't know that, but you've never been one to say, look it up before you state something.
Even if they are producing good talent, they have to compete with Arizona, UCLA. Probably Texas and Gonzaga. That is an uphill climb. Put a top 10 all-time coach there; then sure, it could happen.
-
FWIW, the notion of in state recruiting is also pretty antiquated these days.
It doesn’t matter where they come from.
-
Even if they are producing good talent, they have to compete with Arizona, UCLA. Probably Texas and Gonzaga. That is an uphill climb. Put a top 10 all-time coach there; then sure, it could happen.
And Underwood competes with the blue bloods, Michigan, MSU, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, etc. for top talent from his state. That’s true both places. Both coaches have reasonably talent heavy states that are targets for every big school around.
-
Hahahahaha. It’s okay to just be like “oh I didn’t know that, I was wrong. my bad.”
Underwood, like Hurley, competes with a lot of top schools for his state’s top talent. He tends to actually get more of it though, and win more games.
The fact that you think ASU is on even footing with Illinois is both hysterical and woefully uninformed. Or that Memphis is on equal footing with Kentucky because they had the same coach. There’s a reason HOFers level up to premier schools.
-
Who would want to go to Gonzaga? They’re really mediocre historically and play in a tiny conference in a tiny gym. Not desirable.
-
And Underwood competes with the blue bloods, Michigan, MSU, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, etc. for top talent from his state. That’s true both places. Both coaches have reasonably talent heavy states that are targets for every big school around.
Right, but Illinois at least has a history of landing some of those players.
-
The fact that you think ASU is on even footing with Illinois is both hysterical and woefully uninformed. Or that Memphis is on equal footing with Kentucky because they had the same coach. There’s a reason HOFers level up to premier schools.
“Even footing” in what way?
I think Illinois has an obviously better history, but I also think most of it was multiple decades ago and isn’t that relevant to recruits in 2023.
I don’t think there’s anything inherent about the two schools that states Illinois shall be the better program. You still haven’t even been able to spell out what that inherent difference is, just “it just is.” I think they both play in high major conferences with high major athletic budgets, both are in talent heavy states and regions. There’s no reason ASU can’t be a better program than Illinois just because they haven’t been historically, in the same way that Gonzaga or Baylor or whoever else can become a better and more attractive program than Illinois. The biggest difference is, ASU has had mediocre coaches who produced mediocre results. Illinois has had a few of those two, but a couple decades ago hired three straight HOF coaches anymore. That’s the only real difference between them.
-
Don’t you think it’s kind odd that for this entire discussion you’ve been arguing what you FEEL is true - Illinois produces more talent than Arizona, Hurley is comparable to Underwood - and I’ve been arguing what actually is true - their actual results, the actual state recruiting rankings?
Is there never a point where you look at it and think huh, maybe my hunch wasn’t right in this instance?
You’re oblivious to the fact that situation matters. Apparently you think it’s 100% about the coach. That couldn’t be more untrue.
-
Right, but Illinois at least has a history of landing some of those players.
Yes. Because we have hired better coaches. We’ve hired guys like Henson and Kruger and Underwood that win games and take programs to the tournament consistently. They’ve hired guys like Bobby Hurley and Herb Sendek that win fewer games and take programs to the tournament occasionally.
The difference in historical success isn’t because of the name on the front of the jersey. It’s because of the guys we’ve had on the sidelines. It’s not some inherent superiority. We had a streak of hiring three great coaches in a row, and got great results. When we hired two mediocre coaches in a row we got mediocre results, even though we were still Illinois Basketball.
-
Historically, I feel confident that Illinois has produced more talent. Can’t speak for the last 5 years or so.
I also feel confident in my guess that over the last 30-40 years, Illinois vastly outnumbers ASU in top 100 recruits landed. And it’s not just dumb luck.
-
Historically, I feel confident that Illinois has produced more talent. Can’t speak for the last 5 years or so.
I also feel confident in my guess that over the last 30-40 years, Illinois vastly outnumbers ASU in top 100 recruits landed. And it’s not just dumb luck.
No one has said it’s dumb luck. It’s because we’ve hired better coaches.
Maybe Illinois has produced better recruits a couple decades ago. That’s probably true. It’s just not relevant to the discussion about Underwood and Hurley. What is relevant is which state has produced more talent with those guys at their current schools, and the answer is Arizona by a sizable amount.
You’ve yet to produce a single piece of compelling evidence for the “Hurley is actually a comparable coach to Underwood but he doesn’t get the same results because of Illinois’ success from 1980-2005” take, so I’m gonna drop it now.
I’ll continue judging coaches by the results they get, and you can judge them by the results you guess they might have in a different situation, or how much talent you feel like their state probably produces.
-
Yes. Because we have hired better coaches. We’ve hired guys like Henson and Kruger and Underwood that win games and take programs to the tournament consistently. They’ve hired guys like Bobby Hurley and Herb Sendek that win fewer games and take programs to the tournament occasionally.
The difference in historical success isn’t because of the name on the front of the jersey. It’s because of the guys we’ve had on the sidelines. It’s not some inherent superiority. We had a streak of hiring three great coaches in a row, and got great results. When we hired two mediocre coaches in a row we got mediocre results, even though we were still Illinois Basketball.
Despite having some retards (sorry hate that word, but it feels right) for ADs. Why? Because Illinois IS and HAS BEEN a desirable job. For a long time. Until Mike Thomas fucked things up. This guy hired Groce and Beckman for christs sake.
-
No one has said it’s dumb luck. It’s because we’ve hired better coaches.
Maybe Illinois has produced better recruits a couple decades ago. That’s probably true. It’s just not relevant to the discussion about Underwood and Hurley. What is relevant is which state has produced more talent with those guys at their current schools, and the answer is Arizona by a sizable amount.
Again. My only point is that Underwood likely wouldn’t be as “successful” at ASU as he’s been at Illinois. And there’s reasons for that. If you find that controversial, oh well.
-
Yes, he hired mediocre coaches and got mediocre results. When schools hire good coaches, they tend to get better results. The results are dictated by the coach, not the success they had when you were like 10-25.
I guess I don’t understand why that’s surprising to you. It seems pretty obvious.
-
Again. My only point is that Underwood likely wouldn’t be as “successful” at ASU as he’s been at Illinois. And there’s reasons for that. If you find that controversial, oh well.
We’ll never know. What we do know is that Underwood’s been more successful at every stop thusfar than the coach you think is comparable to him. That’s just an objective fact. You can rationalize why that is however you’d like.
-
Coaching matters, obviously. Elite coaching matters even more. Infrastructure and fit also matter. It would take one hell of a coach to get ASU to a 1 seed, I can promise you that.
-
I’m actually curious and drawing a blank. Who was the last recruit Underwood got from Illinois? I know we have Morez coming next year but I don’t think we’ve gotten any Illinois kids for a while.
-
Oh, Ty Rodgers I guess, moved to Illinois as a HS upperclassman I think. Before that it was Adam Miller.
-
We’ll never know. What we do know is that Underwood’s been more successful at every stop thusfar than the coach you think is comparable to him. That’s just an objective fact. You can rationalize why that is however you’d like.
Ok, I will rationalize a bit. Hurley inherited a Buffalo team that went 14-20 the year before he started and finished in 1st his two years there.
Underwood inherited a program that went 26-3 and ultimately had his wins vacated. How’s that for rationalizing?
-
Coaching matters, obviously. Elite coaching matters even more. Infrastructure and fit also matter. It would take one hell of a coach to get ASU to a 1 seed, I can promise you that.
Yes, the good coaches tend to win more games and make the tournament consistently for sure. And the mediocre coaches tend to win fewer games and make the tournament less.
I don’t see how you think this supports your point though. It does not.
-
Ok, I will rationalize a bit. Hurley inherited a Buffalo team that went 14-20 the year before he started and finished in 1st his two years there.
Underwood inherited a program that went 26-3 and ultimately had his wins vacated. How’s that for rationalizing?
Very on brand.
-
I’m actually curious and drawing a blank. Who was the last recruit Underwood got from Illinois? I know we have Morez coming next year but I don’t think we’ve gotten any Illinois kids for a while.
The landscape of recruiting has changed drastically the last few years. With the portal and more euros. Good homegrown talent is nice to have, but isn’t as vital as it was even when Underwood started here.
-
Very on brand.
I thought you wanted more facts?
-
You’re oblivious to the fact that situation matters. Apparently you think it’s 100% about the coach. That couldn’t be more untrue.
If you were to say, provide me a single piece of compelling evidence that supports your point, I’d be more amenable to listening to it. That you’ve made like 75 posts about this and haven’t done that yet is pretty telling.
Your entire take is Illinois is a better, more desirable, easier place to win than Arizona State because they had more success in the 80’s through 2005. I don’t think the evidence supports such a take in any way, and you have yet to produce evidence that would support it.
-
I thought you wanted more facts?
It’s pretty clear you find facts irrelevant to this discussion, since your whole thing has been about what you FEEL is true, even if the “facts” don’t support it.
-
If you were to say, provide me a single piece of compelling evidence that supports your point, I’d be more amenable to listening to it. That you’ve made like 75 posts about this and haven’t done that yet is pretty telling.
Your entire take is Illinois is a better, more desirable, easier place to win than Arizona State because they had more success in the 80’s through 2005. I don’t think the evidence supports such a take in any way, and you have yet to produce evidence that would support it.
If pointing out that Calipari’s results at Kentucky were clearly superior to that of Memphis didn’t do it for you, then I got nuthin’.
-
No, but you can mostly thank top 10 coach of all-time Lute Olsen for that.
Interesting.
-
Do you think Illinois is a better, more desirable basketball program than Gonzaga in 2023?
I assume at one point you’d have made these exact arguments about Gonzaga, and yet..
-
Your entire take is Illinois is a better, more desirable, easier place to win than Arizona State because they had more success in the 80’s through 2005. I don’t think the evidence supports such a take in any way, and you have yet to produce evidence that would support it.
Apparently I’m not the only one with comprehension issues.
-
Budget, conference, alumni/fan support, and yes, history…
-
Apparently I’m not the only one with comprehension issues.
Apologies. You also mentioned talent in the state (or more specifically let, the talent level you FEEL like comes from the state)- advantage ASU. You mentioned conference strength - a push. You mentioned budget - a 25% advantage for Illinois.
-
Budget, conference, alumni/fan support, and yes, history…
So relatively similar budgets. Very similar conferences. Similar levels of mediocrity in the lifetimes of the kids we’re recruiting.
Yes, we definitely have a more rabid - but surely much dumber and more entitled - fanbase.
-
Do you think Illinois is a better, more desirable basketball program than Gonzaga in 2023?
I assume at one point you’d have made these exact arguments about Gonzaga, and yet..
Unique niche only they have been able to fill. Few probably doesn’t get enough credit for creating Duke West out of a midmajor.
-
Ayo specifically mentioned how he wanted to bring Illinois back. It was his #1 stated goal.
His #1 goal was getting to the NBA.
-
Again. You’re talking about an all-time coach. Who’s been at one program for as long as I can remember. And I’m 55.
-
Unique niche only they have been able to fill. Few probably doesn’t get enough credit for creating Duke West out of a midmajor.
Why’d you avoid the question?
20 years ago there’s no doubt you’d have laughed at anyone who thought Gonzaga would ever be competitive with the Illinois’ of the world. They have no history and play in a rinky dink arena in a rinky dink league, in a small town.
There’s one reason Bobby Hurley’s results have been notably worse than Underwood’s at every stop, and it ain’t because of the success the programs had 20 years ago.
-
His #1 goal was getting to the NBA.
“I just felt that playing for my home state and investing in my home state meant more than it would at another school,” Dosunmu told SB Nation. “I thought I had a chance to do something special at Illinois.”
“Illinois is our state program,” Dosunmu’s father told SB Nation. “We want Illinois to be on top. We believed we had the right pieces and could turn it around.”
“We like challenges. We like building things. We’re a hard working family. Illinois was a perfect fit.”
“Five to 10 years from now, the legacy I leave at my home school will mean more than anywhere else.”
-
Why’d you avoid the question?
20 years ago there’s no doubt you’d have laughed at anyone who thought Gonzaga would ever be competitive with the Illinois’ of the world. They have no history and play in a rinky dink arena in a rinky dink league, in a small town.
There’s one reason Bobby Hurley’s results have been notably worse than Underwood’s at every stop, and it ain’t because of the success the programs had 20 years ago.
If and when ASU gets an all-time coach to stay there 25 years I’ll tell you you were right.
-
“I just felt that playing for my home state and investing in my home state meant more than it would at another school,” Dosunmu told SB Nation. “I thought I had a chance to do something special at Illinois.”
“Illinois is our state program,” Dosunmu’s father told SB Nation. “We want Illinois to be on top. We believed we had the right pieces and could turn it around.”
“We like challenges. We like building things. We’re a hard working family. Illinois was a perfect fit.”
“Five to 10 years from now, the legacy I leave at my home school will mean more than anywhere else.”
That does not say anything about his number one goal. Which was to get to the NBA.
-
I don't know man, I feel like the root of this is the same as the root of many of our arguments back in the day.
You consistently argue based on how you feel about something. You feel like Illinois produces more talent than Arizona, so you state that and use it as evidence. You feel like Underwood and Hurley are comparable, so you state that and give some nebulous reason why their results aren't comparable. You feel that Illinois is a sleeping giant that should get any coach they want because we're Illinois.
I'm more interested in like, objective reality. Which state actually produced more talent? Which coach has actually produced better results? Which coaches actually sign on to come to Illinois?
-
That does not say anything about his number one goal. Which was to get to the NBA.
That was his number one personal goal. No shit, Sherlock. His number one stated reason for choosing Illinois was to be the pied Piper that brought Illinois back.
-
If and when ASU gets an all-time coach to stay there 25 years I’ll tell you you were right.
Mark Few wasn't an all time coach 20 years ago.
He's become one, by winning a ton of games.
Again, you'd have reacted EXACTLY the same to this discussion about Gonzaga and Illinois 20 years ago, but you'd have been wrong, because reality isn't that interested in how you FEEL about the two programs' potential. The results are the results.
-
That was his number one personal goal. No shit, Sherlock. His number one stated reason for choosing Illinois was to be the pied Piper that brought it back.
I'm actually curious, do you really think this is why Ayo came to Illinois?
Not for .. other reasons?
-
I don't know man, I feel like the root of this is the same as the root of many of our arguments back in the day.
You consistently argue based on how you feel about something. You feel like Illinois produces more talent than Arizona, so you state that and use it as evidence. You feel like Underwood and Hurley are comparable, so you state that and give some nebulous reason why their results aren't comparable. You feel that Illinois is a sleeping giant that should get any coach they want because we're Illinois.
I'm more interested in like, objective reality. Which state actually produced more talent? Which coach has actually produced better results? Which coaches actually sign on to come to Illinois?
He FEELS that Justin Fields plays like an actual NFL QB instead of a wingback.....We know that Fields does not get to call the plays.
-
That was his number one personal goal. No shit, Sherlock. His number one stated reason for choosing Illinois was to be the pied Piper that brought Illinois back.
Maybe you should be clearer in your verbiage. Which takes us right back to the wording of the poll question.
-
Mark Few wasn't an all time coach 20 years ago.
No shit.
-
I'm actually curious, do you really think this is why Ayo came to Illinois?
Not for .. other reasons?
I’m sure there was more than one reason.
-
The results are the results.
Says the guy who thinks one Final Four in 8-9 years is essentially the same as a title and 4 Final Fours in 6 years.
-
He surely wanted to resurrect our program once he committed (obviously no one picks their college program to go lose), but I suspect if someone else had wanted him to resurrect their program.. more .. he'd have listened.
-
Says the guy who thinks one Final Four in 8-9 years is essentially the same as a title and 4 Final Fours in 6 years.
The guy who judged the entire tenures at those places and posted objective numbers, rather than cherry picking the first 6 years at a place and ignoring the last 6 (Calipari has 6 tournament wins the last six years, equalling his worst stretch when he took over Memphis)
He's coached at three schools. Two mid-majors and a blue blood.
He took all three of them to the Final Four. Two of them, he left right after - so arguing about how many Final Fours or Titles he'd have had if he'd stayed is useless, no one can know. I suspect more than one.
-
He surely wanted to resurrect our program once he committed (obviously no one picks their college program to go lose), but I suspect if someone else had wanted him to resurrect their program.. more .. he'd have listened.
Anthony Longstreet: “Show me the canceled check!”
-
The guy who judged the entire tenures at those places and posted objective numbers, rather than cherry picking the first 6 years at a place and ignoring the last 6 (Calipari has 6 tournament wins the last six years, equalling his worst stretch when he took over Memphis)
He's coached at three schools. Two mid-majors and a blue blood.
He took all three of them to the Final Four. Two of them, he left right after - so arguing about how many Final Fours or Titles he'd have had if he'd stayed is useless, no one can know. I suspect more than one.
So do you feel Calipari’s stint at Memphis was “just as successful” as Kentucky? I’ll hang up and listen.
-
Anthony Longstreet: “Show me the canceled check!”
Is this an elite joke on purpose, or on accident?
-
So do you feel Calipari’s stint at Memphis was “just as successful” as Kentucky? I’ll hang up and listen.
I think it was pretty comparable, yes. Very similar win%, better conference win%, about 0.5 tournament wins less per year.
Certainly not a night and day difference by any accounting. He built Memphis into one of the top few programs in the country, and when he went to Kentucky did the same thing.
They're not identical, but they're certainly much closer than Underwood and Hurley's results.
-
I think it was pretty comparable, yes. Very similar win%, better conference win%, about 0.5 tournament wins less per year.
Certainly not a night and day difference by any accounting. He built Memphis into one of the top few programs in the country, and when he went to Kentucky did the same thing.
Again, his results at Memphis were excellent. They get you recognition and get you paid. His results at Kentucky get you a 1st class ticket to the HOF. And that was in a half-dozen years.
-
He was absolutely headed to the Hall of Fame whether he took the Kentucky job or not.
-
He was absolutely headed to the Hall of Fame whether he took the Kentucky job or not.
Right, but you could remove the rest of his career minus those 6 years and he’s in.
-
You could also pull a Dominic and remove those 6 years entirely and he'd still be in.
-
so arguing about how many Final Fours or Titles he'd have had if he'd stayed is useless, no one can know. I suspect more than one.
I thought you were the “I only argue on what’s happened” guy and not the “this is what could have happened” guy?
-
You could also pull a Dominic and remove those 6 years entirely and he'd still be in.
Most likely. Still wouldn’t be as impressive as that 6 year run. That was probably a top 3 run all-time, since Wooden anyway. Certainly would think the modern era.
-
Most likely. Still wouldn’t be as impressive as that 6 year run. That was probably a top 3 run all-time, since Wooden anyway. Certainly would think the modern era.
Yep. Unfortunately, since then he's been pretty pedestrian. Not bad by any means, but not even remotely close to the program he had when he left Memphis.
-
I thought you were the “I only argue on what’s happened” guy and not the “this is what could have happened” guy?
Yep. I am.
If I wasn't, I'd have said "he'd have won a number more if he'd stayed", rather than "we can never know, but I suspect he'd have won more."
I would never use "I feel like" as evidence of my point, you and I are different in that way. I rarely have to, to be fair, because I try not to make arguments the evidence doesn't support.
-
Yep. I am.
If I wasn't, I'd have said "he'd have won a number more if he'd stayed", rather than "we can never know, but I suspect he'd have won more."
I would never use "I feel like" as evidence of my point, you and I are different in that way. I rarely have to, to be fair, because I try not to make arguments the evidence doesn't support.
I feel like we are.
-
I feel like we are.
Haha, very nice.
I'm still impressed with the Ayo joke. I hope it was made because the guy who recruited Anthony Davis was on our staff when we got Ayo, and wasn't just random.
-
I just feel like it’s preposterous to think everything is mostly equal outside of the coach. Sure, you have transformational coaches like K, Olsen, Calhoun. But there are certainly competitive advantages and disadvantages at work throughout college basketball. And there is literally zero evidence to support the conclusion that ASU is in any way, equal to the U of I.
-
You have yet to provide any evidence - hell, forget evidence, you haven't even postulated a reason - that Illinois is just inherently a better program than ASU, and that objectively better results at Illinois are 'comparable' to objectively worse results at ASU.
-
You have yet to provide any evidence - hell, forget evidence, you haven't even postulated a reason - that Illinois is just inherently a better program than ASU, and that objectively better results at Illinois are 'comparable' to objectively worse results at ASU.
Outside of Final Fours, 1 seeds, high seeds in general, fan support, budget, and history over several decades that heavily favors one side over the other, yes, you’re right. I haven’t.
-
Outside of Final Fours, 1 seeds, high seeds in general, fan support, budget, and history over several decades that heavily favors one side over the other, yes, you’re right. I haven’t.
If Reggie Theus ever coached at ASU, I am sure you would change your tune.
-
If Reggie Theus ever coached at ASU, I am sure you would change your tune.
This shit is stale
-
Outside of Final Fours, 1 seeds, high seeds in general, fan support, budget, and history over several decades that heavily favors one side over the other, yes, you’re right. I haven’t.
I mean yes. Zero of the things you list here are a reason that mediocre results at ASU should be considered comparable to better results at Illinois.
-
This shit is stale
It’s never stopped them before. They been doing it 3-5 years minimum.
-
I mean yes. Zero of the things you list here are a reason that mediocre results at ASU should be considered comparable to better results at Illinois.
The point is there is a competitive advantage at Illinois. It’s crazy to deny that. I suspect Hurley and Underwood are comparable coaches. Neither a significant upgrade over the other.
-
This shit is stale
This whole fucking conversation is getting stale. Don't let it stop you guys tho.
-
This whole fucking conversation is getting stale. Don't let it stop you guys tho.
Ok. Thanks.
-
No problem. I actually kinda, sorta enjoy watching you guys repeat yourselves over and over. It's kinda boring, but it's the end of the workday so fuck it.
-
This shit is stale
I should have referred to 3-5 other Tempo memes instead.
Chump edit: Tempo beat me to it.
-
The point is there is a competitive advantage at Illinois. It’s crazy to deny that. I suspect Hurley and Underwood are comparable coaches. Neither a significant upgrade over the other.
As long as you totally ignore their results - and not just at ASU and Illinois, notably - then sure.
I'm not willing to ignore their actual, objective results to make an argument based on how I feel.
As an extreme illustrative example, it's kind of like saying that Roy Williams and John Groce are comparable coaches - sure one of them had notably better results than the other, but he got them at Kansas and UNC while the other got his at Illinois, Akron, and Ohio, so they're really comparable. Switch Roy Williams at UNC and Groce at Illinois, which program turns out better?
-
I should have referred to 3-5 other Tempo memes instead.
I didn't expect you to do that, but I wouldn't have been surprised if you did.
-
I didn't expect you to do that, but I wouldn't have been surprised if you did.
Well done.
-
Can’t find it, but somewhere I read that “Bill Self won 75% of his games and 4 tourney games at Tulsa.” Yet for some reason he left. And I’m thinking it wasn’t only money.
-
Can’t find it, but somewhere I read that “Bill Self won 75% of his games and 4 tourney games at Tulsa.” Yet for some reason he left. And I’m thinking it wasn’t only money.
Really? Surely no one could produce results like that at a program without the history and fanbase of an Illinois.
You're still not even addressing the actual argument. Zero people have said it doesn't make sense to move to bigger/more high profile jobs.
What we were discussing, if you remember, is whether it makes sense to claim that one coach is 'comparable' - even better at X's and O's! - to another coach despite notably better results because of the history / fanbase / whatever of the program. It makes no sense, and isn't at all related to whether a coach would move from a mid-major to a high-major or a high-major to a blueblood. Calling a guy who won a lot at UNC 'comparable' to a guy who won notably less at Illinois doesn't make any sense, even though UNC is obviously the much bigger, more nationally relevant, etc. program.
Those moves aren't always about winning more either, by the way. Probably not even most of the time - surely they know at this point that moving from a mid-major where you've had quite a bit of national success to a high-major where the expectations are higher but there's no promises you will actually be able to compete is very risky. That's why more and more guys in 2023 are staying longer - sometimes even their whole careers - at mid-majors instead of jumping at the first major conference offer.
-
Can’t find it, but somewhere I read that “Bill Self won 75% of his games and 4 tourney games at Tulsa.” Yet for some reason he left. And I’m thinking it wasn’t only money.
I'm thinking it was money. Who would not want to live on Tulsa Time?
-
I'm thinking it was money. Who would not want to live on Tulsa Time?
Maybe it was tornadoes. It wasn't the Hurricanes.
-
I don’t know it to be a fact, but Hurley was a high IQ PG for Duke in their heyday. That’s probably enough street cred to believe he’s likely better at Xs and Os than Underwood, who is pedestrian at Xs and Os.
-
I don’t know it to be a fact, but Hurley was a high IQ PG for Duke in their heyday. That’s probably enough street cred to believe he’s likely better at Xs and Os than Underwood, who is pedestrian at Xs and Os.
Uhhh what’s your point?
(https://i.ibb.co/rwYwrLs/IMG-1373.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kSjSCr1)
-
As long as you totally ignore their results - and not just at ASU and Illinois, notably - then sure.
I'm not willing to ignore their actual, objective results to make an argument based on how I feel.
As an extreme illustrative example, it's kind of like saying that Roy Williams and John Groce are comparable coaches - sure one of them had notably better results than the other, but he got them at Kansas and UNC while the other got his at Illinois, Akron, and Ohio, so they're really comparable. Switch Roy Williams at UNC and Groce at Illinois, which program turns out better?
Nah man, do Trubisky to Mahomes…
-
Nah man, do Trubisky to Mahomes…
Only someone very stupid or very dishonest or both would still be making this claim, so I'm not surprised.
-
Only someone very stupid or very dishonest or both would still be making this claim, so I'm not surprised.
Lighten up, Francis. It was a joke, Spark. Another Tempo meme reference.
-
Only someone very stupid or very dishonest or both would still be making this claim, so I'm not surprised.
I do remember the time Trubisky was statistically on par with Mahomes, though.
-
Lighten up, Francis. It was a joke, Spark. Another Tempo meme reference.
One of MANY!
-
As long as you totally ignore their results - and not just at ASU and Illinois, notably - then sure.
I'm not willing to ignore their actual, objective results to make an argument based on how I feel.
As an extreme illustrative example, it's kind of like saying that Roy Williams and John Groce are comparable coaches - sure one of them had notably better results than the other, but he got them at Kansas and UNC while the other got his at Illinois, Akron, and Ohio, so they're really comparable. Switch Roy Williams at UNC and Groce at Illinois, which program turns out better?
This is really below your usual standard of work. Usually you make me work harder. For this example to be legit, both of the coaches have to be competent.
-
Let me ask you this way, Spark. If Hurley were the coach at Illinois; do you think his results would possibly be just as good (possibly even better) than Underwood. And yes, there’s a fair chance he’d be worse than Underwood. Or do you think his results would be exactly the same as ASU, because “they are both high majors” and there’s essentially no difference?
-
I do remember the time Trubisky was statistically on par with Mahomes, though.
Spark, this is NOT a joke....
-
Yes. Because we have hired better coaches. We’ve hired guys like Henson and Kruger and Underwood that win games and take programs to the tournament consistently. They’ve hired guys like Bobby Hurley and Herb Sendek that win fewer games and take programs to the tournament occasionally.
The difference in historical success isn’t because of the name on the front of the jersey. It’s because of the guys we’ve had on the sidelines. It’s not some inherent superiority. We had a streak of hiring three great coaches in a row, and got great results. When we hired two mediocre coaches in a row we got mediocre results, even though we were still Illinois Basketball.
How do you consider Bruce Weber a mediocre coach but not Underwood?
Underwood has far worse results.
But you are the guy that thinks Trubisky is similar to Mahomes lol
-
Ok, I laughed.
-
I think the Trubisky v Mahomes example is actually quite appropriate for this debate. Sometimes the “numbers” don’t tell the entire story.
-
I do remember the time Trubisky was statistically on par with Mahomes, though.
Yep, over a 4-5 week stretch. Me too. Are you implying it didn't happen?
I also remember how you misrepresented that intentionally for literal years.
-
I think the Trubisky v Mahomes example is actually quite appropriate for this debate. Sometimes the “numbers” don’t tell the entire story.
It's a perfect example of how you're unable to partake in an argument without exaggerating or misrepresenting others' points and beating up strawmen. I agree.
I said “Trubisky is definitely better than Mahomes” in the same way you said “Reggie Theus is the only acceptable choice for the next Illinois basketball coach”. Which is to say, only in the mind of people who are being actively dishonest.
-
This is really below your usual standard of work. Usually you make me work harder. For this example to be legit, both of the coaches have to be competent.
They're of comparable competency. One of them just had jobs where it's way easier to win.
Is it a dumb argument no reasonable person would make? Yes. Is it the same one you're making? Also yes.
This is the point in the argument where you said, "oh so you think Illinois is a comparable program to UNC? You don't think UNC has competitive advantages?"
Frankly, it's pretty well on par with your usual work.
-
How do you consider Bruce Weber a mediocre coach but not Underwood?
Underwood has far worse results.
But you are the guy that thinks Trubisky is similar to Mahomes lol
I'm shocked that A. you don't recognize the differences in the Illinois program that those two guys inherited and B. you're dishonestly parroting Tempo's active dishonesty about the Trubisky/Mahomes thing.
I'm not actually shocked, because you're a complete fucking idiot who is proudly wrong about nearly every single thing you say.
Underwood's early results in the first two years taking over a dead program were comparable to Weber's last few years after he'd killed it, yes. His last four years have been considerably better than any four year stretch that Weber built here, that's for sure.
-
I'm shocked that A. you don't recognize the differences in the Illinois program that those two guys inherited and B. you're dishonestly parroting Tempo's active dishonesty about the Trubisky/Mahomes thing.
I'm not actually shocked, because you're a complete fucking idiot who is proudly wrong about nearly every single thing you say.
Underwood's early results in the first two years taking over a dead program were comparable to Weber's last few years after he'd killed it, yes. His last four years have been considerably better than any four year stretch thaty Weber built here, that's for sure.
Weber’s first 4 years at Illinois are better than anything Underwood will ever achieve. Ever. Why does Weber not get credit for those wins?
You talk about building rosters. This past year is the first year Underwood has had where it’s a roster completely built by himself. Guess what. It sucked. Weber’s teams were better that he built from scratch.
Weber’s 2008-09 and 2010-11 teams were far better than this past year of Underwood.
But according to you, there are no inherent competitive advantages in college basketball. So it doesn’t matter what situation a coach enters in. He’s just gonna succeed or fail based on who he is.
-
Hey NITSqueaky.
Just STFU.
-
And to go further, these 100% built Weber teams:
SIU (2001-02)
IL (2008–09)
IL (2010-11)
K State (2017-18)
K State (2018-19)
Were all better than the only Underwood built team we can compare it too which is this year’s Illinois team.
And no sparky, Underwood’s first 2 years were no where close to even Weber’s last years.
Weber went 20-14, 17-15 his last 2 years and was fired.
Underwood went 14–18, 12-21 his first 2 seasons.
I expect you’ll want Underwood fired if he goes 17-15 this year right? If you’re gonna apply the same standards to Weber, please be consistent.
-
And to go further, these 100% built Weber teams:
SIU (2001-02)
IL (2008–09)
IL (2010-11)
K State (2017-18)
K State (2018-19)
Were all better than the only Underwood built team we can compare it too which is this year’s Illinois team.
And no sparky, Underwood’s first 2 years were no where close to even Weber’s last years.
Weber went 20-14, 17-15 his last 2 years and was fired.
Underwood went 14–18, 12-21 his first 2 seasons.
I expect you’ll want Underwood fired if he goes 17-15 this year right? If you’re gonna apply the same standards to Weber, please be consistent.
You’re an utter moron, straight up, if you don’t think Underwood built the last four Illinois teams. An utter, complete moron.
-
If Underwood went 17-15 this year I’d be okay with him getting fired, even if it’s clearly a pretty quick trigger. If we did we’d be likely to get worse though.
If Underwood made the Final Four this year you’d be here making up some excuse for why it didn’t count and when you predicted we’d be horrible you were actually right. That’s the difference between us - I am not a fucking idiot.
-
You’re an utter moron, straight up, if you don’t think Underwood built the last four Illinois teams. An utter, complete moron.
He inherited Trent Frazier. He inherited Damonte Williams. If you aren’t going to give credit to Weber for the 2003-2006 success, it’s only fair to apply the same standard to Underwood
-
If Underwood went 17-15 this year I’d be okay with him getting fired, even if it’s clearly a pretty quick trigger. If we did we’d be likely to get worse though.
We’re you this pessimistic about firing Weber?
How much worse can we do than Underwood? Again, 31-45. No more Kofi’s.
Underwood/Groce should be the floor of Illinois coaches
-
This past year is the first year Underwood has had where it’s a roster completely built by himself.
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
-
He inherited Trent Frazier. He inherited Damonte Williams. If you aren’t going to give credit to Weber for the 2003-2006 success, it’s only fair to apply the same standard to Underwood
Ignoring that both of them could’ve left and he got them to re-commit, it makes sense that a basketball genius like you would compare Damonte Williams and Trent Frazier to an entire starting five that played in the NBA.
Totally matches up to your level of basketball knowledge.
If you don’t think Brad Underwood built the last four teams here, or if you think Weber did build his first few teams here, then “complete moron” was giving you way too much credit, so my bad on that.
-
How do you arrive at that conclusion?
Same way he comes up with all his shit - just pretend with me!
-
We’re you this pessimistic about firing Weber?
How much worse can we do than Underwood? Again, 31-45. No more Kofi’s.
Underwood/Groce should be the floor of Illinois coaches
How much worse can we do than four straight tournament teams after 3 in a decade under Weber and Groce?
You are truly irredeemably stupid my friend. Just bottom of the barrel intelligence. Surprising you got kicked out of UI for being a stalker since that implies you got in in the first place.
-
One thing I love is Truth trying to gotcha me by saying I didn’t like Weber, that’s funny as fuck.
-
Wait, so Underachiever can't count The Kofi Years in the teams he built?
-
He inherited Trent Frazier. He inherited Damonte Williams.
Yes, a top 150 and a top 200 prospect.
And only in the same sense that Weber inherited Brian Randle, Rich McBride, and Warren Carter -- 2 top 50 and a top 150 prospect.
I have always thought that those became the new coaches' recruits, though that is changing if new NCAA legislation holds up.
It's fair to say Weber got a bigger boost and he failed to maintain recruiting at that level. Recruiting improved after Howard was hired, but results were still mediocre.
Recruiting improved since Underwood was hired and was maintained after the assistant overhaul.
The main problem has been player retention; which is an NCAA wide problem.
-
Don't understand why anyone wastes time trying to debate with a delusional pedophile who guaranteed we would only win 14 games.
Then lied and guaranteed only 17 wins.
Then guaranteed we would be in NIT.
He is a fucking illiterate homeless fcktard living in a flop house driving a fcking cab for drunks.
-
Yep, over a 4-5 week stretch. Me too. Are you implying it didn't happen?
I also remember how you misrepresented that intentionally for literal years.
This comment just inspired me to go listen to some Spin Doctors.
-
This comment just inspired me to go listen to some Spin Doctors.
I like that one.
-
It's a perfect example of how you're unable to partake in an argument without exaggerating or misrepresenting others' points and beating up strawmen. I agree.
I said “Trubisky is definitely better than Mahomes” in the same way you said “Reggie Theus is the only acceptable choice for the next Illinois basketball coach”. Which is to say, only in the mind of people who are being actively dishonest.
I never once said that you said “Trubisky is better than Mahomes.” But you used stats to show that Trubisky was “on par with what Mahomes was doing.” And I knew that was a ridiculous assertion at the time. You really not going to just fess up and admit you got spanked on that one?
-
They're of comparable competency. One of them just had jobs where it's way easier to win.
So now Spark wants to use the argument that competitive advantage is a thing. When he just spent 12 pages arguing it wasn’t. And yes, I realize we’re not Kansas or UNC. But neither is ASU Illinois. A lot of historical data tells us this. And since Spark is the data guy, you’d think he’d accept this data.
-
Hey NITSqueaky.
Just STFU.
This is not your thread.
-
But the Weber argument is a weak one. We know he inherited a roster he could have never assembled himself.
-
He inherited Trent Frazier. He inherited Damonte Williams. If you aren’t going to give credit to Weber for the 2003-2006 success, it’s only fair to apply the same standard to Underwood
Don’t agree with this at all. We had 4-5 players on the 2003 team better than Frazier. And DaMonte wouldn’t have played 4 mpg on that team.
-
Wait, so Underachiever can't count The Kofi Years in the teams he built?
You new to their discussion?
I do think Dom is working a little to hard to tear down what Underwood has done. But I’m not willing to dismiss is lack of results without Kofi altogether. The point stands. But Underwood gets credit for the Kofi wins, too. There’s middle ground there.
-
This comment just inspired me to go listen to some Spin Doctors.
Perfect band for Little Mr. Can’t Be Wrong
-
So now Spark wants to use the argument that competitive advantage is a thing. When he just spent 12 pages arguing it wasn’t. And yes, I realize we’re not Kansas or UNC. But neither is ASU Illinois. A lot of historical data tells us this. And since Spark is the data guy, you’d think he’d accept this data.
Surely you’re smart enough to recognize that I’m using it specifically to point out how dumb it is? I mean, I said that explicitly, and I know you saw it because you deleted it from your quote.
-
Perfect band for Little Mr. Can’t Be Wrong
You made the case that Trubisky was “on par with Mahomes(using stats),” I believe an exact quote IIRC. Regardless of what assumed implications you were trying to make, that statement alone should embarrass you. Just admit it was silly to compare the two in any way and be on with it.
-
Perfect band for Little Mr. Can’t Be Wrong
Even better....
-
You made the case that Trubisky was “on par with Mahomes(using stats),” I believe an exact quote IIRC. Regardless of what assumed implications you were trying to make, that statement alone should embarrass you. Just admit it was silly to compare the two in any way and be on with it.
I didn’t say that, outside of discussing that five week stretch. My guess is you know it, too.
I made an argument about how silly it is to judge two guys who have played less than 20 NFL games each. There are countless examples as to why.
In that case, Mahomes turned out obviously better than Trubisky, and the simple point I was making is as valid as it was then - you seem to not be able to get it.
-
You said “Reggie Theus is the only guy I’ll be happy with” - your exact words IIRC.
-
Wow. Relitigating the Trubitsky and Mahomes argument.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9n3A_-HRFfc
-
It’s exactly as stale and exactly as false as the “tempo loves Reggie Theus” meme, but it’s all he’s really got.
-
Even better....
That would be him in this case. The guy won’t fess up to the preposterous assertion that Trubisky was in any way “on par with Mahomes.” C’mon Spark, own ther stupid statement. Sure, we know what “the numbers,” said. And I told you you were being ridiculous. Well, how’s Trubisky looking compared to Mahomes now?
-
You said “Reggie Theus is the only guy I’ll be happy with” - your exact words IIRC.
“Pretty much on par with Mahomes” is how I remember it.
-
PAMan, you gonna let Spark off the hook on that one? It was absurd to compare the two in any way at the time. And even more absurd now.
-
“Pretty much on par with Mahomes” is how I remember it.
During those five weeks, yes.
To imply otherwise is just dishonesty. And I know you hate when people do to you what you’re doing to me right now.
-
I do remember the Tampa game in which Tampa started 4 rookies in the secondary like 3 games into their careers. Trubiksy threw for like 500/6. But it “counted!”
-
Yeah, it did. Objectively.
-
PAMan, you gonna let Spark off the hook on that one? It was absurd to compare the two in any way at the time. And even more absurd now.
While I remember the argument, and agreed in the premise that the two were never comparable, it seems to me that you have this one fully under control.
-
Noted though - next time someone says the Theus thing or says you’re a drunk, shitty dad I’ll let them have it. You’re obviously not above lying about people to claim some kind of message board victory.
Wouldn’t want to “let you off the hook” for demanding Reggie Theus or being a drunk.
-
While I remember the argument, and agreed in the premise that the two were never comparable, it seems to me that you have this one fully under control.
Spark seems to disagree.
-
Yeah, it did. Objectively.
Yep. And that game was totally representative of the player Trubisky was and is.
-
Yep. And that game was totally representative of the player Trubisky was and is.
If you say so. I certainly didn’t say that.
-
This is like the old days. Haven’t had this much fun here since probably pre-Covid. Although the JFC “debates” with PAMan were pretty fun.
-
Spark seems to disagree.
Yes, I see it.
-
Man, you better hope Justin Fields ends up great. You’re about 10x as bullish on him as I ever was on Trubisky.
-
This is like the old days. Haven’t had this much fun here since probably pre-Covid. Although the JFC “debates” with PAMan were pretty fun.
I’n surprised you remember pre-COVID with the drinking.
-
Some good counterpunches from Spark.
-
Man, you better hope Justin Fields ends up great. You’re about 10x as bullish on him as I ever was on Trubisky.
I’m not sure about that. Like Reggie Theus, anything I’ve ever said has been “re-imagined” and amplified by the HQ talkarazzi. All I’ve ever said is that I love the kid (easy to root for) and I think he has the “potential” to be great. And that he’s exciting. I’ve never once claimed he was a finished product or already a great NFL quarterback.
-
I’ve probably said 20x there’s a chance he might now work out or reach his potential.
-
I’m not sure about that. Like Reggie Theus, anything I’ve ever said has been “re-imagined” and amplified by the HQ talkarazzi. All I’ve ever said is that I love the kid (easy to root for) and I think he has the “potential” to be great. And that he’s exciting. I’ve never once claimed he was a finished product or already a great NFL quarterback.
I mean I’ve seen all the Fields arguments. You’re obviously considerably more sure about him than I ever was about Mitch. No doubt about it.
FWIW, I’m more sure about him too. Despite your false narrative, I was never all that bullish on Trubisky. Thought he could’ve been a guy the Bears won big with by managing a game and having a great defense and running game, but didn’t happen.
-
I’ve probably said 20x there’s a chance he might now work out or reach his potential.
He is. He’s been doing lots of squats.
-
My avatar is a completely satirical response to PAMan’s insistence on putting literally every failure of the Bears’ organization at the feet of Justin Fields.
-
My avatar is a completely satirical response to PAMan’s insistence on putting literally every failure of the Bears’ organization at the feet of Justin Fields.
I know it’s satirical, but I’ve also seen you talk about him.
-
Either Spark has concussed Tempo with those counterpunches or Tempo is backtracking as fast as Murph riding his bike down a mountain.
-
My avatar is a completely satirical response to PAMan’s insistence on putting literally every failure of the Bears’ organization at the feet of Justin Fields.
A Strawman avatar would be more apropos.
-
I know it’s satirical, but I’ve also seen you talk about him.
Yeah. “He still has things to improve on, but could get better, especially if he gets more help. He’s an exciting player (if not great)! I like the kid, hard worker, easy to root for.”
Controversial over the top stuff.
-
Either Spark has concussed Tempo with those counterpunches or Tempo is backtracking as fast as Murph riding his bike down a mountain.
How do you figure?
-
Yeah. “He still has things to improve on, but could get better, especially if he gets more help. He’s an exciting player (if not great)! I like the kid, hard worker, easy to root for.”
Controversial over the top stuff.
Again, you’re obviously much more bullish on him than I was on Mitch, and you’re still lying about my views about Mitch like 6 years later.
-
I mean I’ve seen all the Fields arguments. You’re obviously considerably more sure about him than I ever was about Mitch. No doubt about it.
FWIW, I’m more sure about him too. Despite your false narrative, I was never all that bullish on Trubisky. Thought he could’ve been a guy the Bears won big with by managing a game and having a great defense and running game, but didn’t happen.
I don’t know what I’ve ever said about him other than that he’s “talented anf a hard worker.” I’ve never once said he didn’t have things he needs to get much better at. All I’ve ever said that he’s overcome a lot to be in a position to where his arrow is still pointing up. Way up according to some. I have never ever ever ever once said that Fields is definitely the answer. I do think he’s shown enough to build around him.
-
If someone wants to show me where I’ve said Fields is the definite answer and he’s a top 3-5 quarterback in the league, I’m all eyes and ears.
-
How much worse can we do than four straight tournament teams after 3 in a decade under Weber and Groce?
31-45 without Kofi.
Groce was 37-53.
You can’t do worse than that
-
Again, you’re obviously much more bullish on him than I was on Mitch, and you’re still lying about my views about Mitch like 6 years later.
Can you please explain to me how I’m “lying?”
Here’s what happened. You made that case that Trubisky “is more or less on par with Mahomes” (even if through just 5 games). I said: “stop with that nonsense, Mahomes is clearly better!” You said:”Not according to the statistics.” I said: “I don’t give a damn what the statistics say, Mahomes is way better.”
Contrary to your accusation, I never once said you said that Trubisky was better than Mahomes. I merely pointed out that comparing the two in any way was dumb, and you took exception to it. That’s why we argued about it.
-
31-45 without Kofi.
Groce was 37-53.
You can’t do worse than that
So you don’t give credit to Underwood for bringing in Kofi but can use that he did to discredit him. Interesting 🤔
-
Pretty amazed Spark won’t take his screamingly obvious L on the Trubisky/Mahomes topic.
-
I’ll bet Spark still thinks the Bears won the Mack trade. And he the debate.
-
One thing I love is Truth trying to gotcha me by saying I didn’t like Weber, that’s funny as fuck.
Well wanting Weber fired for years that you are fine with Groce/Underwood having is batshit crazy, especially since 4+ years into a tenure it doesn’t matter where you started from.
If Underwood is a mediocre coach in year 5 and after, same with Groce/Weber- why tolerate it?
-
During those five weeks, yes.
Based on a 5 week sample size, Brock Purdy is clearly on his way to being better than Tom Brady
-
So now Spark wants to use the argument that competitive advantage is a thing. When he just spent 12 pages arguing it wasn’t. And yes, I realize we’re not Kansas or UNC. But neither is ASU Illinois. A lot of historical data tells us this. And since Spark is the data guy, you’d think he’d accept this data.
Exactly.
If there’s no comparative advantage between jobs, then there should also be no distinction made between Bruce Weber starting in 2003 and Brad Underwood starting in 2017. It’s the exact same Illinois job right spark?
-
So you don’t give credit to Underwood for bringing in Kofi but can use that he did to discredit him. Interesting 🤔
If we’re forecasting the future, it’s only reasonable to forecast events that have high probability of occurring in the future.
If Brad Underwood is 31-45 without Kofi Cockburn on the roster, and there is a 1% chance he will ever recruit a similar player to IL, then clearly assessing Underwood on the merits of him coaching Kofi-less rosters is appropriate.
Kofi is such a gigantic outlier in Underwood’s career that one would be dumb not to take that into account.
Gene Chizik was fired at Auburn bc he was never going to recruit another Cam Newton. Kofi is the same way to Underwood.
-
If someone wants to show me where I’ve said Fields is the definite answer and he’s a top 3-5 quarterback in the league, I’m all eyes and ears.
No one has ever said you said that, Strawman34. But you did say this:
Not a super duper spicy take, but I predict Justin Fields will be the best quarterback in Chicago Bears history.
-
Unless someone is pounding the table for Sid Luckman as an all-time great NFL quarterback that seems like a fairly low bar, doesn’t it?
-
Big Jay Cutler fan, are ya?
-
Big Jay Cutler fan, are ya?
Grossman, Kramer, and Cutler likely have better team success than Fields ever has with the Bears
-
If PAMAn wasn’t to hammer me on that quote, fine. But I will say that Fields has already surpassed Caleb Hanie and Josh McCwon for #4 on the list…
-
Unless someone is pounding the table for Sid Luckman as an all-time great NFL quarterback that seems like a fairly low bar, doesn’t it?
I do not know about "all-time great NFL quarterback," but Sid Luckman did win 4 championships, could actually throw the damned ball in the flat, and his number is retired by the Bear.
-
If PAMAn wasn’t to hammer me on that quote, fine. But I will say that Fields has already surpassed Caleb Hanie and Josh McCwon for #4 on the list…
Think you are forgetting some guys if you think those 2 are anywhere near the top 10 of Bear QBs.
Including Fuller and T-Zak....
-
I like that one.
He's talking to himself again. Lol
-
Grossman, Kramer, and Cutler likely have better team success than Fields ever has with the Bears
The best part of this post is that whether it is meant seriously or sarcastically, it hits exactly the same.
-
If we’re forecasting the future, it’s only reasonable to forecast events that have high probability of occurring in the future.
You must be quite the bettor/gambler then, huh?!
-
Grossman, Kramer, and Cutler likely have better team success than Fields ever has with the Bears
Jaylon Johnson is the only current Bear would have started on the ‘06 defense.
-
You must be quite the bettor/gambler then, huh?!
But he did take the advice on the sig.
-
I do not know about "all-time great NFL quarterback," but Sid Luckman did win 4 championships, could actually throw the damned ball in the flat, and his number is retired by the Bear.
Sid Luckman threw for 2,000 or more yards twice in his career. 1100 or more 4x. I’m guessing he didn’t call the plays.
-
They were slinging the ball all over the yard during the Sid Luckman era.
-
They were slinging the ball all over the yard during the Sid Luckman era.
As shown by the 50/50 TD to INT rates and 50% completion rates of the era, they were doing it quite literally.
-
Sid Luckman threw for 2,000 or more yards twice in his career. 1100 or more 4x. I’m guessing he didn’t call the plays.
Actually, he probably did call the plays.
-
Actually, he probably did call the plays.
But that wouldn’t have satisfied the requirement for the joke.
-
Who are the two morons who voted that ASU and Illinois are equal programs? Show your hands.
-
As shown by the 50/50 TD to INT rates and 50% completion rates of the era, they were doing it quite literally.
You mean in an era where you could basically clock the receiver at any point?
Isn't his TD% still up there?
-
Jaylon Johnson is the only current Bear would have started on the ‘06 defense.
Are you a fan of the Bears or a fan of the QB? Most fans don’t care who the QB is as long as the team is winning. Likewise,most fans want to get rid of the QB if he is losing
Justin Fields could put up Kyler Murray stats, and he’d be a failure if the Bears are as bad as the Cardinals
-
Are you a fan of the Bears or a fan of the QB? Most fans don’t care who the QB is as long as the team is winning. Likewise,most fans want to get rid of the QB if he is losing
Justin Fields could put up Kyler Murray stats, and he’d be a failure if the Bears are as bad as the Cardinals
Judging Fields by his rookie year under the final year of the Pace/Nagy era, and his 2nd year where they literally made the team bad on purpose seems a bit premature. Let’s see what they do the next couple of seasons.
-
Can you please explain to me how I’m “lying?”
Here’s what happened. You made that case that Trubisky “is more or less on par with Mahomes” (even if through just 5 games). I said: “stop with that nonsense, Mahomes is clearly better!” You said:”Not according to the statistics.” I said: “I don’t give a damn what the statistics say, Mahomes is way better.”
Contrary to your accusation, I never once said you said that Trubisky was better than Mahomes. I merely pointed out that comparing the two in any way was dumb, and you took exception to it. That’s why we argued about it.
You're lying by making up multiple quotes and attributing them to me. You're doing it again in this post.
I mentioned earlier, I can do it too.
You said "Reggie Theus is the only acceptable replacement for Weber," and we said "I think he'd be kind of mediocre" and you said "No, he's the only guy who can lead us to success."
You said that in exactly the same way I said Trubisky and Mahomes were comparable outside of the specific 5 week stretch we were discussing: you didn't. And yet, you've held me to that quote you made up for 6 years. You ignored the ACTUAL point that you know I was making, because I've explained it to you clearly about three dozen times, and tried to "gotcha" me using made up quotes that I didn't say. That's lying.
-
Who are the two morons who voted that ASU and Illinois are equal programs? Show your hands.
I assume they're mocking you for making an idiotic strawman poll trying to make your point seem reasonable by lying about what you're arguing about.
-
Judging Fields by his rookie year under the final year of the Pace/Nagy era, and his 2nd year where they literally made the team bad on purpose seems a bit premature. Let’s see what they do the next couple of seasons.
Oh, is the sample size too small to make a judgment?
Weird.
-
I assume they're mocking you for making an idiotic strawman poll trying to make your point seem reasonable by lying about what you're arguing about.
ding ding ding!
-
Oh, is the sample size too small to make a judgment?
Weird.
LOL
-
You're lying by making up multiple quotes and attributing them to me. You're doing it again in this post.
I mentioned earlier, I can do it too.
You said "Reggie Theus is the only acceptable replacement for Weber," and we said "I think he'd be kind of mediocre" and you said "No, he's the only guy who can lead us to success."
You said that in exactly the same way I said Trubisky and Mahomes were comparable outside of the specific 5 week stretch we were discussing: you didn't. And yet, you've held me to that quote you made up for 6 years. You ignored the ACTUAL point that you know I was making, because I've explained it to you clearly about three dozen times, and tried to "gotcha" me using made up quotes that I didn't say. That's lying.
Would be a perfect candidate for the Tempo McStrawman Thread.
-
Would be a perfect candidate for the Tempo McStrawman Thread.
Pick a lane, Sally.
-
You're lying by making up multiple quotes and attributing them to me. You're doing it again in this post.
I mentioned earlier, I can do it too.
You said "Reggie Theus is the only acceptable replacement for Weber," and we said "I think he'd be kind of mediocre" and you said "No, he's the only guy who can lead us to success."
You said that in exactly the same way I said Trubisky and Mahomes were comparable outside of the specific 5 week stretch we were discussing: you didn't. And yet, you've held me to that quote you made up for 6 years. You ignored the ACTUAL point that you know I was making, because I've explained it to you clearly about three dozen times, and tried to "gotcha" me using made up quotes that I didn't say. That's lying.
What “quotes” did I make up? Let’s get specific please. Then I can go from there.
-
I have explained the Trubisky/Mahomes argument exactly as it happened. Exactly.
-
Nice. Looks like the mult vote just counted. Trump would love the result.
-
The “point” you made was that Trubisky was more or less on par with Mahomes through 5 weeks. I told you that was laughable because one guy was clearly better than the other regardless of what your numbers said. You took issue with it and said “but this is what the numbers say.” That is EXACTLY the way it went down.
-
Nice. Looks like the mult vote just counted. Trump would love the result.
Wait, you had your mults vote against you? Nice move to try and throw everyone off.
-
Pick a lane, Sally.
I think I did, the Tempo Strawman thread lane.
-
Spark, here is my point. You can deflect with the “but the numbers and data say this” defense all you want. But this is similar to the Nagy/Belichick argument we had. “At this point in their careers, blah blah blah.” Technically, yes you were “right.” But I mocked you for that stuff because clearly one was better than the other. And it was ridiculous to compare them in any way. Despite what the precious data said. And again, I never ever once said you said Trubisky was “better,” or even as good. But clearly you were trying to prop up Trubisky at the time. That’s fine. But to do it using Mahomes as your counter example was absurd, even at the time, with supporting data.
-
And again. You’re the data guy. But refuse to accept the data that says over the last 40+ years Illinois is a superior program over a large handful of coaches. ASU and Illinois have not been on level playing fields, just as Illinois and Kentucky are not on level playing fields. Now, could you convince me that the gap has closed somewhat? Yes. You could.
-
Spark, here is my point. You can deflect with the “but the numbers and data say this” defense all you want. But this is similar to the Nagy/Belichick argument we had. “At this point in their careers, blah blah blah.” Technically, yes you were “right.” But I mocked you for that stuff because clearly one was better than the other. And it was ridiculous to compare them in any way. Despite what the precious data said. And again, I never ever once said you said Trubisky was “better,” or even as good. But clearly you were trying to prop up Trubisky at the time. That’s fine. But to do it using Mahomes as your counter example was absurd, even at the time, with supporting data.
Now if you want to explain to me what you think I’m misrepresenting here. I will listen. I just don’t believe I’ve misrepresented what happened. In the least.
-
I’m gonna guess DeliciousPussy definitely had a vote.
-
I think I did, the Tempo Strawman thread lane.
You mean the piss poor PAMan attempt at trolling lane? Seems like a lane you’re comfortable in.
-
You mean the piss poor PAMan attempt at trolling lane? Seems like a lane you’re comfortable in.
Just laying out the facts.
You are habitual strawman contractor.
-
Zzzzzzzzzzzzz…
-
What “quotes” did I make up? Let’s get specific please. Then I can go from there.
Every quote in the post I replied to.
-
Every quote in the post I replied to.
That is called a "Classic Tempo Post."
-
Every quote in the post I replied to.
Ok…
-
10 votes in a row out of nowhere to ASU! I guess there really is a Santa Claus, Virginia!
-
Spark, here is my point. You can deflect with the “but the numbers and data say this” defense all you want. But this is similar to the Nagy/Belichick argument we had. “At this point in their careers, blah blah blah.” Technically, yes you were “right.” But I mocked you for that stuff because clearly one was better than the other. And it was ridiculous to compare them in any way. Despite what the precious data said. And again, I never ever once said you said Trubisky was “better,” or even as good. But clearly you were trying to prop up Trubisky at the time. That’s fine. But to do it using Mahomes as your counter example was absurd, even at the time, with supporting data.
You simply didn’t understand my point - the only point I was ever making - about how silly it is to judge a QB, good or bad, by his first 15-20 games.
I’m curious - if you were me, how many years would you continue repeating the same obvious, simple point hoping maybe THIS TIME the other guy will get it? I’m on year 6. I think I’m pretty much done trying to explain a simple point to you.
I would definitely appreciate if you’d quit lying about things I didn’t say to try to win an argument, but if you won’t I’m happy to make up all sorts of bullshit about you and pass it off as fact.
-
Ok…
Quoting someone, but putting a thing in quotes that they didn’t say, is lying.
-
Again. What was the specific “lie?” Use a specific example, please.
-
And again. You’re the data guy. But refuse to accept the data that says over the last 40+ years Illinois is a superior program over a large handful of coaches. ASU and Illinois have not been on level playing fields, just as Illinois and Kentucky are not on level playing fields. Now, could you convince me that the gap has closed somewhat? Yes. You could.
Saying “Kentucky and Illinois aren’t on even playing fields!” In order to justify a claim that John Calipari and Bruce Weber are comparable coaches would be really stupid, wouldn’t it?
-
And the doubling down starts in 3.....2......1....
He beat me to it.
-
Can you please explain to me how I’m “lying?”
Here’s what happened. You made that case that Trubisky “is more or less on par with Mahomes” (even if through just 5 games). I said: “stop with that nonsense, Mahomes is clearly better!” You said:”Not according to the statistics.” I said: “I don’t give a damn what the statistics say, Mahomes is way better.”
Contrary to your accusation, I never once said you said that Trubisky was better than Mahomes. I merely pointed out that comparing the two in any way was dumb, and you took exception to it. That’s why we argued about it.
Here’s the post I replied to. In it, you will find two separate quotes attributed to me that I did not say. They are the only two quotes attributed to me. That is called lying.
You said “please explain to me how I’m lying”, and then laid out a conversation in direct quotes that never occurred.
-
You simply didn’t understand my point - the only point I was ever making - about how silly it is to judge a QB, good or bad, by his first 15-20 games.
I’m curious - if you were me, how many years would you continue repeating the same obvious, simple point hoping maybe THIS TIME the other guy will get it? I’m on year 6. I think I’m pretty much done trying to explain a simple point to you.
I would definitely appreciate if you’d quit lying about things I didn’t say to try to win an argument, but if you won’t I’m happy to make up all sorts of bullshit about you and pass it off as fact.
So you were just trying to teach me something? You weren’t trying to prop up Trubisky or Nagy? In the least?
-
Here’s the post I replied to. In it, you will find two separate quotes attributed to me that I did not say. They are the only two quotes attributed to me. That is called lying.
Ok. Tell me exactly what you said then. Because you used stats to show how Trubisky was pretty much playing as well as Mahomes. Forget how I remember it. What specifically did YOU say?
-
If he were a papist, The Pope would make Spark a saint.
-
So you just trying to teach me something? You weren’t trying to prop up Trubisky or Nagy? In the least?
I mean, I didn’t mince words, equivocate, or hide my point - initially, or in the six years after - that it was stupid to judge a guy, good or bad, after his first 20 games. That’s been my point since day 1, and is still a totally valid point. Your insistence on misrepresenting it simply isn’t my problem, Tempo.
-
I’m about 99% sure I’ve portrayed what happened accurately. Saying “stop lying” doesn’t help me see where I went wrong.
-
Ok. Tell me exactly what you said then. Because you used stats to show how Trubisky was pretty much playing as well as Mahomes. Forget how I remember it. What specifically did YOU say?
I said look, after you crowned Mahomes and trashed Trubisky because of their results in a tiny sample size, Trubisky has outplayed Mahomes over the last five weeks - so maybe we should let guys’ careers play out before we rush to judgment, good or bad.
Was what I said then, and what I’m saying now. Has literally never changed through your literal years of lying and misrepresenting it. It is and always was about making holistic judgments one way or the other with a tiny sample size.
-
I mean, I didn’t mince words, equivocate, or hide my point - initially, or in the six years after - that it was stupid to judge a guy, good or bad, after his first 20 games. That’s been my point since day 1, and is still a totally valid point. Your insistence on misrepresenting it simply isn’t my problem, Tempo.
Again. My main point in that “debate” was that Mahomes was the far superior quarterback. And that trying to compare them using numbers was dumb. I think that stance has held up quite well.
-
I’m about 99% sure I’ve portrayed what happened accurately. Saying “stop lying” doesn’t help me see where I went wrong.
You can be sure of whatever you want. If that’s how you took it I guess my simple point was too complex for you? I could not have possibly made it any clearer, then or any number of times since. You simply move on and misrepresent it again next time it comes up.
And it’s fine, but if you’re going to lie about others to win arguments then you should stop whining when others do it to you.
-
Again. My main point in that “debate” was that Mahomes was the far superior quarterback. And that trying to compare them using numbers was dumb. I think that stance has held up quite well.
If your main point was totally irrelevant to the discussion I’d started, and you used that to misrepresent my views for years - is that your issue? Or mine?
Would it be fair to judge Justin Fields based on his production thus far? He’s played more games than either Trubisky or Mahomes had when this discussion took place.
-
I’m about 99% sure I’ve portrayed what happened accurately. Saying “stop lying” doesn’t help me see where I went wrong.
There is a large sample size of this happening though.
-
Again. It doesn’t matter what the stats through 5 weeks said. It was clear Mahomes was the better player. That’s the only point I ever made. It’s 10x more obvious now than it was even then. I don’t see how I’m the one who comes out looking stupid on this one.
-
There is a large sample size of this happening though.
Your “opinion” is virtually meaningless. Go hang out at the deuce, where you have some value.
-
If your main point was totally irrelevant to the discussion I’d started, and you used that to misrepresent my views for years - is that your issue? Or mine?
Would it be fair to judge Justin Fields based on his production thus far? He’s played more games than either Trubisky or Mahomes had when this discussion took place.
To be honest, I’m not sure exactly where I was on Trubisky at that time. Probably didn’t love him. Probably didn’t view him as hopeless. What I was pretty certain of was that he wasn’t in Patrick Mahomes’ league. Although technically I guess he was. So you got me there…
-
Your “opinion” is virtually meaningless. Go hang out at the deuce, where you have some value.
Spark's years worth of damning evidence is something to behold, Strawman34.
-
Again. It doesn’t matter what the stats through 5 weeks said. It was clear Mahomes was the better player. That’s the only point I ever made. It’s 10x more obvious now than it was even then. I don’t see how I’m the one who comes out looking stupid on this one.
Well if you think the point I made was "Trubisky was the better player", you look stupid as fuck. And that's how you've painted this for years, which you know is false - another way to say this is a lie.
-
Spark's years worth of damning evidence is something to behold, Strawman34.
12-18 months ago, you liked the cut of my jib. Often voicing support for my arguments. What’s changed? Other than the butthurt feelings you’ve developed since the JFC topic.
-
Well if you think the point I made was "Trubisky was the better player", you look stupid as fuck. And that's how you've painted this for years, which you know is false - another way to say this is a lie.
Once again, I never ever once said that. So “stop lying.”
-
I can gauranfuckingtee you I never once said you “think Trubisky is ‘better’ than Mahomes.” Even in this thread I said “pretty much on par with statistically.” That’s as far as i went. And that’s exactly what we argued about 5-6 years ago.
-
12-18 months ago, you liked the cut of my jib. Often voicing support for my arguments. What’s changed? Other than the butthurt feelings you’ve developed since the JFC topic.
Like anything else, some of your arguments I agree with and some I do not.
Then there is your penchant for strawmen.
-
We argued about how much “truth” was in those numbers. But, you’re the stat guy (unless stats favor Illinois heavily over ASU over 50 years). So in your opinion, the numbers were the “truth.”
-
Like anything else, some of your arguments I agree with and some I do not.
Then there is your penchant for strawmen.
You agreed with a lot more of them pre JFC.
-
Once again, I never ever once said that. So “stop lying.”
How many god damn times have you tried to "gotcha" me for thinking Trubisky and Mahomes were comparable? And just totally leaving out that the only thing I ever ACTUALLY said was "they've been comparable the last 5 weeks, so let's not rush to judgement before they've played 20 total games?"
I gotta say, this last week has been a reminder about how fucking dishonest you tend to be in these discussions. Really hard to have an earnest, honest discussion when every single time it's full to the brim with strawmen, exaggerations, and outright lies about your position.
And as I've mentioned a few times - I KNOW you hate it when people act like you loved Reggie Theus or whatever falsehood they're spreading about you this week. But that hate doesn't stop you from turning around and doing the EXACT same thing to me when you think it'll "win" you a gotcha. Literally, I said "Mahomes and Trubisky are comparable players" exactly as much as you said "I'm going to be disappointed if we get anybody other than Theus". Exactly the same amount.
-
We argued about how much “truth” was in those numbers. But, you’re the stat guy (unless stats favor Illinois heavily over ASU over 50 years). So in your opinion, the numbers were the “truth.”
More made up stuff.
Hey man, if you want to claim some victory on this go for it. I'm going to point out that they only way you can do that is to flat out lie about the debate and actively misrepresent what I was saying though, because that is true..
-
I’m really trying to find some common ground here. You made the case that Mahomes and Trubisky were basically about even (using stats). I said don’t pay attention to the stats, pay attention to what you see. Are you saying this is an inaccurate remembrance of what occurred?
-
I can gauranfuckingtee you I never once said you “think Trubisky is ‘better’ than Mahomes.” Even in this thread I said “pretty much on par with statistically.” That’s as far as i went. And that’s exactly what we argued about 5-6 years ago.
Yes, and "pretty much on par statistically" leaves out a pretty notable bit of context, right?
If I had said they were "pretty much on par statistically", something that was objectively false, then by all means hammer me for it. I didn't say that though. I said they had been pretty much on par statistically over the 5 weeks previous to the discussion, which was objectively true, and used it as an example to show how silly it is to judge a guy by his first 15-20 NFL games.
The exact point I was making then, and the exact same point I'm making now. Has literally never changed one single time in 5-6 years, and you have managed to accurately recount it zero times in that span.
-
More made up stuff.
Hey man, if you want to claim some victory on this go for it. I'm going to point out that they only way you can do that is to flat out lie about the debate and actively misrepresent what I was saying though, because that is true..
Again. I never ever ever ever ever said you “thought Trubisky was better than Mahomes.” So who is making shit up here?
-
I’m really trying to find some common ground here. You made the case that Mahomes and Trubisky were basically about even (using stats). I said don’t pay attention to the stats, pay attention to what you see. Are you saying this is an inaccurate remembrance of what occurred?
Yes. If you think I said "Mahomes and Trubisky were basically about even", yes, this is an "inaccurrate remembrance" - which you know, because you've misrepresented that point and been corrected at least a dozen times.
-
You made the case they were playing about evenly and used stats to make the case. I said, you probably shouldn’t do that. Now…am I still “lying” here?
-
Again. I never ever ever ever ever said you “thought Trubisky was better than Mahomes.” So who is making shit up here?
You claimed I said "Trubisky was pretty much on par with Mahomes". I did not. You are making shit up here.
-
You made the case they were playing about evenly and used stats to make the case. I said, you probably shouldn’t do that. Now…am I still “lying” here?
You're intentionally leaving out the entire context of the conversation, but say whatever bullshit you want man. I'm done. Misrepresent away, you won't remember it tomorrow anyway.
-
You claimed I said "Trubisky was pretty much on par with Mahomes". I did not. You are making shit up here.
That’s about the gist of what I remembered. Whatever “words” or “phrase” was used, you used stats to say they were playing about equally. I said don’t believe the stats. Again, am I off base with this description of what happened?
-
You're intentionally leaving out the entire context of the conversation, but say whatever bullshit you want man. I'm done. Misrepresent away, you won't remember it tomorrow anyway.
Whatever “context” you care to use, it’s clear Mahomes is 20x the quarterback Mitch Trubisky is. So I’ll leave it at that.
-
Have explained it probably 20 times, and it has never changed one bit.
Not going to do it the 21st time, sorry. If you haven't figured out the simple point I was making by now, you either can't or don't want to.
-
“Context.”
-
Whatever “context” you care to use, it’s clear Mahomes is 20x the quarterback Mitch Trubisky is. So I’ll leave it at that.
Which is, and always has been, totally tangential to the actual point I was actually making.
-
Okay, sorry.
Tempo, lie away. I'm done with this with you. I'll just parrot all the lies about you instead of pushing back on them, and we'll be even.
-
You agreed with a lot more of them pre JFC.
I just think the differences have been more accentuated lately because there are only 5 or so hyper active posters here.
While I thought Trubisky was a poor pick from the start and sucked, I understood Spark's arguments about sample size. Which is, ironically enough, somewhat your argument about JFC. And, at the end of the day, you may be right about him. I do not think he gets 2 years though. If he does not pick up the pace this year, I think they move on.
-
I just think the differences have been more accentuated lately because there are only 5 or so hyper active posters here.
While I thought Trubisky was a poor pick from the start and sucked, I understood Spark's arguments about sample size. Which is, ironically enough, somewhat your argument about JFC. And, at the end of the day, you may be right about him. I do not think he gets 2 years though. If he does not pick up the pace this year, I think they move on.
Ironically, in year 2 of Trubisky they were trying to build around him. In Justin Fields’ case they were literally tearing down the roster. So maybe we shouldn’t call it apples to apples.
-
That’s about the gist of what I remembered. Whatever “words” or “phrase” was used, you used stats to say they were playing about equally. I said don’t believe the stats. Again, am I off base with this description of what happened?
Again. I don’t see where this is “out of context,” or poor recollection. But oh well. I still respect you more than any other poster on this forum. I think you come from an honest place even if we’re not viewing from the same lens.
-
Ironically, in year 2 of Trubisky they were trying to build around him. In Justin Fields’ case they were literally tearing down the roster. So maybe we shouldn’t call it apples to apples.
I never said they were. Just that you are using sample size, in addition to roster context and other things, as part of your argument.
-
I never said they were. Just that you are using sample size, in addition to roster context and other things, as part of your argument.
Yeah. I made the case that maybe we should see what he looks like with a team that’s actually trying to win before we declare him a certain failure. You found that highly objectionable
-
Yeah. I made the case that maybe we should see what he looks like with a team that’s actually trying to win before we declare him a certain failure. You found that highly objectionable
Maybe Spark and you can now find some common ground.
-
And despite the fact they were clearly not doing anything to help him, you were blaming him for 31-30 losses in which he accounted for almost all of the offense.
-
And despite the fact they were clearly not doing anything to help him, you were blaming him for 31-30 losses in which he accounted for almost all of the offense.
I have never heard of a DT having a W-L record.
-
I have never heard of a DT having a W-L record.
That’s because you are a meatball. Something you accuse me of being.
-
So much for the spark vs tempo specific forum
-
I have never heard of a DT having a W-L record.
‘Member the time EQ St. Brown dropped a perfectly thrown pass on 4th down to end a game and it was Justin Fields’ fault? I ‘member.
-
That’s because you are a meatball. Something you accuse me of being.
What was Dan Hampton's W-L record?
-
‘Member the time EQ St. Brown dropped a perfectly thrown pass on 4th down to end a game and it was Justin Fields’ fault? I ‘member.
I believe the sentiment was that he was shocked it was thrown to him instead of behind him.
-
So much for the spark vs tempo specific forum
Akin to Simone Biles, where is it now?
-
Well, I just kept scrolling… and scrolling… and scrolling past all of these stupid fucking posts. Not once did I say anything until now. This is fucking… in the words of a famous strawman here on the board… retarded (even though I/he doesn’t like that word)…
Thanks to Mn for making the one post regarding a transfer in all this mess. Hell I don’t know if it was even in this particular thread, as they’re ALL fucking hijacked with this shit 😩
-
What was Dan Hampton's W-L record?
Mostly good.
-
PAMan calling others a meatball and falling for the “Qb gets all the glory or all the blame” trope is peak PAMan.
-
Akin to Simone Biles, where is it now?
A for creativity. B on sticking the landing.
-
A for creativity. B on sticking the landing.
At least he didn’t quit 💁🏿♀️
-
I’ll explain why the trope is untrue in an effort to help ThePAMan. Do quarterbacks get an inordinate amount of credit for success? Almost certainly. Is it fair to blame the guy who was the best player on the field for his team for a loss? That’s objectively stupid.
-
At least he didn’t quit 💁🏿♀️
Now that landing deserves a perfect 10.
-
PAMan calling others a meatball and falling for the “Qb gets all the glory or all the blame” trope is peak PAMan.
You called me a meatball; I said nothing of the sort. Spark bat signal is lit.
JFC and Jack Sanborn have lost the last nine games they have started.
-
JFC and Jack Sanborn have lost the last nine games they have started.
You just nailed the punchline without even realizing you were telling a joke.
-
You just nailed the punchline without even realizing you were telling a joke.
Someone was telling a joke and it was not me....
-
Someone was telling a joke and it was not me....
Oh you were…the fact that an undrafted rookie was one of our most heralded players last year speaks volumes about the “quality” of the roster. But that was lost on you. Because you are largely clueless.
-
Well, I just kept scrolling… and scrolling… and scrolling past all of these stupid fucking posts. Not once did I say anything until now. This is fucking… in the words of a famous strawman here on the board… retarded (even though I/he doesn’t like that word)…
Thanks to Mn for making the one post regarding a transfer in all this mess. Hell I don’t know if it was even in this particular thread, as they’re ALL fucking hijacked with this shit 😩
Go ask the people at loyalty if they have dicks then. Literally no one will mind.
-
Oh you were…the fact that an undrafted rookie was one of our most heralded players last year speaks volumes about the “quality” of the roster. But that was lost on you. Because you are largely clueless.
Oh brother. Well, his "record" sucks!
-
The ten consecutive votes out of nowhere for ASU was a nice touch. Bravo to whoever made that happen.