gatnom

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Feb 2, 2016 -> 04:56 PM) I'd prefer Tiley to George so I'm glad he seemingly passed. But I agree I think it's weird he's still being brought up in some way. If he was the hire I certainly would not complain either. Both guys head and shoulders above the rest of the candidates. I don't think it's all that weird. He's been the guy everybody connected to the process wanted all along, to the point where some donors apparently thought they could hand deliver him to Illinois. It seems like a lot of people are unwilling to give up their wishful thinking. I agree with you that Tiley > George, though. Considering his real world success at turning things around and the fact that he'd be a preferred candidate of major boosters, one would have to think he's about as ideal of a candidate as Illinois could get.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 10:30 PM) Looked like Hill got fouled at the end. He was, but Illinois got more calls in their favor down the stretch IMO.

QUOTE (Brian @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 10:10 PM) Wow. Two bad possessions by both teams. Groce is abysmal in last shot situations.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 28, 2016 -> 09:07 AM) IMO, Illinois needs to focus on regional guys that may be growing their senior year where Illinois may be one of their better offers. Going after national guys at this point isnt a good strategy. I'm not sure the current staff has many connections to the midwest to do this kind of thing. I mean their highest recruit from Illinois itself is ranked 30th in the state or so.

I know I said it yesterday, but I'm surprised anybody even musters up anger about the Illinois football situation. With all these losses, maybe we only win 3-4 games instead of 4-5 games. Who cares? We're still on the path to being Purdue bad in a couple years regardless.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 25, 2016 -> 04:51 PM) http://sports.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting...016/illinois-26 21 total commits. 7 3* and the rest are 2*. Not that star's mean anything but it shows you how poorly they really do recruit. When they extended Cubit, they really removed any reason to follow the program for the next 3-4 years. Although, it's not like there was much reason to follow it beforehand.

I think I'm finally on the fire Groce bandwagon. I still think we'd be a tournament team if we were fully healthy, but there's just no excuse for our complete lack of offense. These players should be able to do more than dribble out the shot clock and chuck long contested 2's. The offensive movement, passing, and shot selection looked good in the Purdue game for maybe the first time under Groce, but it appears that it was just a fluke.

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Jan 14, 2016 -> 02:32 PM) That's "against the rules". They'll never do it. Beat me to it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 12, 2016 -> 11:08 AM) LOL The whole "SEC is the greatest conference in the nation" is what started the whole random conference pride thing, but it really is stupid no matter what side happens to be perpetuating it in a given year.

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 07:20 PM) I agree. Played extremely well tonight. DJW played some pretty good defense considering he hasn't gotten big minutes all year. Having a PG who can actually shoot next year in Abrams and Lucas will help quite a bit as well. I think Black should just RS this year. Any chance we can get Thorne to come back next season as well? Medical RS? Abrams is really more of a stopgap than a PG who can shoot. His main virtue is really just that he's going to keep Tate off the floor. Thorne would most likely get a medical RS if he were to stay out the rest of the season. But, I think the staff knows it needs to put up something of a competitive season if they want to stick around, and getting Thorne back is the best hope they have of doing that. So as soon as he's able to go, he'll be on the court.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jan 10, 2016 -> 06:42 PM) Hill and Nunn have been incredible today and this is the best we have looked on offense against a good defensive team since Groce's first year. Good defensive gameplan too (overmatched inside so Purdue has scored a bit but the rare game this year where I like the plan and we have executed on D). This is the best a Groce team has looked in his time here, IMO. The '13 team won against better teams, but there was actually movement and passing on offense tonight, which is refreshing.

QUOTE (Boogua @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 12:31 PM) I think Thorne is going to be back pretty soon Yeah, I think the staff knows it needs to start winning games and fast, since the only thing that guarantees their jobs for another year is making the tournament. Plus, they are probably pretty confident in landing another 5th year guy if they need to since there are so many transfers every year.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 11:07 AM) I don't buy at all that this is a solid tournament team even at full health. You don't think the inside presence from Thorne, rebounding from black, and lack of being Jaylon Tate from Abrams makes this a tournament team? In a down year for the B1G? We hung with Iowa state for the one half we had Thorne, and we lost by one @Providence.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Jan 8, 2016 -> 10:42 AM) We are about to miss the tourney for the 6th time in the last 9 years and we haven't been to the Sweet 16 since the Final 4 season. The last time we were competitive for a Big 10 title and on a national level was Dee Brown's senior year. Since Dee graduated we have won 2 NCAA tourney games and our seeds in that stretch were 12 (one of the last teams in the field and could have easily been left out), 5 seed (our best team post Dee and while that team was very solid they were also genuinely painful to watch play and failed to score 40 points twice that year), 9 seed and 7 seed. So basically one team in the last 10 years that was a top 25 type team and that team couldn't score. Illinois basketball is in pretty awful shape. What it is and what it has been for 10 years are two different things. Now, this team at full strength isn't anything resembling a national title contender, but it is solidly a tournament team. Whether having a team in the tournament in year 4 of the Groce era would have been considered "awful" shape is a matter of personal opinion.

You guys really make the situation sound a lot worse than it is at Illinois. This was a tournament team at full strength, but last night they played with one starter on the road at MSU. Of course they were going to look like s***. In a vacuum, I still think Groce is a good enough coach to win at Illinois. However, it's not a vacuum, and three straight tournament misses is probably too much to overcome.

QUOTE (farmteam @ Jan 7, 2016 -> 09:05 PM) As an outsider, Guenther seems the most culpable. The main problem tonight is that we're missing 4/5 starters, but this is the most accurate reason for why Illinois is here.

QUOTE (bmags @ Dec 18, 2015 -> 11:14 AM) Enjoy AJ Ricker back, he was truly awful at Missouri. He was one of Illinois' best coaches when he was with the team... whether that says more about the quality of the coaching staff or that he works well with Cubit is up for debate.

On the Illinois AD search: Lol. I have to admit it's fun to watch them fail.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 2, 2015 -> 10:25 PM) Groce is so, so bad. Go 2-20 from the field? Better play more and more of a walk-on who is a black hole on offense! Along PGs who are also black holes! Even sadder when Austin was awful on the defensive end. Yeah, hard to defend that. I still think Groce can be a successful coach, but he needs to stop the bleeding and quick this season if he's going to be.

They're getting good looks for the most part. They're just shooting like 15% right now.

Illinois is going to have to make some shots at some point...

QUOTE (zenryan @ Dec 2, 2015 -> 06:12 PM) Top preference would've been a Mullen but cant complain about Richt. Kind of funny reading all these experts the last few weeks saying how bad Miami's job situation is. In the end, Miami could've gotten any coach they preferred. Mullen was there for the taking and at worst they end up with either Schiano or Butch Davis. I think Schiano is a good coach, but I'm not sure he really fits what Miami is trying to do. Not that this thought matters at all...

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ Dec 2, 2015 -> 05:14 PM) Interesting. I was blown away by the pictures myself. But yeah pictures won't do it justice, good or bad, compared to tv, especially since we've yet to see it with people in it. Hope it's amazing. I think it was the whole 2 year buildup of a renovation. I was expecting some amazing new venue or something, but at the end of the day it's still going to be the same building. I think getting the empty donor seats off of TV and replacing them with the students should make it look a thousand times better, though.

QUOTE (raBBit @ Dec 2, 2015 -> 05:09 PM) Thank you for the nice words. Again, on the point of KW, I tiptoed around that so your point is certainly a valid counterpoint but I think it strikes at something more incisive. I don't dilute the FO down to KW's tenure vs. Hahn's tenure as I think they mesh and meld in different ways but the roster that the White Sox had when Hahn was named GM was just horrid. It was a black hole. It was overpaid older vets, busted prospects, a team bereft of young talent other than Sale (and whatever was thought of Quintana at that time) and no farm. If someone ranked the 30 organizations' futures at that time there would have to be 26th, 27th, 28th, 29th or 30th. The strides haven't been tremendous but they've been good and we have every reason to believe they will continue to pay dividends. There is premier talent and a better system with some potential plus guys at the top. The team is just incredibly bad with all of the supplementary pieces and with any sort of normal regression we will see improvement. I would agree with all of this. I actually don't think this White Sox team is even that far away from competing. The only unfortunate part is they don't really seem to have much of an option to significantly improve the team in the short term except hope their players play better.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Dec 2, 2015 -> 04:35 PM) The article is definitely taking a specific view, to point out that SOME of the narrative is off. I don't think it is trying to make it seem like a rosy picture, as much as it happens to be a take on the aspects that run against the negative narrative. There is plenty of negative to be found, no doubt. I realize he wasn't really writing it to me per se, and I admitted he was just trying to dispel myths surrounding the organization. I just felt the need to comment on the bigger picture. The juxtaposition of Epstein/Hoyer and Williams/Hahn sort of lends an unofficial stamp of approval to the whole situation, which really may not be warranted at all.