http://blogs.suntimes.com/hoopsreport/2009...he_hat_t_1.html

Bump. I'm proud of our coach.

Good for him, good for Illinois. Championships are not won in November (as some people think), but they start there. Coach has proven he can win with good talent, and the next few years, we'll see some pretty good talent.

I always knew Bruce was an outstanding coach, but now that he is able to recruit, the sky is the limit. I really can see a Final Four coming our way in a few years and hopefully a NC soon as well!

GO ILLINI!!

The thing that I think especially ought to be mentioned here is that Weber has always been a hell of a basketball coach, and bless his heart, a pretty hard-headed and stubborn guy about the way he does things.

However, he changed the way he recruited in response to a changing landscape (maybe a couple of years late, but he did change) and that is the sign of a guy with staying power.

I can't wait until the real star of the program becomes head coach. Oh well, I can live with the bumpkin riding JH's coattails to success until then.

In other words..."blah blah blah, same old crap, something stupid about Worldwide Wes, parting shot."

You can really stop posting now, we all know your schtick.

Evidently I must keep posting just to remind people that winning 1 NCAA game in 4 years does not equate with being a great coach.

Sorry. He's been a very mediocre coach, and that's without taking into account his Mr. Haney impression, which of course drops him even further down.

From the article:

"The guy has won over 72 percent of his games at Illinois, with a Final Four appearance, two Big Ten titles and two runner-up finishes in his six years. He owns the highest winning percentage of any coach in Big Ten history who has coached at least six years in the conference."

Nuff said.

That's an unfair construct to coaches like Izzo (actually virtually everyone who has coached in the Big 10), who took over a program that had fallen off a little. weber benefitted from the very unusual situation of replacing a coach who had the program riding very high and left the cupboard stocked. Since then, i.e., over the last 3 years weber is what, around .550 winning %?

1 NCAA win in 4 years.

If that's still true in 6 months, we'll talk.

Wait, could you post that again? We all missed it the first 50 times.

Jud Heathcote's last team was 22-6. MSU went to the NCAA tournament in 5 of Heathcote's last 6 seasons. What did they fall off from? The championship in 1979?

As far as "around .550 winning %" for the last 3 years, where did you get that? In any event, all the correct number proves is that 07-08 was a bad year.

I guess conference play means nothing and goes out the window....it's all about wins in the NCAA's....

It used to be about the NCAA's. I disagree when the above poster said one NCAA win in four years indicates a bad coach. I would argue it probably indicates a bad recruitment period. Luckily, those days are past us.

Once again facts get in the way of Fear's ranting.

Are you and Lucy Baldwin able to care for your children? The little monsters probably eat you out of house and hole.

Most of that was during his first 2 years, the Truth is ANY coach has to have the players.

He is overrated as a coach, he will win when he has Top talent and when he doesn't he'll struggle.

You lost me on that one

Nope. He's a really good coach. He had a few bad years recruiting. Hopefully that's behind us. There's absolutely nothing in Weber's history that suggests that he won't succeed over the next years with all the talent he and the staff have put together.

Recruiting is mostly a confidence game (that's why $Bill was so good at it). Potential recruits want to know they will surrounded with other good players.

Granted, Weber had to overcome the "bumpkin" thing, and also the negativity coming from all directions (including here). But now that he's got it rolling, it should continue rolling. Confidently.

Nope. Our record during Weber's first 2 years was identical to our record during years 2 and 3.

1 NCAA Tournament win over the last 4 seasons
Hasn't been able to win with his own players


Bruce Weber is a great guy, and a solid X's and O's coach. But he has yet to prove that he can take the reins of a program and turn it into a consistent winner. Weber's most successful seasons at Illinois were his first two, and he was successful due to the talent Bill Self provided him with. Since then, Weber has been unable to garner success with his own players. Weber is a middle of the pack coach, both in the Big Ten, and around the country. He has a lot to prove this season!

STOP IT!

You do realize Illinois had 24 wins and was 2nd place in the Big Ten last year right? Played the post season without their best defensive player?

How is that much different than Bill Self's last season at Illinois? 25-7, 2nd place in Big Ten

Didn't Bill Self's best season's at Illinois happen with Lon Kruger's players?

Weber was 103-54 at SIU. 152-57 at Illinois.

The 2009 Recruiting class is comparable (ratings wise) to 2003 (Brown, DWill, Augustine).
The 2010 Recruiting class is better.

The only thing I agree with in your post is the last sentence, Weber has a lot to prove -- but only b/c everybody has to go out and prove it every year.

Bruce Weber coached the players that were here when he got here. He had no choice on that. He had a successful season last season with all of his own players. He'll have another successful season this year. The next two after that could be really special.

You can cherry pick all you want, but he's the only coach in Illinois history that has ever gotten to a National Championship game. He's also the only coach since the 1950's to win Back to Back Big Ten Titles. He's also the only Illinois coach that has ever beaten a higher seed in the NCAA tournament. I know some people like to act like he's only been the coach for 4 years, and like to act like the only thing that matters in those 4 years are NCAA wins, but in three of those four years we had lots of wins in the regular season. Only one of those seasons was truly "bad."

He's shown that when he has the talent, he's all good. He's a great game day coach and is respected across the country. His period of sucking at recruiting is hopefully behind him. My biggest concern is can he continue recruiting success over a sustained period of time. I'm not concerned at all about his coaching accumen.

He has to establish an ability to win with "his" players.

Last season was NOT a success. You can't call losing in the first round of the NCAA Tournament a success. If you do so, then you are admitting that the standards of your program are very low.

Yes, Weber is the only Illinois coach to get to a National Championship. But he did so because of the GREAT talent that Bill Self provided him. Since establishing his own players at Illinois, what has Weber won?

Yes, last season was a success. We were second in the Big Ten, and that wasn't even close to what was expected going into that season. The team played well, and went down in an NCAA game where our best perimeter defender was unavailable and their guards got hot. That team then gave a great Gonzaga team a near loss. Choosing that and only that as your rubric for last season is not taking into account the entire picture of the season.

I'm not going to sit and argue the whole "winning with Self's guys" thing. First, it's played out and lame. Second, I have a feeling it's going to be disproven over the next few years as Weber gets some talent that is in the same ballpark as those guys were.

You think Weber still has something to prove. If you're talking about sustaining recruiting, then I agree with you. If you're talking about coaching, I think he's a great coach that has already proven himself throughout his career.

Cosign on all comments with emphasis on paragraph one (re: one NCAA game).

If you are equating last seasons results to being a success, then you are admitting that standards at Illinois are very low.

Last season was NOT a success!

Bruce Weber's greatest asset is that he will do it the right way and all I am saying is he "wiil not cheat to compete" which will keep him employed at Illinois as long as Illinois does not fall off the radar.

His greatest concession over the last few years is having conceded that he will have to recruit the potential "in state and bordering states one and dones?"
Is Illinois a fertile enough state that as long as he successfully recruits Illinois, will the U of I BB team be good? Yes

will he ever have the national recruiting base of Kansas/NC/Duke? Probably not.



Is that national recruiting base the differnce between very good teams and National Chamionship teams? Yes

It was a success relative to expectations. Expectations were tempered due to recruiting hardships that basically everybody has admitted. Relative to that and what most people thought, it was a successful season that saw us nationally ranked, competing for a Big Ten title, with a high seed in the NCAA tournament. That's generally been the measure of success in our program, so last year wasn't any different.

You're free to think what you want, but I'm pretty confident most Illini fans would view last season as a success. It didn't end the way that we wanted, but it doesn't change the fact that we had a great season and ended up 2nd in the Big Ten.

Wasn't Fredo the one in the family who was dumb and got wacked because of it? Just saying...

Just admit you were wrong about him while you can still save a little face.

Recruiting was broken, now it's fixed. He's always been a good game coach. Last season was certainly a success considering the recruiting dip (that had been fixed by last year) and what he had to work with.

Bang him for not capitalizing on the FF run. He deserves it. However, he also deserves credit for recognizing his weakness in approach and fixing it. The future is bright. Your group's irrelevant ranting aside...

It is not a binary argument. Last season ended on a disappointing note, but I would hardly call 24 wins and 2nd place in the B10 a failure.

We are embarking on a nice run of Illinois basketball. You may as well get on board and enjoy the journey.

I think it's completely fair to put the blame on Bruce for recruiting failures. I think he's a big boy, and that's part of the territory.

I also think it's fair to be critical of 06/07 as a sub average season, and 07/08 as a horrible season. Some of that was due to recruiting misses. Some of that was also due to having teams with gigantic glaring weaknesses, as well as some coaching choices by Weber and the staff.

I just think it's silly that it has to be one or the other...you can acknowledge that Weber is a good coach and about to hopefully have a great run without being unrealistic about his shortcomings in past seasons. There's a grey area.

But on a list of 10 concerns I have about Bruce Weber, I'm not sure game-day coaching or game prep coaching would even make the list...maybe inbounds plays would come in at #10....maybe.

This is beyond idiotic. The enormous success we experienced in 2004-05 required both the playing talent of the individual players AND the coaching acumen of Weber.

Dee, Deron, Luther, et. al. were quite good, but 37-2 and a National Championship appearance isn't good - it's spectacular. And they became spectacular in no small measure due to Weber's influence.

Really!?! Thanks Captain Obvious! Is it different anywhere else with anyone else? I hope you didn't strain yourself coming up with that.

Weber is Todd Lickliter, with better luck.

and better talent, and a National Championship appearance, and a couple BT Championships under his belt, and he as assembled a really good looking returning team this year, and he has assembled another great class coming in next year, and an even better class the following year, and didn't he win that National coach of the year award thingy.

Other than that you were spot on once again.

It's amazing how far you have slipped over the past couple years.

No, he's larue33, without the irrational hatred. ;)

Given his recruiting struggles, you think if he'd stepped into a situation like Iowa's he wouldn't be struggling pretty much the way Lickliter is? And, given his success at Butler, you think Lickliter wouldn't have been successful if he'd landed a program like Illinois and a roster like the one Weber inherited?

No I don't.

And "I think" that you still haven't been able to get past the reality of knowing the coach you hate will be coaching your favorite team for SEVERAL more years, maybe even a decade or so. That makes me smile!

You must live a very small life.

And Larue is the Illiniboard's version of Beano Cook.

Roy Williams left Self with a lot of talent. Self took that talent and was bounced in the first round of back to back tourneys by Bucknell and Bradley.

You have an irrational hatred for Weber.

But I have to admit that I don't totally disagree with you here.

Larue, otherwise one of the more steady-handed, logical and thoughtful posters on any board, hates weber, and it's over the top. I don't know what happened, but I hope someday, they can reconcile and put this behind them.

I've said this before, but it's true -- Coach Weber is very well respected throughout the country, probably more so than he is here.

It's easy to say that pretty much any coach (other than a crazy recruiter) would be struggling right now at Iowa. That brand is stinky.

What's silly to say is that any coach (including Lickliter) would have been able to take the 04/05 team to a National Championship. That's just dumb. Weber's system was perfect for those guys, and enhanced their strengths while minimizing their weaknesses. I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest that Lickliter (or a comperable coach) would have done well with that team, but to assert that they would just automatically have been able to take that 04/05 team to a 37-2 record is just silly and not based in reality.

I also think the tendancy is to forget Weber's first year, in which we saw him mold and shape the team into what 04/05 would end up being. I think the "Weber was only successful because of Self's players" would make a lot more sense if Weber's first year had been 04/05, but it wasn't. That team had a 2 years of Weber's coaching and system, and that pairing was the source of the success that year.

Yup. People forget that it was a rocky start that first year because of the difference in coaching styles. Weber didn't just roll the ball out there and say "okay guys...you were doing okay before so just keep doing what you did last year".

Credit goes to the outstanding players we had at that time for (eventually) buying into Weber's system and learning it quickly. Credit goes to Weber for implementing it.

So what's the difference between my thread,"what coach would the Weber-bashers prefer?", that was pulled after two hours (which I thought actually required a little bit of thought) and this thread?

This thread has gone on for days and has the same tired arguments and personal attacks (BW supporters vs. detractors) that we've seen since 2006. What's the difference? Is there a moderator that can justify this hypocrisy? Didn't think so.

This board is the land of the free and home of the brave compared to the moronic scout board. And here you have some posters with above average IQs, unlike the mentally challenged that reside on the other board. So, what's to complain about?

As for your question, ABw. Anyone.