College Football 2013 Season

[MRT144]

There is ALWAYS going to be competition... who can really say what it will look like next year. For all we know, a lot of other "better places to go" may also be available.
Coaches will always be a crap shoot at best unless we are talking about the true gods... and we aren't going to get one of those this year, next year, the year after...
It's time for a change. Keeping Zook on the "chance" that we "might" get a "better" coach is just silly... it's giving up a year toward our future.

Another year of Zook is not the answer to anything. And anybody that thinks he should stay for another year is a complete idiot. But feel free to try and justify his .400 record as the best coach available... You will only continue to look stupid, and obviously didn't watch any of the last 6 Illini games.

I disagree. College football is full of place holder coaches that amount to statistical noise. The illini with or without zook would likely be just as average as they have always been. There's maybe 10-12 coaches in college football who have meaningful impact on their teams success in the positive and there will always only be a handful of them to go around. The odds that anyone in Champaign-Urbana can identify such a candidate is slim to none. They haven't done it before, and the prize pigs go to the storied universities eventually (Saban at LSU with Les Miles continuing is one of the few times that an individual made an average team a national powerhouse).

Do you think Illinois should shell out Urban money or Saban money on anyone but those two guys? Penn State's sexual abuse issues withstanding, they kept Joe Pa on board through thick and thin and didn't blow their wad on whatever new coach was gonna supposedly turn everything around. Zooker may not be a Joe Paterno, but it pains me whenever a coach doesn't pan out and the "solution" is to get an equally weak bum in there for more money.

[Ming]

When's the last time Illinois had a 5 year rolling average of .500? Late 80s?

Zook's record against Big 10 teams... 18 - 38 (.321)
Only ONE winning season out of seven in league play
Had a winning record against only ONE Big 10 team - Indiana

And people think he should keep his job... get real.
He wasn't working... Seven years... time to try again.

[rah]

When's the last time Illinois had a 5 year rolling average of .500? Late 80s?

I don't think you can look at the overall record since the non-conference schedules have gotten a lot softer.
Their conference record doesn't quite have the same luster. (if you can call .500 a luster )

Conference record
2007 6-2
2008 3-5
2009 2-6
2010 4-4
2011 2-6

[Ming]

I disagree.

Disagree with what?
That Zook sucked but we should keep him anyway?
That it's not time for a change?
That we should waste yet another year on a coach who has proved he can't win in the Big 10?
I'm simply saying he sucked and it was a good thing he was fired. And that it's time to try something new. Is that what you are disagreeing with?

All the points you make after that simple statement are valid "opinions"... which some might disagree with, but none of them justify keeping Zook, and that's the point the Illini fans are making.

[-Jrabbit]

All these people saying Zook is a bad coach but that Illinois should keep him are just hilarious.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Better to be average than horrible - ask Syracuse.

[MRT144]

Disagree with what?
That Zook sucked but we should keep him anyway?
That it's not time for a change?
That we should waste yet another year on a coach who has proved he can't win in the Big 10?
I'm simply saying he sucked and it was a good thing he was fired. And that it's time to try something new. Is that what you are disagreeing with?

All the points you make after that simple statement are valid "opinions"... which some might disagree with, but none of them justify keeping Zook, and that's the point the Illini fans are making.

Zook is not good, but if you're not going to get a "true god" of coaching, then what is the point, especially if it costs your university more money.

[MRT144]

All these people saying Zook is a bad coach but that Illinois should keep him are just hilarious.

I do have a vested interest

[rah]

Zook is not good, but if you're not going to get a "true god" of coaching, then what is the point, especially if it costs your university more money.

Since there are probably only a handful or so of schools that will every attract a "true god", by your logic then there is no point for almost every college to ever fire a "not good" coach.
That's just silly.

[MRT144]

Since there are probably only a handful or so of schools that will every attract a "true god", by your logic then there is no point for almost every college to ever fire a "not good" coach.
That's just silly.

Maybe. I'm more concerned about hiring not good coaches for more money than current not good coaches.

[Ming]

Zook is not good, but if you're not going to get a "true god" of coaching, then what is the point, especially if it costs your university more money.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA... So your really saying that we should keep him because he sucks... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

As Jrabbit says... this is hilarious.

I'm willing to roll the dice with a new coach. Coaching gods have to come from somewhere, and who knows... But what I do know is, that Zook sucks, and to keep him is simply stupid.

[Ming]

Maybe. I'm more concerned about hiring not good coaches for more money than current not good coaches.

This is even more hilarious... Yeah, you don't want to hire a new coach because it will cost you more money, so let's keep the crappy coach, and have all of our major supporters (BIG DOLLAR CONTRIBUTORS) unhappy. Where do you come up with this stuff.

This assumption you seem to be making that there are NO better coaches than a guy who couldn't even win a third of his conference games and had a .400 record in 7 years is just plain silly. I'm sure there are more than JUST 10-12 coaches that could do better than that.

[MRT144]

This is even more hilarious... Yeah, you don't want to hire a new coach because it will cost you more money, so let's keep the crappy coach, and have all of our major supporters (BIG DOLLAR CONTRIBUTORS) unhappy. Where do you come up with this stuff.

This assumption you seem to be making that there are NO better coaches than a guy who couldn't even win a third of his conference games and had a .400 record in 7 years is just plain silly. I'm sure there are more than JUST 10-12 coaches that could do better than that.

For Illinois, there likely isn't a better coach out there. Just accept your role as a jobber of the Big 10.

[rah]

NEVER

[MRT144]

The ultimate point is that yes, new blood might help the Illini win more but there is no evidence that the AD, President, etc etc know how to find talent given that they hired Zook in the first place.