Scholarship table
And that's why Illinois doesn't need to "get weird." Just get a good coach.Iowa hired Hayden Fry in 1979 and hired Kirk Ferentz when he retired. Everyone knows what Iowa football is. Wisconsin hired Barry Alvarez in 1990, and outside of a two year stint with Gary Andersen, has been run pretty much the same way since then with two of his assistants. Everyone knows what Wisconsin football is. Both Fry and Alvarez knew that how you build long-term success is by looking at what the high schools are producing in their main recruiting areas. It's not some spread option stuff. It is run of the mill, power football. All of that feeds their programs. Someone said earlier that Illinois cannot "out Big Ten the Big Ten." But that's exactly what Iowa and Wisconsin have done! (Michigan State too.)Getting weird may bring Illinois some wins early. But I just don't think it's sustainable. Purdue did that with Joe Tiller. It worked pretty good for awhile - until Joe was pushed out and the program has sucked since then.
Agree to disagree that IL can follow the Wisconsin or Iowa model. While Wisco and Iowa as states may not have the aggregate in-state recruiting talent of Illinois, those schools are so insulated from recruiting competition that they are able to retain a disproportionate number of their own top guys, who skew heavily toward one or two positions and enable them to develop a program identity (the bolded section of your post above). You see that culturally, not just in football terms, and its not just based on one coach. When you drive even into northern Wisconsin, just watch for how many service and retail businesses are called "Badger X." Or in Iowa, how many of the same business are "Hawkeye X." Those high school recruits aren't going anywhere else. And you'll never get that in Illinois. Their success isn't because they got "just a good coach" its because that coach's success was able to exploit a statewide hunger to identify with the school that was already there, and that feeds on itself - and Illinois will never have that. They'll always have - at best - a 25% chance of fending off ND, and nothern B10 schools for Chicago area kids, and maybe a slightly better chance at fending off the B12 or SEC for kids in the southern part of the state.
Oddly, I recently was surprised by how little football talent Illinois produces relative to its size.The state's Class of 2016 had just one top 200 player (per 247).Class of 2017 had three.Class of 2018 had one.Class of 2019 has two (the highest rated being #138).Not that it's an excuse for how bad the Illini have been (we can blame that on terrible coaching hires since John Mackvic), but the state hasn't been a hotbed for college football talent since Donovan McNabb and Simeon Rice were teammates at Mount Carmel.
So DJ Durkin has been reinstated by Maryland. Apparently the President of the University didn't want him back. However the Board of Trustees told the President that he would be out of a job unless he reinstated Durkin.That sounds normal.
So apparently the President is leaving his job.
Also, Michigan host Penn State this Saturday. They are at Ohio State to end the year.
I don't see Clemson or ND losing. I would put them in the playoffs.Alabama plays at LSU Saturday. Alabama wins and they are pretty much in the playoffs even if they lose in the SEC Championship Game. LSU wins and neither can afford another loss. Which could get real weird if UGA wins out and wins the SECCG.Michigan has at Penn State this weekend and home against OSU. If they win out, coupled with an LSU loss, they are in as well.Oklahoma, Washington State and Kentucky / Georgia likely need help. (Kentucky and Georgia play this weekend)So right now, I am projecting Alabama v. Michigan and Clemson v. ND.
I could see Notre Dame losing to Northwestern, Syracuse or @ USC.
Me too. They almost lost at home to Ball State and Pitt.
Now this from a Washington Post sports writer ...Rick Maese @RickMaeseAnd in a stunning twist, the University Maryland has parted ways with DJ Durkin… more coming soon…
Lots of backlash from yesterday’s Regents decision. Deceased player’s family, UMD students, many players, some of whom walked out of Durkin first back team meeting, politicians, and then Gov. Hogan said this morning that decision was strange and he wanted to look into it. Gov. Hogan originally appointed members to the Board of Regents. Canada to coach remainder of season.
I think the players speaking out was the end. If Durkin stayed, there's was no way he was going to be able to recruit effectively anymore. So the program's future outlook with him was poor at best. With no future and no ability to lead the current team, he simply had no value to the program. The Board of Regents initial decision was as short-sided as you will find.
I really don't understand the board's decision. What did they have to gain? Was there some blackmail or financial win/loss at stake?