There's no doubt he has to show improvement or he will be gone, that pretty much goes without saying when a coach doesn't win a conference game.  Doesn't change the fact that he and Zook basically had identical 1st seasons.  If TB can't turn it around like Zook did, then his stay will be a lot shorter. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
TB's back so it's playing out.  I, for one, hope the staff turns it around.  Otherwise, it'll be another coupla, few years before we're on the upswing.  But even though there likely won't be many wins next season,  TB's team must start showing significant progress and promise, in terms of player development, player production, player strength and conditioning, fundamentals, schemes, game management, enthusiasm, etc.  There's no way around it.  The UI administration and fans alike need something to hang their hat on while waiting for the W-L record to improve.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Maybe he's the master of the inscrutable pun? 
Add "chewlrey" and it would have been perfect.

Illinigrad wrote:

illiniferret wrote: He will be fired with the lowest winning percentage in Illinois history. Not an easy feet unfortunately.

The typo of feat as "feet" (not to mention "leagacy") is a perfect tribute to Beckman!

Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Rats is right. Comparing Beckman's start at IL to Zook is comparing apples and oranges.  It still is mind boggling that Beckman could take a returning bowl team with experienced players and trash an entire season.  Appointing a staff that clearly did not have the needed experience to win in the BIG was the second sign that Beckman was in over his head.  The first sign was his initial presser.  What was MT thinking?  Was Beckman his last choice?  We are going to have a really nice scoreboard this coming season which unfortunately will post a bunch of losing scores.

Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Illinigrad wrote: Rats is right. Comparing Beckman's start at IL to Zook is comparing apples and oranges.  It still is mind boggling that Beckman could take a returning bowl team with experienced players and trash an entire season.  Appointing a staff that clearly did not have the needed experience to win in the BIG was the second sign that Beckman was in over his head.  The first sign was his initial presser.  What was MT thinking?  Was Beckman his last choice?  We are going to have a really nice scoreboard this coming season which unfortunately will post a bunch of losing scores.

Do you have an original idea or do you just post the same stuff every day, multiple times a day?  We get it...You hate Beckman and love Zook

I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

I know I speak for many here, but criticizing Zook in no way makes Beckman "my guy" or "our guy"

By, year to year drop, I assume you mean going from 6 (or, 7) to 2, correct?

Zook's 2011 team won 6 regular season games and the following players did not return from that team:  Jenkins, T. Wilson, Allen, T, Henry, Mercilus, Cornell, Ford, I. Thomas, etc.  It added one of the conference's worst recruiting classes and not a single consensus 4* player

Beast (or anyone), do you think Beckman was left with a (regular season) 6 win team?  Not a chance.

sorry, I didn't mean to insult you. I was trying to needle the AH guy. But, yeah, I think the team here was capable of winning at least a couple of conference games with adequate coaching.

UofIL25 wrote:

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

I know I speak for many here, but criticizing Zook in no way makes Beckman "my guy" or "our guy"

By, year to year drop, I assume you mean going from 6 (or, 7) to 2, correct?

Zook's 2011 team won 6 regular season games and the following players did not return from that team:  Jenkins, T. Wilson, Allen, T, Henry, Mercilus, Cornell, Ford, I. Thomas, etc.  It added one of the conference's worst recruiting classes and not a single consensus 4* player

Beast (or anyone), do you think Beckman was left with a (regular season) 6 win team?  Not a chance.

Yep, aware who the original post was to...and not insulted.

Like you, I also believe we should've won at least a few conference games...I just don't see the 6 win team that people are referring to.  Logic dictates it was quite a bit less than a 6 win team when you factor the roster's gains/losses

I've said before, this was probably a 4-win team (i.e. the 2 OOC wins plus 2 conf wins) that Beckman blundered to a 2-win team. 

Beckman did himself no favors, but Saban or Meyer wasn't going to win with what Zook left

TheBeastisback wrote: sorry, I didn't mean to insult you. I was trying to needle the AH guy. But, yeah, I think the team here was capable of winning at least a couple of conference games with adequate coaching.

UofIL25 wrote:

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

I know I speak for many here, but criticizing Zook in no way makes Beckman "my guy" or "our guy"

By, year to year drop, I assume you mean going from 6 (or, 7) to 2, correct?

Zook's 2011 team won 6 regular season games and the following players did not return from that team:  Jenkins, T. Wilson, Allen, T, Henry, Mercilus, Cornell, Ford, I. Thomas, etc.  It added one of the conference's worst recruiting classes and not a single consensus 4* player

Beast (or anyone), do you think Beckman was left with a (regular season) 6 win team?  Not a chance.

Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Also, if things were always the same from year to year in terms of personnel then your argument would hold merit.

The fact of the matter is that players change, schemes change and the players replacing those who leave are either better or worse.  Looking at recruiting rankings from 2010-2012 we can see that those classes were just awful and are just now having to start getting a bulk of the playing time.

Also, and I've already made this clear on here multiple times, just because I'm presenting these things doesn't mean I think Beckman can do no wrong.

I've said multiple times that he (obviously) needs to show improvement after how bad last year was.

However, for people to constantly be on here posting non-factual information and to suggest that after one year he should be gone or that he's the worst hire we've ever had is just stupid.

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Whether TB is the worst hire we've ever had remains to be seen.  It could turn out not to be the case and I, for one, am hopeful that a remarkable turnaround occurs.  As yet, though, there's little evidence to disprove the assertion made by of TB's detractors.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Also, if things were always the same from year to year in terms of personnel then your argument would hold merit.

The fact of the matter is that players change, schemes change and the players replacing those who leave are either better or worse.  Looking at recruiting rankings from 2010-2012 we can see that those classes were just awful and are just now having to start getting a bulk of the playing time.

Also, and I've already made this clear on here multiple times, just because I'm presenting these things doesn't mean I think Beckman can do no wrong.

I've said multiple times that he (obviously) needs to show improvement after how bad last year was.

However, for people to constantly be on here posting non-factual information and to suggest that after one year he should be gone or that he's the worst hire we've ever had is just stupid.

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

That was why I said among....

ahsftbll32 wrote: Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Again, the point is useless because things don't happen in a vacuum.  There are dozens of variables that go into each year that determine the +/- in wins and losses from the previous year, especially when you are switching coaches.

This isn't that hard to figure out.

TheBeastisback wrote: That was why I said among....

ahsftbll32 wrote: Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Other than the fact that it was his first year and he demonstrated success at building up another program, yes I agree.

CapitalIllini wrote:
Whether TB is the worst hire we've ever had remains to be seen.  It could turn out not to be the case and I, for one, am hopeful that a remarkable turnaround occurs.  As yet, though, there's little evidence to disprove the assertion made by of TB's detractors.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Also, if things were always the same from year to year in terms of personnel then your argument would hold merit.

The fact of the matter is that players change, schemes change and the players replacing those who leave are either better or worse.  Looking at recruiting rankings from 2010-2012 we can see that those classes were just awful and are just now having to start getting a bulk of the playing time.

Also, and I've already made this clear on here multiple times, just because I'm presenting these things doesn't mean I think Beckman can do no wrong.

I've said multiple times that he (obviously) needs to show improvement after how bad last year was.

However, for people to constantly be on here posting non-factual information and to suggest that after one year he should be gone or that he's the worst hire we've ever had is just stupid.

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

The problem with Beckman is that he is so incompetent, he doesnt have any schemes to run, so you have to scratch that excuse

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Seems we're in full agreement.  There was a reason TB was hired, but at this point in his tenure at UI, there's been little to no evidence of it.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Other than the fact that it was his first year and he demonstrated success at building up another program, yes I agree.

CapitalIllini wrote:
Whether TB is the worst hire we've ever had remains to be seen.  It could turn out not to be the case and I, for one, am hopeful that a remarkable turnaround occurs.  As yet, though, there's little evidence to disprove the assertion made by TB's detractors.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Um, how about when Zook took a team with 9 regular season wins and then had them at 5 the next year?

Also, if things were always the same from year to year in terms of personnel then your argument would hold merit.

The fact of the matter is that players change, schemes change and the players replacing those who leave are either better or worse.  Looking at recruiting rankings from 2010-2012 we can see that those classes were just awful and are just now having to start getting a bulk of the playing time.

Also, and I've already made this clear on here multiple times, just because I'm presenting these things doesn't mean I think Beckman can do no wrong.

I've said multiple times that he (obviously) needs to show improvement after how bad last year was.

However, for people to constantly be on here posting non-factual information and to suggest that after one year he should be gone or that he's the worst hire we've ever had is just stupid.

TheBeastisback wrote: I haven't looked it up yet but the year to year drop in wins engineered by your guy Beckman might be among the worst in post wwII Illini history.

ahsftbll32 wrote: Nevermind the fact that it was a team that lost 6 in a row, lost their only offensive threat, lost maybe the nations best pass rusher as well as 3-4 other starters on D that were key to that unit, a team that was just starting to have the players from recruiting classes in the 50's, 60's, 70's nationally start to take over as upperclassmen, or that we were implementing new schemes.

Also, go back and look at Zook's recruiting classes and tell me how many of those stud players either played well or even made it to campus...

Of Zook's first full recruiting class (2006) the 4*'s were Cumberland, Duvalt, Chris James, Rahkeem Smith, Marques Wilkins, and Juice.  How many of those contributed anything close to their ranking while at Illinois?  One, Juice.

Zook got a ton of athletes to Champaign but didn't know how to recruit football players or guys who fit what schemes they were trying to run.  He just wanted as many fast, strong, athletic guys on campus as possible and thought it would just magically equate to a good football team.

Other than all of that, your post was spot on...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

STLINI wrote: So, comparitively speaking, each coach had 2 wins and 0 conference wins in their first season.  What sense does it make to compare a guys 7 year career to 1 season?  I really can't believe people are talking about a "legacy" after 1 year.  Let it play out. 

CapitalIllini wrote:
Unfortunately, comparatively speaking, the Zooker's lookin' like a Hall-of-Famer at this point.

ahsftbll32 wrote: You mean sorta like Guenther and Zook did?

HairClubforSelf wrote: Beckman and Thomas' legacy will be very similiar to this

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nc...ooley-dave-hart

Both will leave it for the next two guys to clean up which hopefully happens next from next October to December

Illinigrad wrote: Rats is right. Comparing Beckman's start at IL to Zook is comparing apples and oranges.  It still is mind boggling that Beckman could take a returning bowl team with experienced players and trash an entire season.  Appointing a staff that clearly did not have the needed experience to win in the BIG was the second sign that Beckman was in over his head.  The first sign was his initial presser.  What was MT thinking?  Was Beckman his last choice?  We are going to have a really nice scoreboard this coming season which unfortunately will post a bunch of losing scores.

There were some very significant injuries last season that you are overlooking.

Beckman's legacy will be that somehow, against all logic, he was still able to convince 4 posters on this board, ahsftbll32, UofIL25, STLINI and surfpimp, that there was reason for hope for Illini football with him still in place as the head coach.

That is TRULY a remarkable accomplishment ... that he could somehow find 4 people like that is amazing ...

rats60 wrote: Zook took over a team that had won 4 games the previous 2 seasons. Beckman took over a team that had won 14 games the previous 2 seasons. So, people weren't suprised by Zook only winning 2 games, Beckman going 2-10 was a shock.

There was also optimism about recruiting with Zook bringing in the #4 class in the B1G with 6 4 star recruits and 1 top 100 player. Beckman has a worse class with guys decommitting left and right.

There is no question Beckman did a horrible job of coaching last year. And I agree that it was no shock that Zook did poorly in year 1 and it was shocking for Beckman. However, in hindsight, Beckman had much less to work with than our rose colored glasses thought coming into the season. A very mediocre, borderline bowl team that loses multiple playmakers and replaces them with young, inexperienced, poorly rated recruits is no longer a bowl team. Add in a TON of injuries to the returning starters and their backups, and you have a disaster on your hands. Beckman did about as bad of a job handling that as possible, but maybe it shouldn't have been such a shock that we did so poorly. Of course, you and others are so biased against Beckman that you would never concede an inch to admit that last year's team likely wouldn't have been bowling under most coaches.

And as far as recruiting goes, the bias continues. The 2013 class is plenty good to be optimistic. It's just those of you who are on an anti-Beckman campaign that can't allow yourselves to appreciate the players coming in. There are 7 guys in this class that are rated as borderline 3/4 star or better. That's equivalent to guys like Mikel, AJ Jenkins, Foster, Jon Davis, O'Toole, Millines, etc. But again, since you don't like Beckman, let's just cut the data how we want, point out the lack of 4 stars and assume that all the players are MAC-caliber players.