In Reply to: I see it a little differently posted by Cachorro on February 05, 2026 at 10:43:10
is their lack of a strong post presence and lack of a strong rebounding game. Most top teams have these two things going for them--both Illinois and Michigan averaging near 46 boards a game and 6 blocks, to UCLA's 36 boards per game and a bit over 3 blocks. Of course, both of those teams are much bigger than the Bruins, particularly Illinois with their two beefy 6'9 PFs, two 7 footers and their very good big guards at 6'6-6'7 (not counting the 6'2 injured Boswell in the guard group).
As an example of the differences here are a couple of comparisons of common opponent games. Last night, Illinois destroyed Northwestern by 40 points (84 to 44) and outrebounded them 48 to 20. In the recent Bruin game with Northwestern at Pauley, Bruins outscored NW by 7points (71 to 64) and were actually outscored the second half by NW---both teams had 29 rebounds. Quite a difference when ooking at the comparative numbers relative to a common opponent.
But then, here is another comparison. Illinois beat Rutgers by 26 points earlier (81 to 55--Rutgers actually outscored Illinois the second half). Illinois outrebounded them by 11 (41 to 30). Then UCLA recently beat Rutgers by 32 points 98 to 66 while outrebounding them 33 to 27.
So one comparison gives Illinois a big advantage while the other where UCLA demolished Rutgers, it seems like the the Bruins could be the better team. Based on these two comparisons, it looks like both teams could be fairly equal. But after watching Illinois in several games, the eye test tells me that it's not close with Illinois having a significant advantage. These are only opinions though. Of course, the Bruins will have a chance to mess up that viewpoint at Pauley later this month. I hope they do just that.