Well, I'm in no way connected to the Illinois program, but I'd ask you: have you ever seen a Petros team put an emphasis on distance? No. Have you ever seen a program where the event group of the director doesn't place an emphasis on his event area? No. So it's not a far leap to get there. Put another way, someone in an earlier post brought up their amazing signing class. Tell me, how many distance athletes comprised it?
I don't need a public statement (and have you ever seen a director publicly say they don't care about an event area?) from him to know the direction his program is going. People are creatures of habit by nature and we gravitate and do what we know best. Come on man. Besides given the number of programs that focus on distance (Wisconsin) and mid-distance (PSU) in the conference if you aren't going to make a concerted effort to put money there - you aren't going to be competitive. You'll get lucky every now and then, but it's not going to drive your team score.
I will grant you: with 18 scholarships on the women's side it is possible to be a well balanced program, especially if your school has great assistance programs outside of athletic aid (think academic aid, reciprocity agreements, etc). Anything that helps you stretch your dollar means you can be better in more event areas.
I don't even understand why you're in such a tizzy over stating the direction of a program. It happens everywhere: Milt has pushed UNC to be much more distance-centric, St. Clair at Nebraska throws heavy. It's not a knock on the other event groups or the coach - it's what happens.