• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Big 5 conference money disparity could lead to a shake up with the Big 12

WFU Lurker said:
Or maybe I realize that there are more fruitful outlets for my competitive desire than Wake Forest football.
Click to expand...

Because the fanbase lacks competitive desire.
 
sportsnut said:
And some lack a healthy dose of realism
Click to expand...

The alleged "realism" that WF cannot compete due to size is illusory and that's been proven by success of other small academic P5 institutions. WF's problem, and its fans' problem, is that they lack the courage and will to compete. It *always* has been.
 
Lohengrin said:
The alleged "realism" that WF cannot compete due to size is illusory and that's been proven by success of other small academic P5 institutions. WF's problem, and its fans' problem, is that they lack the courage and will to compete. It *always* has been.
Click to expand...

What other P5 schools that are roughly WF's size have competed successfully on any kind of regular basis in football?

Taking that even one step further, how many P5 even exist that are roughly WF's size......say 6,000 students or less?
 
Last edited:
Duke's enrollment is 6,626
Vandy's enrollment is 6,851
Stanford's enrollment is 7,019
Northwestern's enrollment is 8,405
Notre Dame's enrollment is 8,448
TCU's enrollment is 8,647
USC's enrollment is 10,321
Also, Miami's enrollment on the Coral Gables Campus is 4,500 (the total enrollment is 11,000)
The size of enrollment has absolutely nothing to do with athletic success as all of those private school programs compete an succeed against larger State U's in football and basketball.
 
Wake's undergrad enrollment is currently 4800. Total is just under 7700. So Duke's undergrad enrollment is about 1/3 larger than Wake's. And Wake is at or near an all time high in undergrad enrollment. The increase is about the only thing that Hatch has done that could have some positive impact on athletics.
 
Pilchard said:
Duke's enrollment is 6,626
Vandy's enrollment is 6,851
Stanford's enrollment is 7,019
Northwestern's enrollment is 8,405
Notre Dame's enrollment is 8,448
TCU's enrollment is 8,647
USC's enrollment is 10,321
Also, Miami's enrollment on the Coral Gables Campus is 4,500 (the total enrollment is 11,000)
The size of enrollment has absolutely nothing to do with athletic success as all of those private school programs compete an succeed against larger State U's in football and basketball.
Click to expand...

Comparing WF with Stanford, Notre Dame, Duke or Southern Cal is just plain silly. (Or those other schools, too, for that matter.) That's one of the biggest problems in discussions like this. Some WF people have a ridiculously inflated idea about what is realistically possible. That's also the reason why there is so much needless frustration.....they have raised the bar far beyond what should be reasonably expected.

Nothing anyone says is going to change those people's minds, though, so they will just have to keep getting frustrated and making up more false excuses as to why...for almost 100 years...WF has not been able to compete in P5 football on any kind of an even remotely consistent basis. One 3-year winning streak in the school's history. Just think how many different excuses have been made to explain why WF has only had one 3-year run of consecutive winning seasons in its entire history.

What Jim Grobe did during 2006 thru 2008 was a once-in-a-lifetime thing. Nobody did that at WF before him.....and nobody is going to do it at WF (in a P5 conference) after him. In the entire 62-year history of the ACC none of WF's 13 football coaches...not even Jim Grobe with those 3 magical years...managed to compile a winning record. And at 6-18 so far, I will lay strong odds that Dave Clawson will not be the first one to do so.

Feel free to keep beating your head against the wall, though. I went to my first WF game in 1958.....and I accepted the reality of what was reasonably possible in ACC football at WF long ago. Call that LOWF if it makes you feel better. I call it accepting 62 years of reality.
 
We get it. WF should drop its football program.

As for inflated expectations, perhaps you are confusing this Message Board with another, but most people here expect very little out of the football program.

Most people here doubt that WF will win 3 of 8 ACC games next year against a soft conference schedule in Clawson's 4th season with an experienced roster. Dave Clawson has a combined record of 6-18 in 3 years at WF, and the universal sentiment here supports him and continues to express patience. There is no fanbase in a Power V conference with lower expectations or demands less tangible results out of its football program. None.
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
We get it. WF should drop its football program.

As for inflated expectations, perhaps you are confusing this Message Board with another, but most people here expect very little out of the football program.

Most people here doubt that WF will win 3 of 8 ACC games next year against a soft conference schedule in Clawson's 4th season with an experienced roster. Dave Clawson has a combined record of 6-18 in 3 years at WF, and the universal sentiment here supports him and continues to express patience. There is no fanbase in a Power V conference with lower expectations or demands less tangible results out of its football program. None.
Click to expand...

This is his 3rd season.
 
Pilchard said:
We get it. WF should drop its football program.

As for inflated expectations, perhaps you are confusing this Message Board with another, but most people here expect very little out of the football program.

Most people here doubt that WF will win 3 of 8 ACC games next year against a soft conference schedule in Clawson's 4th season with an experienced roster. Dave Clawson has a combined record of 6-18 in 3 years at WF, and the universal sentiment here supports him and continues to express patience. There is no fanbase in a Power V conference with lower expectations or demands less tangible results out of its football program. None.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand what I am saying. I don't think WF should drop football. I just think it should play it somewhere other than the ACC. We can't compete in the ACC in football. Never have, really, if you look at the entire 62 years we have been in the conference, and certainly cannot now.

And you say the fanbase supports Clawson, even though it doesn't expect him to have even a .500 conference record after 4 years....yet that same fanbase stopped supporting Jim Grobe, who performed unheard of miracles for them.
 
bobknightfan said:
You misunderstand what I am saying. I don't think WF should drop football. I just think it should play it somewhere other than the ACC. We can't compete in the ACC in football. Never have, really, if you look at the entire 62 years we have been in the conference, and certainly cannot now.

And you say the fanbase supports Clawson, even though it doesn't expect him to have even a .500 conference record after 4 years....yet that same fanbase stopped supporting Jim Grobe, who performed unheard of miracles for them.
Click to expand...

The fan base stopped supporting Grobe because he stopped trying.
 
Because Jim Grobe stopped being interested in coaching football. Again, WF doesn't have an insane fanbase with outrageous expectations. The WF fanbase (which is almost an oxymoron) didn't railroad Grobe. It was simply time for a good thing to end before it became a very bad thing. The last two seasons (2014 and 2015) of really awful football would've been the same or worse had Grobe continued. The talent level was incredibly poor. Everyone knows this, including Grobe himself. Grobe's legacy would've taken a hit had he continued at WF.

With few exceptions, anyone affiliated with WF loves Jim Grobe. Hands down the best coach WF has had in its 50+ years in the ACC. Even so, his commitment to the program dropped off the table over his last couple of years. That is undeniable. FWIW, I don't blame Grobe at all. He was 61 when he coached his last football game at WF, and coaching football, particularly at WF, can't operate on auto-pilot. It's essentially a 12 to 16 hour a day, year-round commitment. Just a grueling job, that does pay incredibly well. Grobe is a great coach, but in acknowledging what Grobe did also naturally means someone else can do the same or at least come close.

Difficult? Of course. Impossible. Obviously not.
 
Last edited:
Weird to see Pilch admit all that.
 
PhDeac said:
Weird to see Pilch admit all that.
Click to expand...

Really? Looking forward to seeing some more magic in the search of past postings, but I had no problem with WF and Grobe parting ways after the 2013 season. Time to end a good thing.

Also, the abject lack of talent on hand left by Grobe in 2014 and 2015 was obvious to anyone that watched the games.
 
Last edited:
Pilch, you were constantly on my ass for posting the same stuff you posted.
 
Not at all.

The major issue to me was and still is those that question play-calling ignoring every step that goes into building a football program. People acted like the problem with WF football in 2013 (and every year before that) was that WF didn't call the right plays or used the wrong scheme on defense. The problem was and still is the lack of talent on hand. WF hired an entirely new staff with great credentials and the results were the same. The play calling changed, but the results didn't; WF was good when it had good players and sucked when it had sucky players. It has always been that way. Yet, many who post here acted the like the difference between the wins and losses was that WF didn't use split backs or some other inane claim.

The talent level had dried up by Grobe's last years and he didn't have the energy to build it back up. Always agreed with that thought.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top