• 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!

Wake Forest Twitter Thread aka Coach Scheier wins the Internet

Turd Ferguson said:
I'm not disputing our shittiness prior to Grobe, but bowl appearances is a bad measure. I mean the the 1970 ACC championship team did not go to a bowl, while a couple of things go the other way and this shitty 5-7 team could've gone.

So yes, Grobe's success from 06-08 was special, our teams have not looked any better the last four years than Caldwell's last four. The records are not that different, and I would argue Caldwell was coaching in a stronger conference than what has been the case recently.
Click to expand...

This is a really good point and one that hasn't been made enough. Can anybody reasonably say that the ACC is better now then it was then?
 
The 1970 ACC championship team finished 6-5 and lost to Nebraska 36-12, South Carolina 43-7 and Houston 26-2.
 
YoungBuck95 said:
For those that didn't check the Caldwell comparison thread. I went through the numbers and wins/losses & money earned.

This year Grobe got $460,000 check per win. Unacceptable. To top that number off, he's had 36-39 record, with a conference record of 21-27 since the 2006 season. He's made $13,800,000 in the six seasons since, excluding incentives for the 3 bowls we've made it to. The check per win comes out to be $383,333. The check per conference win comes out to be $657,142.
Click to expand...

I think this is the point. I would love to shoot for the moon and be great at football and all that, but even for the most LOWF of you out there, you have to agree that this is excessive and we are in no way getting a fair return on investment. We could probably get Caldwell back for much cheaper and get pretty similar results. Plus, he has coached Peyton Manning now, so he has that going for him.

Paging Gentleman Jim...
 
ChrisL68 said:
The 1970 ACC championship team finished 6-5 and lost to Nebraska 36-12, South Carolina 43-7 and Houston 26-2.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is. They had a winning record and won the conference and didn't go to a bowl. Jim has had the luxury of coaching in a pretty shitty ACC when the threshold for getting a bowl bid is laughably low. Just saying you shouldn't use bowl appearances as a measuring stick.
 
Strickland33 said:
This is a really good point and one that hasn't been made enough. Can anybody reasonably say that the ACC is better now then it was then?
Click to expand...

No, but it is all relative when in conference. By that, I mean, maybe the ACC isn't as good, but I would argue that the players across the conference (including WFU) aren't as good either, so it all kindof evens out until you get OOC. Recruiting is largely based on conferences, so if the ACC is (to borrow a phrase I have heard from others) watered-down now, it is watered-down for everybody so I think the comparison of Grobe v Caldwell is fair.

I don't think Grobe goes this year. I think both coordinators do. Next year is a make or break year for Grobe. Depending on how many players are left, the team should have plenty of experience.
 
While we will never be world beaters I would be perfectly happy with being a bowl team year in year out. 7-5 on a yearly bases in the current state of the ACC is not that much to ask. Baby steps. Which is why I think we should try to be a yearly bowl team first and then take the next step to be a legit regular conference championship contender. Get Vandy off the schedule they are trending upward play three very easily winnable ooc games and one crowd pleaser.
 
ChrisL68 said:
About the same level of crappyness nationally.
Click to expand...

For one, FSU won a national championship in 1999 and lost in the national championship in 2000. When is the next time that we get somebody in that game?
 
Thanks for the info, pigskin. Interesting to hear that when we are consistently a first half team.
 
Strickland33 said:
I think you and I both know that that's untrue...
Click to expand...

ChrisL68 said:
About the same level of crappyness nationally.
Click to expand...


What are you talking about. The ACC used to be called FSU and the 8 dwarfs. Carolina had some good teams in the mid 90s. Virginia and GT had some decent teams. But the league sucked then too.

Dooley's bowl team in 92 had no regular season wins over > 500 teams. Caldwell's bowl team in 99 had one. Georgia Tech on senior day.
 
ChrisL68 said:
What are you talking about. The ACC used to be called FSU and the 8 dwarfs. Carolina had some good teams in the mid 90s. Virginia and GT had some decent teams. But the league sucked then too.

Dooley's bowl team in 92 had no regular season wins over > 500 teams. Caldwell's bowl team in 99 had one. Georgia Tech on senior day.
Click to expand...

My point is that at least the ACC had FSU. What does our conference hang it's hat on now? A bunch of teams that rise in the rankings because they beat each other on mediocre OOC schedules before falling down the stretch to teams they should beat if they're actually worth a damn? I watched FSU drop to Florida and Clemson drop to SC last night and neither of those teams looked like they deserved a shot in a legit bowl.
 
ChrisL68 said:
Here is the 99 ACC football standings.

1999 ACC football standings

ConfOverall
TeamWLWL
#1 Florida State †8–012–0
#17 Georgia Tech5–38–4
Virginia5–37–5
Clemson5–36–6
Wake Forest3–57–5
NC State3–56–6
Duke3–53–8
Maryland2–65–6
North Carolina2–63–8


We beat Georgia Tech, State and Carolina.

We lost to Maryland at home and Duke.
Click to expand...

Well, that's more or less what we did this year, no?

Our only decent conference win was over 8-4 Carolina...
 
jamesda3 said:
While we will never be world beaters I would be perfectly happy with being a bowl team year in year out. 7-5 on a yearly bases in the current state of the ACC is not that much to ask. Baby steps. Which is why I think we should try to be a yearly bowl team first and then take the next step to be a legit regular conference championship contender. Get Vandy off the schedule they are trending upward play three very easily winnable ooc games and one crowd pleaser.
Click to expand...

The cowardly remark doesn't seem that far off base. Any more ideas on how we can lower ourselves further to make a toilet bowl every year? Instead of running scared from Vandy, how about we have some balls and actually try to improve the program and hold the coaching staff responsible?
 
I know we all like to latch onto wins/losses as a method of comparing Grobe and Caldwell, but I'd submit that looking to the Sagarin rankings of their respective teams is necessary too. It's hard to tell whether Grobe has benefited from a weaker ACC, for example, and the Sagarin ratings help to clear that question up by controlling for our schedule every year. When you chart out the Sagarin ratings of their teams (data only available back to 1998), a couple things are clear:

1) Caldwell's final year was terrible, but his previous two years were hardly disastrous. In fact, it appears Caldwell's teams in '98 and '99 performed to the level of your typical Grobe team.
2) Our 2006-2008 years were legitimately awesome by Wake Forest standards.
3) Given the type of recruits we bring in, I think any Sagarin rating better than 65 or so is a good year for us. By that measure, Grobe has performed admirably for many years. The last 3 years, however, have been abysmal. To give an idea of where 102 and 113 stand, it's basically around an average FCS team. It's well off the reservation for any FBS bowl conference school, no matter how small.

9zx8wz.jpg


Edit: this may not be obvious, but a lower Sagarin rating is better. Thus, a #1 rating would be the best any team could have.
 
Last edited:
5-7
3-9
6-7
5-7
19-30

5-6
3-8
7-5
2-9
19-28

Last four years for Grobe and Caldwell and totals. Grobe had a very non-LOWF three year stretch, but the last four have been no better than pre-Grobe. And having watched our teams play, it is just ugly, uninspired, uninteresting football.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top