• 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!

2-53 (solution?) (post Dook)

palmab03 said:
Not voluntarily, for sure. But we'll leave.
Click to expand...

Somebody here gets it. There is no reasonable future for WF in this new ACC as far as consistently competitive football & basketball are concerned...and particularly in football, where there is no hope at all for even minimal competitiveness. One miracle conference championship in the last 45 years in the old, less competitive conference should have made that abundantly clear to any reasonable person. It doesn't matter who the coach or the AD is. Clawson cannot win here. Grobe couldn't do it again. Hell, Vince Lombardi couldn't win consistently in the situation WF faces in this conference today.

ETA: If you consider playing 4 chicken-shit non-conference games like Delaware, Army, Elon, Presbyterian or Tulane, etc. and trying to find 2 wins in the conference to get to 6-6 and go to some meaningless bowl in mid-December to be "competitive", I suppose you might be able to do that occasionally. It all depends on your definition of being competitive.
 
Last edited:
bkf is going to be so pissed off when we have a run in one of the sports again. He will probably go back to his old standby trolling of accusing our players of being thugs.
 
bobknightfan said:
Somebody here gets it. There is no reasonable future for WF in this new ACC as far as consistently competitive football & basketball are concerned...and particularly in football, where there is no hope at all for even minimal competitiveness. One miracle conference championship in the last 45 years in the old, less competitive conference should have made that abundantly clear to any reasonable person. It doesn't matter who the coach or the AD is. Clawson cannot win here. Grobe couldn't do it again. Hell, Vince Lombardi couldn't win consistently in the situation WF faces in this conference today.

ETA: If you consider playing 4 chicken-shit non-conference games like Delaware, Army, Elon, Presbyterian or Tulane, etc. and trying to find 2 wins in the conference to get to 6-6 and go to some meaningless bowl in mid-December to be "competitive", I suppose you might be able to do that occasionally. It all depends on your definition of being competitive.
Click to expand...

What situation is it that makes it so hopeless for us? The conference landscape, or self-imposed LOWF restraints?
 
BKF, the guy who hasn't cared about Wake athletics for 25 years, sure spends a lot of time talking about Wake athletics.
 
We all get the same number of scholarships in basketball and football as everybody else.

Yes our academics are harder than the majority of those in the ACC. Is that a legitimate "excuse"? Yes. It's a real hindrance.
Can we overcome that? Yes, we have shown that in the past we can.
Do I like asking questions and answering them myself? Yes.

Why are schools like Northwestern, Duke, and to a lesser extent Notre Dame and Stanford (obviously different circumstances than we have) succeeding while we are flailing.

The answer to that is coaching. The type of school has a lot of impact on the type of player that you can recruit from an academic standpoint, but these days a coach can win pretty much anywhere. We just use the "we're an elite school and we have high standards so we can't win" as a crutch so when we fail we feel better about ourselves.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
We all get the same number of scholarships in basketball and football as everybody else.

Yes our academics are harder than the majority of those in the ACC. Is that a legitimate "excuse"? Yes. It's a real hindrance.
Can we overcome that? Yes, we have shown that in the past we can.
Do I like asking questions and answering them myself? Yes.

Why are schools like Northwestern, Duke, and to a lesser extent Notre Dame and Stanford (obviously different circumstances than we have) succeeding while we are flailing.

The answer to that is coaching. The type of school has a lot of impact on the type of player that you can recruit from an academic standpoint, but these days a coach can win pretty much anywhere. We just use the "we're an elite school and we have high standards so we can't win" as a crutch so when we fail we feel better about ourselves.
Click to expand...

Not sure I'd consider Northwestern as having consistent success, but in terms of Duke, ND and Stanford money is a big factor. It's an arms race now and like it or not Wake doesn't have as deep pockets to draw upon as the others you mentioned. That being said, I also think our athletic department amazingly thinks that money will lead to success, as opposed to success leading to money. I don't invest my money in poorly run companies, and the same applies with this athletic department.
 
Rolfe said:
Not sure I'd consider Northwestern as having consistent success, but in terms of Duke, ND and Stanford money is a big factor. It's an arms race now and like it or not Wake doesn't have as deep pockets to draw upon as the others you mentioned. That being said, I also think our athletic department amazingly thinks that money will lead to success, as opposed to success leading to money. I don't invest my money in poorly run companies, and the same applies with this athletic department.
Click to expand...

The money arms race argument applies to football much more so than basketball. Why does Clemson historically suck at basketball? Why is Miami suddenly good? Leadership and program building. UVA has even fewer excuses than Wake and they had 9 out of 10 seasons under 20 wins in the 2000's. Then they hire a guy with only 3 years of head coaching experience, he loses 31 games in 2 years, next thing you know they're winning conference titles.

Sure, there are a handful of programs like UNC and Kentucky that will get superstars handed to them on a silver platter year after year - but because those kids can leave after one year even they can't create an uncompetitive landscape for programs that can consistently recruit, consistently develop players, and have solid coaching schemes. And there are programs with no money in garbage conferences that will never be good.

There's absolutely nothing to prevent Wake from being successful, but the problem with consistency is that it's performance over time. It simply takes time to figure out whether the coach you hired and the staff they assembled and the recruiting philosophies you follow work. In Bennett's 4th year UVA regressed - bounced in round 1 of the ACC tourney and didn't even make the NCAA's. Years 5 and 6 - 1st in the ACC regular season with an ACC Tournament title and a Sweet 16.

Pick the right guy and it can still take time to be good. Pick the wrong guy and it takes time to find out you're wrong. What sucks is that both paths generally involve losing a bunch.
 
Rolfe said:
Not sure I'd consider Northwestern as having consistent success, but in terms of Duke, ND and Stanford money is a big factor. It's an arms race now and like it or not Wake doesn't have as deep pockets to draw upon as the others you mentioned. That being said, I also think our athletic department amazingly thinks that money will lead to success, as opposed to success leading to money. I don't invest my money in poorly run companies, and the same applies with this athletic department.
Click to expand...

I'm working on a BSD piece that will probably go live at the end of the year talking about the latter part of your post. Basically saying apathy and hopelessness doesn't generate revenue and that starts at the top. Still working through a lot of it in my mind.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
I'm working on a BSD piece that will probably go live at the end of the year talking about the latter part of your post. Basically saying apathy and hopelessness doesn't generate revenue and that starts at the top. Still working through a lot of it in my mind.
Click to expand...

10 months is a long time to write one article.
 
Not sure why I do this, but here are some of the programs that have won on the road at GT since WF's last road win there:

- UNC (Greensboro)
- East Tennessee State
- Illinois-Chicago (twice)
- Mercer
- Charlotte
- Penn State
- USC (Upstate)

USC (Upstate) which only recently became D-1 and is coached by former Deac Eddie Payne has more ACC road wins since the 2014 season (2) than WF . USC (Upstate) won at VT in 2014 and at GT in 2015. So, not only would C-USA schools have a better ACC road record than WF, Atlantic Sun schools would have a better ACC road record than WF (1), even though WF has had 19 more chances at road wins than USC (Upstate). USC f-ing Upstate.
 
I have read and worry that the other members of the ACC will eventually run Wake off. Wake and BC are the only schools that have not been competitive in basketball or football in the last 5_6 years. And BC at least brings a major media market. I have read that other ACC schools fell like Wake just hangs out to pick up a check. Really guess you could throw NCSU I with Wake and BC.
 
chill43 said:
I have read and worry that the other members of the ACC will eventually run Wake off. Wake and BC are the only schools that have not been competitive in basketball or football in the last 5_6 years. And BC at least brings a major media market. I have read that other ACC schools fell like Wake just hangs out to pick up a check. Really guess you could throw NCSU I with Wake and BC.
Click to expand...

NCSU has 2 sweet sixteens' in 4 years, recently went to the College World Series, and usually goes to a bowl game. Right at the moment, Wake and BC would kill for that kind of success.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top