• 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!

Historically Competitive?

A

Azdeac

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
894
Reaction score
70
Location
Scottsdale, AZ
Not even close . . .

From 2001-2009 - Wake lost 10 games by 20+ points. Average = 1+ blowout per season
From 2010-present - Wake has lost 15 games by 20+. Average = 4+ blowouts per season

Caldwell - 28 20pt+ losses in 8 season = Average 3.5 blowouts per season
 
Number of seasons in Caldwell's career with more than 2 conference wins? Two.

Number of seasons in Grobe's career with less than 3 conference wins? Two.

Keep the Caldwell talk coming. For those of us that have gone through both regimes, it is hilarious to compare them.
 
DCDeac said:
Number of seasons in Caldwell's career with more than 2 conference wins? Two.

Number of seasons in Grobe's career with less than 3 conference wins? Two.

Keep the Caldwell talk coming. For those of us that have gone through both regimes, it is hilarious to compare them.
Click to expand...

I was in undergrad during the Caldwell era. Jim Grobe 2001-2006, and maybe 2008-2009, certainly was a huge improvement. What worries me is that Jim Grobe 2010-??? looks, and feels, more and more like Caldwell every day, complete with blowout losses, empty stands, and a team that doesn't appear to give a shit.
 
Deacon923 said:
I was in undergrad during the Caldwell era. Jim Grobe 2001-2006, and maybe 2008-2009, certainly was a huge improvement. What worries me is that Jim Grobe 2010-??? looks, and feels, more and more like Caldwell every day, complete with blowout losses, empty stands, and a team that doesn't appear to give a shit.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we all know Grobe's tenure from 2001 to even 2009 aren't even comparable to Caldwell's tenure, but all that is in the past and right now it's Caldwell-esque with no signs of improving.
 
Wake Forest from 2010 to the current has been slightly better than the average Caldwell time. Caldwell took us to the Aloha Bowl in 1999 and Grobe went to the Music City in 2011. I think that 2010 to current has been very comparable with Caldwell's final few years at Wake correct?

Caldwell's last four years:

5-6 (3-5)
3-8 (2-6)
7-5 (3-5)
2-9 (1-7)

Winning percentage: .378; ACC winning percentage: .281

Grobe's last four years (counting this year as year 4)

3-9 (1-7)
6-7 (5-3)
5-7 (3-5)
2-3 (0-2)

Winning percentage: .381; ACC winning percentage: .346

If my math is correct, there really isn't much of a difference other than how much Grobe is getting paid is there?
 
Deacon923 said:
I was in undergrad during the Caldwell era. Jim Grobe 2001-2006, and maybe 2008-2009, certainly was a huge improvement. What worries me is that Jim Grobe 2010-??? looks, and feels, more and more like Caldwell every day, complete with blowout losses, empty stands, and a team that doesn't appear to give a shit.
Click to expand...

Yep. When we got destroyed at Stanford in 2010, that was pretty much the end of the era of good feelings.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Wake Forest from 2010 to the current has been slightly better than the average Caldwell time. Caldwell took us to the Aloha Bowl in 1999 and Grobe went to the Music City in 2011. I think that 2010 to current has been very comparable with Caldwell's final few years at Wake correct?

Caldwell's last four years:

5-6 (3-5)
3-8 (2-6)
7-5 (3-5)
2-9 (1-7)

Winning percentage: .378; ACC winning percentage: .281

Grobe's last four years (counting this year as year 4)

3-9 (1-7)
6-7 (5-3)
5-7 (3-5)
2-3 (0-2)

Winning percentage: .381; ACC winning percentage: .346

If my math is correct, there really isn't much of a difference other than how much Grobe is getting paid is there?
Click to expand...

Again, if you lived through it, I think you'd understand. This year we've played 2 conference games including one against a national title contender, so while we may get blanked it's not fair to compare it to a full Caldwell year. So Grobe's last 3 horrible years we have 9 ACC wins and a bowl appearance. Throw out Caldwell's single bowl appearance year, add up every conference win in the rest of his Wake career, and you get 9 ACC wins in 7 years.

While I'm not thrilled with Grobe retaining Lobo and agree it may be time for him to move on or retire, this Caldwell talk is a joke. The team was so, so bad. We're going ape shit about Grobe when he went 5-3 two years ago, went to a bowl game, and had us a field goal away from an ACC Championship game appearance. Caldwell went 4 consecutive years without winning more than a single conference game. He didn't win a conference game at home until he beat Duke by one point in his 4th year. Seriously imagine that for a second as a supporter of the program. Not one home conference win until the 2nd to last game of year number 4.

And the program was so bad we kept him 3 more years without a bowl appearance.

Just let that sink in.
 
Everything you say is true but it seems that you'd rather look at what Grobe accomplished in 2006-2008 rather than the recent results. That's a valid point of view, but if we end up going 2-10, 3-9, or even 4-8, we're paying Jim Grobe 1.3 million a year in base salary to give almost identical results to what we paid Caldwell to do over a four-year period his final four years at Wake Forest.

If you think Grobe deserves more time based upon past results four and five plus years ago, then that's one argument, it's another discussion to say that the team we've had for the past four years is substantially better than a four-year period which will yield the same type of record. Also there are more bowl games now, an additional game a year, and a division format where teams who are mediocre can stay in the chase longer. Wake was lucky to get Duke every year for a guaranteed win for almost 12 years. Now Grobe took advantage of this, but half the teams in the Atlantic didn't get play Duke and some had to play Georgia Tech or Virginia Tech. Wake basically started with a half game advantage on half the conference every year since the ACC went to divisions. This makes it much easier to compete for an ACC division crown.

Again, kudos to Grobe for having us in position a couple of years ago to make the championship game and one might argue that Caldwell's teams would have never been close to that. I don't think that you can argue though that this four year period is substantially better than another four year period when the records are going to be almost identical.
 
Caldwell's final 4 years we won 6 conference games by double digits and lost 17 conference games by double digits (every loss we had Caldwell's final year was by double digits in the conference, we beat Duke by 2)

In the last 3 years plus two games, we have won 2 conference games by double digits and lost 11 conference games by double digits.

It's not like these aren't comparable.
 
Eh, it's basically arguing about how horrible shit smells.

In my mind, Grobe's peak earned him this year at a minimum. After this year - if we do lose out which seems possible - I'm not losing any sleep over his firing or retiring or whatever. He kept Lobo, he's made his bed.

But Grobe's previous 3 years are comparable to Caldwell's best 3 years, so comparing them in any way as equals to me is laughable. And if you lived through those years, Grobe's teams have been so clearly superior year in and year out that it's just not even in the same universe.

Great that the fan base expects more now that we've seen Wake can be competitive. Complacency is a killer, and everyone should demand more than what we're seeing this year. The topic of this post suggests we're worse off now than historically with Caldwell, and that is a joke.
 
I guess. OP just said we're averaging more blowouts over the last four years than we did over Caldwell's entire stint. What does that mean to you?
 
Nothing. Blowouts are overrated. Conference wins and losses are a much better method of comparison, and even at his worst Grobe is comparable to Caldwell's best seasons over the past 3 years. Which is pretty unbelievable.
 
Well I would feel a lot better about Wake if we had lost 35-20 than losing 56-7 or whatever the score was.
 
Blowout losses are important when you're averaging getting your ass kicked 1 out of every 3 games. That's not "historically competitive". My OP was to point out that Grobe's past 4 years are eerily similar to the Jim Caldwell disaster. This is NOT the same coach who over his first 9 years built a team nobody wanted to play.
 
Season 11 was better than seasons 1-4 for Grobe though.

No disagreement that we suck hairy balls right now. I get the outrage - especially with basketball being a dumpster fire.
 
i would have to think that blowout losses matter in recruiting, too. these kids are winners in high school. they have pride. they don't want to come play for a team that is getting clowned on a regular basis. I have to think that Grobe's ability to get us competitive in the early 00's helped get some of the recruits that led us to a historically great stretch in 2006-2010.
 
Replace Presbyterian/Elon with Appy State and these records are very close.

Wakeforest22890 said:
Wake Forest from 2010 to the current has been slightly better than the average Caldwell time. Caldwell took us to the Aloha Bowl in 1999 and Grobe went to the Music City in 2011. I think that 2010 to current has been very comparable with Caldwell's final few years at Wake correct?

Caldwell's last four years:

5-6 (3-5)
3-8 (2-6)
7-5 (3-5)
2-9 (1-7)

Winning percentage: .378; ACC winning percentage: .281

Grobe's last four years (counting this year as year 4)

3-9 (1-7)
6-7 (5-3)
5-7 (3-5)
2-3 (0-2)

Winning percentage: .381; ACC winning percentage: .346

If my math is correct, there really isn't much of a difference other than how much Grobe is getting paid is there?
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top