How Many Wins for 2016 Wake Football?

[wsc8521s]

It certainly didn't correlate "extremely well" at Wake from 2006 - 2009 when we had a worse record every year even as we returned more experience.

It's a lot harder to improve on 11 or 9 wins than it is to improve on 3.

And we did not have more experience in '09 than '08. At quarterback, yes, but otherwise it wasn't close

 

[bobknightfan]

The bottom line is that Jim Grobe actually ruined WF fans' expectations forever with what he accomplished from 2006 thru 2008....which was a total outlier in all of WF football history. Why was it an outlier? WF has been playing football for how long...100 years or so? In that 100 years or whatever it has been, that was the only time that 1) WF has ever had 3 straight winning seasons, and 2) WF has ever won more than 8 games in a season. And now the ACC is tougher than it has ever been in football.

28 wins & 3 bowls in three years. Even the millennials here are not going to live long enough to ever see another 3-year run even close to the one Grobe had from 2006 thru 2008.

 

[StrickDeac]

The bottom line is that Jim Grobe actually ruined WF fans' expectations forever with what he accomplished from 2006 thru 2008....which was a total outlier in all of WF football history. Why was it an outlier? WF has been playing football for how long...100 years or so? In that 100 years or whatever it has been, that was the only time that 1) WF has ever had 3 straight winning seasons, and 2) WF has ever won more than 8 games in a season. And now the ACC is tougher than it has ever been in football.

28 wins & 3 bowls in three years. Even the millennials here are not going to live long enough to ever see another 3-year run even close to the one Grobe had from 2006 thru 2008.

A lot of what you say is partially true. I'm not sure we'll ever see 28 wins in 3 seasons again.

You can't tell me the "ACC is tougher than it has ever been" when we are playing Duke, BC, and Syracuse every year though.

The gap between the have's and have-not's has grown considerably. (RE: P5 vs. G5)


It's easier to get to a bowl now than it has ever been in the past. 6 wins gets you in. A mediocre team that wins 2-3 ACC games and schedules smartly OOC gets to a bowl.

 

[bobknightfan]

A lot of what you say is partially true. I'm not sure we'll ever see 28 wins in 3 seasons again.

You can't tell me the "ACC is tougher than it has ever been" when we are playing Duke, BC, and Syracuse every year though.

The gap between the have's and have-not's has grown considerably. (RE: P5 vs. G5)


It's easier to get to a bowl now than it has even been in the past. 6 wins gets you in. A mediocre team that wins 2-3 ACC games and schedules smartly OOC gets to a bowl.

LOL. Beat Presbyterian, Elon, Liberty & Gardner-Webb....go 2-6 in the ACC and "earn" a trip to Shreveport a week before Christmas to play another shitty 6-6 team in a totally meaningless "bowl" in 40-degree, rainy weather.

Is that the plan to return WF football to relevance? I'd love to pay top dollar for season tickets & an early December flight to beautiful Shreveport, La to watch all of that garbage.

 

[Deaconblue]

NCAA has put a moratorium on establishing new bowls, because three bowls had to accept 5-7 teams last year because there weren't enough 6 win teams.

 

[Deacsfan27]

LOL. Beat Presbyterian, Elon, Liberty & Gardner-Webb....go 2-6 in the ACC and "earn" a trip to Shreveport a week before Christmas to play another shitty 6-6 team in a totally meaningless "bowl" in 40-degree, rainy weather.

Is that the plan to return WF football to relevance? I'd love to pay top dollar for season tickets & an early December flight to beautiful Shreveport, La to watch all of that garbage.

"Top dollar" lol.

Season tickets are like $100. I love football season for tailgating, hanging out with friends in good weather, and watching an occasional good football team come to Groves. That's how I grew up, and that was worth the money to me then, and now. Having a competitive football team is obviously nice, but it's not the primary reason that I buy season tickets (as sad as that is to say).

 

[cheeseheads12]

LOL. Beat Presbyterian, Elon, Liberty & Gardner-Webb....go 2-6 in the ACC and "earn" a trip to Shreveport a week before Christmas to play another shitty 6-6 team in a totally meaningless "bowl" in 40-degree, rainy weather.

Is that the plan to return WF football to relevance? I'd love to pay top dollar for season tickets & an early December flight to beautiful Shreveport, La to watch all of that garbage.

You clearly don't understand that you can't schedule 4 FCS teams to ensure a bowl bid. Well I guess we could, but we'd have to win like 9 games to get a bowl bid.

 

[bobknightfan]

You clearly don't understand that you can't schedule 4 FCS teams to ensure a bowl bid. Well I guess we could, but we'd have to win like 9 games to get a bowl bid.

OK, substitute Charlotte, Old Dominion & Tulane for three of them. The point's the same. You're trying to squeeze out a totally shitty, meaningless bowl bid by beating Presbyterian, Charlotte, ODU, Tulane & the two worst ACC teams on the schedule...just so you can say "We went to a bowl game!".

One shitty 6-6 team playing another shitty 6-6 team in the middle of December isn't "going to a bowl game". It's more like just adding a 13th game to the schedule.

In the 1950's many teams only played a 9-game schedule. In the 1960's, most teams played a 10-game schedule. Then it increased to an 11-game schedule....then to a 12-game schedule. All the changes were made for one reason.....more money. And that's all these worthless bowls are about....more money. They aren't really bowl games in any meaningful sense of the word. Years ago, there were only four bowl games on New Year's Day....and almost all of the 8 teams playing in those bowls were undefeated or had only one loss. There were a very few teams that had 2 losses & made a coveted New Year's Day Bowl.

Now, New Year's Day is just another regular Saturday afternoon football day. In 2011, 5 teams playing on New Year's Day had 7-5 records.

 

[StrickDeac]

OK, substitute Charlotte, Old Dominion & Tulane for three of them. The point's the same. You're trying to squeeze out a totally shitty, meaningless bowl bid by beating Presbyterian, Charlotte, ODU, Tulane & the two worst ACC teams on the schedule...just so you can say "We went to a bowl game!."

One shitty 6-6 team playing another shitty 6-6 team in the middle of December isn't "going to a bowl game."

Yes, actually today it is. Whether you think it's right or wrong, it's a bowl game. Ask Duke, NC State, or any number of our peers who have been doing it.

In the 1950's many teams only played a 9-game schedule. In the 1960's, most teams played a 10-game schedule. Then it increased to an 11-game schedule....then to a 12-game schedule. All the changes were made for one reason.....more money. And that's all these worthless bowls are about....more money.

Now, New Year's Day is just another regular Saturday afternoon football day. In 2011, 5 teams playing on New Year's Day had 7-5 records.

You are correct, but this isn't the 1950's anymore. That's nearly 70 years ago. Things change. You don't have to like them, but they do.

My point still stands. It's easier to get to a bowl now than it has ever been in the past. And with that, Wake should "expect" to be in bowl contention more often than they were in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s.

You change the rules, the strategy changes. That's business my friend.

 

[bobknightfan]

Yes, actually today it is. Whether you think it's right or wrong, it's a bowl game. Ask Duke, NC State, or any number of our peers who have been doing it.



You are correct, but this isn't the 1950's anymore. That's nearly 70 years ago. Things change. You don't have to like them, but they do.

My point still stands. It's easier to get to a bowl now than it has ever been in the past. And with that, Wake should "expect" to be in bowl contention more often than they were in the 50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s.

You change the rules, the strategy changes. That's business my friend.

Fair enough...but if you want to talk about "things changing", you also have to talk about the "value" of a bowl game changing. Bowl games used to be a reward for a better than average to really good season. Playing 40 bowl games and reaching the point where you have 5-7 teams playing in a bowl game significantly cheapens the value of what a bowl game is supposed to be....and when more than one-third of the eligible teams in the nation are playing in a bowl game it has virtually reached the point, in my opinion, where many of these so-called bowl games could more accurately be described as simply playing a 13th game on the schedule. At the very least, a team should have to have a winning record to play in a bowl game. 7-5 is bad enough. Having 6-6 teams in bowl games is ridiculous. And there are no words to describe having a 5-7 team playing in a bowl game.

I will agree with you that if you can qualify for a bowl game by winning 2 games in your conference to go along with 4 cupcake non-conference games, it is pathetic that WF has not gone to one of those bowl games since 2011. What I don't understand is all the euphoria that some people have about the possibility of going to one of these meaningless bowls by playing a shitty schedule and trying to eke out 6 wins. Even if they did that, they haven't really accomplished anything. I guess we could then say "Hey, we've moved from being downright shitty to being mediocre in football." If you want to hang your hat on that, be my guest. Going to a bowl game with wins over the two worst teams in the conference being your only meaningful wins during the entire season? Personally, I don't see that as anything to get excited about.

 

[wsc8521s]

It's nothing amazing, but it would be a nice step forward for those of us who actually care about Wake football

 

[Deaconblue]

And crappy one or not, making a bowl is much better than not making one. Even if it is just the "13th game" on the schedule. Bowl teams get an extra 20 practices days between their last regular season game and the bowl. That can be significant extra reps for those playing and also more practices for those redshirting. Players on teams that regularly go to bowls have an extra 80 days of practice by the time they start their sr years over those who never go to bowls. Significant, I think.

The players get some nice swag. The alums have something to do, and some bragging rights. Helps get more $upport for the team.

 

[Deacsfan27]

It's nothing amazing, but it would be a nice step forward for those of us who actually care about Wake football

Right, the problem is he doesn't care and is just here to yell at clouds.

 

[bobknightfan]

And crappy one or not, making a bowl is much better than not making one. Even if it is just the "13th game" on the schedule. Bowl teams get an extra 20 practices days between their last regular season game and the bowl. That can be significant extra reps for those playing and also more practices for those redshirting. Players on teams that regularly go to bowls have an extra 80 days of practice by the time they start their sr years over those who never go to bowls. Significant, I think.

The players get some nice swag. The alums have something to do, and some bragging rights. Helps get more $upport for the team.

Most people already have something to do during the two weeks before Christmas...when most of these crappy bowl games are being played.

 

[BillBrasky]

The offensive scheme sucks donkey balls at this level and our O line is below average at best. I'd set the line at 3.5 wins.

Our offense would be mediocre in the FCS. Until you fix that, nothing is going to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BlackjackMc]

Four wins. Same reason as last year and the year before that and the years before that. Offensive line...or lack thereof.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

5 wins seems reasonable. Making a bowl would be a nice step

 

[Turd Ferguson]

Why do you think this? You don't have faith in Clawson? You don't think the talent is there? You think the ACC will be as improved as we are going to be?

I want to hear why people think we won't improve when we return almost 100% of the productivity on offense, and a ton on defense as well.

Returning 100% off a terrible offense with a scheme that doesn't work with our talent at this level doesn't inspire confidence. Our line will still be terrible and we don't have a QB that can make up for our lack of running game. I just don't see much improvement. I like claw just fine. Hope we're better just dony see where the wins come from.

 

[Deacsfan27]

Returning 100% off a terrible offense with a scheme that doesn't work with our talent at this level doesn't inspire confidence. Our line will still be terrible and we don't have a QB that can make up for our lack of running game. I just don't see much improvement. I like claw just fine. Hope we're better just dony see where the wins come from.

What is our scheme/what offensive scheme would our talent fit the best with in your mind?

 

[Deacsfan27]

The offensive scheme sucks donkey balls at this level and our O line is below average at best. I'd set the line at 3.5 wins.

Our offense would be mediocre in the FCS. Until you fix that, nothing is going to change.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would love to take a bet with you on that if you want to go under 3.5? Since you think the line should be there you should feel equally comfortable taking the under.