• 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!

Football Prognostications...

pOHdeac said:
Wake Forest SoS last year (out of 245 schools nationally, 120 D1A, 65 BCS): 26th
Click to expand...

We played 6 teams outside the Top 50 in the Sagarin. BC was #49.
224 Presbyterian College
95 Duke
70 Georgia Tech
55 Navy
53 Clemson
126 Vanderbilt

We could win 5 games most years without having to beat a decent team. Obviously, if our program is going in the right direction, we should expect to beat some decent teams anyway. It blows my mind how people can glorify Grobe one minute and then basically say he's done nothing to increase the standards of our program.
 
PhDeac said:
We played 6 teams outside the Top 50 in the Sagarin. BC was #49.
224 Presbyterian College
95 Duke
70 Georgia Tech
55 Navy
53 Clemson
126 Vanderbilt

We could win 5 games most years without having to beat a decent team. Obviously, if our program is going in the right direction, we should expect to beat some decent teams anyway.
Click to expand...

In what world does top half not equal decent? (Clemson and Navy were both in the top half of D1A last year.)
 
We were in fact 2 plays away from winning 5 games last year, despite how bad we were.
 
pOHdeac said:
So, long story short, you think our floor is the same as Texas and Michigan's? And higher than UCLA and Notre Dame's?
Click to expand...

I'm saying it's not unreasonable to expect Wake football to win a minimum of 5 games a season. You must think Jim Grobe has done nothing for Wake football if you are arguing that it's unreasonable to expect Wake to do no worse than 5 losses given the schedule we play.

If this isn't clear as day after last year, I don't know what to tell you. A very poor Wake team was plays away from winning 5 games. If the Tech and Navy games had ended any differently it wouldn't have meant last year's team was any good. It would have just meant a bad team won 5 games. Last year's team was #102 in the Sagarin with 3 wins.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
We were in fact 2 plays away from winning 5 games last year, despite how bad we were.
Click to expand...

Why do you argue with me and still make my points for me?
 
pOHdeac said:
In what world does top half not equal decent? (Clemson and Navy were both in the top half of D1A last year.)
Click to expand...

I said "most years" not last year or every year. Like I've said several times before, most years we play a FCS, Duke, Vandy, and at least 1 other bad non-con and 1 other bad ACC team.
 
PhDeac said:
I'm saying it's not unreasonable to expect Wake football to win a minimum of 5 games a season. You must think Jim Grobe has done nothing for Wake football if you are arguing that it's unreasonable to expect Wake to do no worse than 5 losses given the schedule we play.

If this isn't clear as day after last year, I don't know what to tell you. A very poor Wake team was plays away from winning 5 games. If the Tech and Navy games had ended any differently it wouldn't have meant last year's team was any good. It would have just meant a bad team won 5 games. Last year's team was #102 in the Sagarin with 3 wins.
Click to expand...

You keep morphing back and forth between two statements.

Do I think 5 wins/year is an unreasonable expectation for WF football going forward? No
Do I think 5 wins is our floor? No

Maybe we just have very different definitions of "floor." I'm thinking of it as the realistic worst-case scenario.

We won 3 games last year. If that doesn't make it clear as day for you that our floor is not 5, I don't know what to tell you.
 
PhDeac said:
I said "most years" not last year or every year. Like I've said several times before, most years we play a FCS, Duke, Vandy, and at least 1 other bad non-con and 1 other bad ACC team.
Click to expand...

So you would agree that last year Navy and Clemson were at least decent, and thus simply beating all worse-than-decent teams would have yielded only 4 wins?

So, long story short, you think our floor is the same as Texas and Michigan's? And higher than UCLA and Notre Dame's?
Click to expand...

Still would love to see a simply yes or no response to this question.
 
I'm not morphing at all. My point has been the same as it was in the post you seem to be some up at arms about. "It's not unreasonable to have a floor of 5 wins" because we play some of the weakest programs in the country on a regular basis.

You seem to be making two points:
1. It is unreasonable expect Wake football to win 5 every year despite playing some of the weakest programs in the country.

2. Despite his accomplishments, Jim Grobe has not elevated the expectations of this program.

Now as far as your definition of floor, I do think the bottom has fallen out of our program over the last 18 games. The last season and a half have been an UNrealistic worst-case scenario coming off of 3 straight bowls and all the positive exposure for our program.

Programs like Texas and Michigan and Notre Dame (UCLA doesn't belong in this group) do have a higher floor than Wake Forest. Winning only 5 games should be an unrealistic worst-case scenario for those programs.

When the bottoms fall out of their programs, they make major changes because they know they have some major repairs to rebuild that floor.

We should be winning a minimum of 5 games because we're playing some of the weakest teams in the country. If we're not winning those 5 games, WE ARE one of the weakest teams in the country and that means we've got to make major changes to address the problem.
 
pOHdeac said:
Maybe we just have very different definitions of "floor." I'm thinking of it as the realistic worst-case scenario.
Click to expand...

I see the "floor" as a typical bad season. But then sometimes you fall down into the basement, like last year. And sometimes you break through the ceiling, like 2006.
 
PhDeac said:
We played 6 teams outside the Top 50 in the Sagarin. BC was #49.
224 Presbyterian College
95 Duke
70 Georgia Tech
55 Navy
53 Clemson
126 Vanderbilt

We could win 5 games most years without having to beat a decent team. Obviously, if our program is going in the right direction, we should expect to beat some decent teams anyway. It blows my mind how people can glorify Grobe one minute and then basically say he's done nothing to increase the standards of our program.
Click to expand...

That is absolutely your own reading and take on others out here. We all know what a slippery slope it is when a chap like yourself begins raising flags (not real flags but YOUR flags) and how quickly a legion of ASS-HAT can emerge in a hue and cry --- motherfuckers who can hardly manage their own affairs are suddenly experts in the "direction of the program"....

Not on my watch. I'll be banned a thousand times before I'll concede to the ignorant rabble.

Therefore, knowing what I know, I preemptively strike and do this out of the goodness of my heart. Truly, I don't want to see you and others in this fanbase "Fuck Yourselves in the ASS" (yea, it did deserve JUST that phrasing) and so I don't want to see you screw yourselves out of the greatest coach this University has likely ever had.

Certainly you will read this and conclude " he thinks all criticism should be muted". Not hardly. Begin your assessments and criticisms but steer away from 'hot seat" nonsense... PLEASE...do it for the love of your very own self. :)

EDIT: And by the way...I accept no floor or ceiling. Going into 2011 there is not one single game that Wake Forest plays that they don't have a good chance to win.
 
Last edited:
FRESH DEACS was a lucky class. it really is that simple.
 
pOHdeac said:
So, long story short, you think our floor is the same as Texas and Michigan's? And higher than UCLA and Notre Dame's?
Click to expand...

The term "floor" is kind of vague, so I can understand how it would be interpreted differently. My interpretation is that it's a floor of expectations, and anything below it is disappointing. Where Texas and Michigan may need to win 8 or 9 games to meet the expectations of their fans, I believe that Wake needs to win 5 games to meet our expectations.

Last season, we won 2 games outright, another close, lost 2 homes games in the last minute, and got blown out the rest of the way. It wouldn't have been unreasonable to win 1 or 2 of the home games (GT and Navy) and keep 1 or 2 of the others close. Had that happened, our expectations would have been met or exceeded, and we would be excited about the upcoming season, instead of pessimistic. As we weren't very far from meeting our expectations in a down year, I think it's pretty reasonable to keep those same expectations for the future.
 
Last edited:
I expect us to be disciplined, well-coached, execute, not turn the ball over, play with some creativity, take calculated risks offensively and not beat ourselves. We will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage athletically against most teams in the conference, simple fact.

If we take care of the above things, the Ws and Ls will take care of themselves.
 
until another class of 2 stars morphs into a roster loaded with nfl players i'll stick with my assessment.
 
Tin Cup said:
I expect us to be disciplined, well-coached, execute, not turn the ball over, play with some creativity, take calculated risks offensively and not beat ourselves. We will ALWAYS be at a disadvantage athletically against most teams in the conference, simple fact.

If we take care of the above things, the Ws and Ls will take care of themselves.
Click to expand...

This hasn't been seen since the Orange Bowl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top