Let's say Lobo takes a HC gig...

[BillBrasky]

You don't have to give credit for Grobe's almost wins. You can give him credit for taking an ACC doormat program with pretty much every disadvantage in the book regarding big time colllege football and building that to a mid-level BCS program.

Oh absolutely. However you should never allow complacancy to occur because you are thankful for past results.

 

[PhDeac]

I wish we had national average numbers to compare those against. Only winning 54% of games leading after three seems like a horrible percentage, but winning 40% of games when down heading to the 4th seems pretty good.

You're forgetting the sample. This is games that were decided by 7 or less only. That's about half the games. Our winning percentage down going into the 4th is much less than 40% and I'd guess it's that way for most teams. This sample wouldn't include a game in which we were down 10 going into the 4th and lost by 10. It would include a game in which we were down 10 going into the 4th and lost by 7.

 

[ChrisL68]

Oh absolutely. However you should never allow complacancy to occur because you are thankful for past results.

I don't see the complacency. We were one drive away from being in the atlantic driver's seat with a team that frankly isn't as talented as Clemson or FSU. We had our chances but just weren't good enough to make the plays we needed to win it.

 

[ChrisL68]

You're forgetting the sample. This is games that were decided by 7 or less only. That's about half the games. Our winning percentage down going into the 4th is much less than 40% and I'd guess it's that way for most teams. This sample wouldn't include a game in which we were down 10 going into the 4th and lost by 10. It would include a game in which we were down 10 going into the 4th and lost by 7.

The same is true in the reverse however.

 

[Deacsfan27]

It shows that over a 10 year span, that it is essentially a coin flip as to whether we win a game or not when it is decided by 7 or less points. These stats aren't really complete either in the sense that it doesn't show backdoor covers and stuff like that.

 

[ChrisL68]

I have seen much improvement from Tanner Price. Last year he totally pooped in his pants on the road.

He looked pretty good at Clemson. Still not there but much better.

With progression next year, maybe he will be ready to take the next step and make the plays late to win a game like that.

 

[PhDeac]

The same is true in the reverse however.

Yeah, of course. That's why the better way to do it would have been by the margin after 3, not the margin at the end of the game. It would give a better perspective on how we perform in different situations.

 

[BigTreeDeac]

Oh absolutely. However you should never allow complacancy to occur because you are thankful for past results.

I don't see much complacency. What I see is people that, to me, have expectations more firmly grounded in reality. There is a big difference between complacency and expectations grounded in reality. Just because some of us acknowledge that our program is not currently in a regression because we haven't made it to the OB or beyond again is not the same as saying we are complacent. Complacent implies an inherent happiness with maintaining the status quo with no want for future improvement and I don't think anybody says "Well I'd rather just be a mid-tier ACC team at best rather than a BCS contender". The difference, though, is that many of us realize that a BCS berth is not the baseline at which our program's progress should be judged, at least not yet.

I think, even considering last year's abysmal performance, it would be fairly hard to argue that Grobe has not progressed this football program. Has he progressed it as far as it can go? No but that doesn't negate progress nor does our "slide" since the OB necessarily demonstrate a regression in program stature. Only time will tell if Grobe can take us to the next level but happiness with our standing this year/Grobe's performance in the past is not an inherently complacent attitude. It can be but it isn't necessarily and should not be interpreted as such. For instance, you can be happy with your job/lot in life while simultaneously striving to better your circumstances. It would be hard to argue that every person happy with their life is complacent.

 

[OblongPickle]

Yeah that is what I noticed. 54% isn't very good at all, but 40% seems above average as well.

It's hard to tell sometimes because it doesn't take into account whether or not the trailing team is down 14 and has the ball and is about to score, or whether or not the leading team is up 14 and driving.

Thanks for the stats...

A great start to analyzing how this team has performed consistently.

Would like to see margin after 3 and % of each situation that we scored in the 4th quarter.

 

[Neurodeac]

Fewer not less. I thought you were a teacher. You're IQ team could not compete with Princeton.

This triggered a random memory. The WFU Quiz bowl team beat Princeton in a regional tournament finals in 1980. It qualified us to be one of the 16 teams in the national tournament.

 

[deacfreke2]

We're 9-19 in our last 28 games with three of the wins coming over Duke, a percentage of 32.1%. So our winning percentage in that stretch is 9% below our all-time historical percentage. Yet, the Lobo apologists say we're not a program in decline. You Wake grads are smarter than me so please explain how things are going so great.

 

[Bubbadeac]

Oh absolutely. However you should never allow complacancy to occur because you are thankful for past results.

I don't think it's complacancy as much as reality...Wake is never gonna consistently draw the top level recruit...Academics, location, school size, popularity, etc...I know that star ratings aren't everything but SEC schools always having the 4 & 5 star kids...That being said I believe Wake can carve out a niche where we're competitive and that's what Wake should strive for...

 

[Deacsfan27]

We're 9-19 in our last 28 games with three of the wins coming over Duke, a percentage of 32.1%. So our winning percentage in that stretch is 9% below our all-time historical percentage. Yet, the Lobo apologists say we're not a program in decline. You Wake grads are smarter than me so please explain how things are going so great.

The past is just that, in the past. We are 5-5 this year, and rebounding off of a 3-9 season in which we won 1 ACC game. If we win a game on Saturday that we are supposed to, we will become bowl eligible, and improve by 4 games in the conference from last year. It seems to be pretty nitpicky to say that we are "a program in decline", particularly when you put it into context with the rest of our "program" and its "history".

 

[Neurodeac]

We're 9-19 in our last 28 games with three of the wins coming over Duke, a percentage of 32.1%. So our winning percentage in that stretch is 9% below our all-time historical percentage. Yet, the Lobo apologists say we're not a program in decline. You Wake grads are smarter than me so please explain how things are going so great.

Talk about finding misleading stats to justify your point. You picked out the worst 28 games (why 28? because that fits your point) and compared it to the average result which includes the best of Grobe's years. The proper comparison would be the worst 28 game stretch during Grobe's years compared to the worst 28 game stretch in WFU history. I'll give you a head start. My first 2 years at Wake we were 1-10 each year for a 2-20 record. So the worst stretch of Grobe shines in comparison to the worst stretch in WFU history (and that is probably not the worst stretch). Of course, as PhDeac would point out, your stats are incomplete in that they don't include other information like difficulty of schedule and ignore trends within the 28 game streak, like the improvement from last year to this year, which would not support your thesis.