poisoned well

[DeaconSig]

Scholly or Walk-on, numb nuts? Scholly means you are a dumbass, walk on means glorified towel boy. Let me pull out the wake record books to see if I can figure out who you are.

Again, let's be clear. You make a number of asinine comments, accusing Wake fans of running off Coach Grobe, claiming that this year's team is better than Coach Caldwell's Aloha Bowl team, and basically insinuating that Wake will never be successful at football ever again. When someone who knows more about football than you do (and who actually was a member of the team you supposedly support) calls you on your bullshit, you decide that I am either a "dumbass" (because God knows, every scholarship football player at Wake was and is stupid) or a "glorified towel boy" (I'm sure Hunter Williams would be happy to know that because he didn't get a scholarship, he is a glorified towel boy- but at least he isn't a dumbass!!).

You really have been on a roll, sunshine. Can't find a better Wake fan around.

 

[kvilledeacon]

Did the fans or alumni install the ill-fated option offense?

? If this is for me, I didn't imply the fans or alumni were the problem. It's the LACK of fans and alumni. I would add, also that the WFU administration is not committed to big time football.

As for the option offense, yes that was a mistake by Grobe, but it was like an act of desperation because he didn't have the material to work with.
He was trying to change direction and make something happen with limited resources.

 

[pourdeac]

I would add, also that the WFU administration is not committed to big time football..

I disagree. I think they are committed to putting out a product that gets positive national recognition and that's about as big time as it can get at Wake. Grobe did that for a while, but he got away from the strategy that made him successful. I still don't understand why. His recent comments about how hard the past few seasons have been on him leave me a bit confused. He had a formula and should have just stuck to it.

 

[tbird]

I disagree. I think they are committed to putting out a product that gets positive national recognition and that's about as big time as it can get at Wake. Grobe did that for a while, but he got away from the strategy that made him successful. I still don't understand why. His recent comments about how hard the past few seasons have been on him leave me a bit confused. He had a formula and should have just stuck to it.

Grobe is a great individual and seems to display alot of integrity. However, Ever since he went over the $2M threshold in benefits, he seemed to become lazy and less inclined to take chances, preferring to be conservative to protect his position. Worked well for several years...

 

[w84it]

I disagree. I think they are committed to putting out a product that gets positive national recognition and that's about as big time as it can get at Wake. Grobe did that for a while, but he got away from the strategy that made him successful. I still don't understand why. His recent comments about how hard the past few seasons have been on him leave me a bit confused. He had a formula and should have just stuck to it.

Depends what you mean by "big time football" - to me there are really only 20 or so schools that fit that bill (your USC, Bama, tOSU, ND types), but there's no reason that Wake shouldn't be putting as much effort into football as Northwestern, Duke, and Vandy.

 

[DeaconSig]

Racer said it well on another board. Wake fans (at least the majority of them) want a team that does the following things:

1. Averages between 5-6 wins per year (our schedule generally allows for at least a 3-1 nonconference schedule, meaning we only need to beat 2-3 ACC teams every year to pull this off);
2. Get to 6-6 or better at least every 3 years; and
3. Be competitive in the majority of our losses.

If Vandy can pull that off, so can we.

 

[kvilledeacon]

I disagree. I think they are committed to putting out a product that gets positive national recognition and that's about as big time as it can get at Wake. Grobe did that for a while, but he got away from the strategy that made him successful. I still don't understand why. His recent comments about how hard the past few seasons have been on him leave me a bit confused. He had a formula and should have just stuck to it.

I guess it depends on the definition of big time football. Even a great coach like Grobe found it very difficult to consistently bring in the talent to have winning teams year after year. With the tough academics and the small stage to play on (football players like the big stage) it's tough to recruit for Wake football.

 

[RacerDeac]

Racer said it well on another board. Wake fans (at least the majority of them) want a team that does the following things:

1. Averages between 5-6 wins per year (our schedule generally allows for at least a 3-1 nonconference schedule, meaning we only need to beat 2-3 ACC teams every year to pull this off);
2. Get to 6-6 or better at least every 3 years; and
3. Be competitive in the majority of our losses.

If Vandy can pull that off, so can we.

I actually have slightly higher expectations than that, even if most of the fan base doesn't. I think there's no reason we can't go to a bowl game 6 out of 10 years in the current ACC and bowl setup. I don't deny that there will be the occasional 2-3 win season when we end up with a tough ACC draw or graduate a great class of seniors, but I expect us to be a pain in the ass to other teams even in those years by playing hard and scheming well. I really don't think that's too much to ask or too high of a bar. It's the bar Grobe set from 2001-2009, and admittedly, didn't meet the last few years. And it's nothing like the "10 win seasons and ACC Championships" the "remember when" crowd wants to paint those of us with expectations of competitiveness and winning with.

 

[siff]

Lack of fans and alumni? I do sometimes wish that students would better support the team, but there is one constant in collegiate sports: build a winner, and they will come.

 

[Marietta Deac]

Racer said it well on another board. Wake fans (at least the majority of them) want a team that does the following things:

1. Averages between 5-6 wins per year (our schedule generally allows for at least a 3-1 nonconference schedule, meaning we only need to beat 2-3 ACC teams every year to pull this off);
2. Get to 6-6 or better at least every 3 years; and
3. Be competitive in the majority of our losses.

If Vandy can pull that off, so can we.

4. If we do lose, lose aggressively, e.g. don't sit on a lead in the 3Q, don't punt inside the opponent's 40, etc

 

[DCDeac]

Scholly or Walk-on, numb nuts? Scholly means you are a dumbass, walk on means glorified towel boy. Let me pull out the wake record books to see if I can figure out who you are.

Jesus. This has to rank up there with some of the worst posts of all time, particularly on the sports board.

 

[PhDeac]

6-6 or better every three years would still put us in the bottom of the ACC. It's a low bar. I think bowls 3 of every 4 years is reasonable.

The 2012 team was in the bottom of the nation in every major statistical category and finished with 5 wins. A team that simply recruits at our level, plays smart and hard, and has competent leadership that knows when to be aggressive and when to be safe could get 6 wins a year.

 

[BillBrasky]

In today's world any team can win at least 7 games, every other year.

If you're not doing that then your ass should be fired.

 

[dmcheatw]

the internet message boards have nothing to do with anything. it shouldn't even be a debate. to suggest otherwise is laughable. the fatc that some AD homers have been able to frame the debate in this way is a monumental success for the AD in and of itself.

 

[DeaconSig]

6-6 or better every three years would still put us in the bottom of the ACC. It's a low bar. I think bowls 3 of every 4 years is reasonable.

The 2012 team was in the bottom of the nation in every major statistical category and finished with 5 wins. A team that simply recruits at our level, plays smart and hard, and has competent leadership that knows when to be aggressive and when to be safe could get 6 wins a year.

I don't think we are that far apart in expectation. I see a schedule with FSU/Clemson/Louisville (and in some years ND/VT/Miami) and think that somewhere between 5 and 6 wins would be acceptable. I didn't have a tremendous problem with most of Grobe's teams the first 5 years- we were bowl eligible twice and generally competitive over the remaining 3 years even though we didn't get over the hump- there was only 1 bad year out of the 3 (2005). There were some bad losses (kollapse at kenan) but most seasons involved Wake being competitive with the majority of the teams on the schedule.

If we scheduled our way to 4 ooc wins a year (which we should do, but haven't) then 6 wins is a good baseline expectation. And maybe a bowl every 2 instead of every three. But we are most likely talking about a few plays each year that will provide the margin between 4 and 7 wins.

 

[PhDeac]

And a good coach makes those plays.

 

[BeachBumDeac]

"Having insane fans is definitely an impediment to a successful athletic program." - Harvey Updyke

 

[deacz]

I don't think we are that far apart in expectation. I see a schedule with FSU/Clemson/Louisville (and in some years ND/VT/Miami) and think that somewhere between 5 and 6 wins would be acceptable. I didn't have a tremendous problem with most of Grobe's teams the first 5 years- we were bowl eligible twice and generally competitive over the remaining 3 years even though we didn't get over the hump- there was only 1 bad year out of the 3 (2005). There were some bad losses (kollapse at kenan) but most seasons involved Wake being competitive with the majority of the teams on the schedule.

If we scheduled our way to 4 ooc wins a year (which we should do, but haven't) then 6 wins is a good baseline expectation. And maybe a bowl every 2 instead of every three. But we are most likely talking about a few plays each year that will provide the margin between 4 and 7 wins.

Agree with this. The problem with the last 4 years is how the differed from the losing seasons in years 3-5. We competed in almost every game during years 3-5, whereas the last 4 we have experienced some awful and dominating losses, even against sub-par teams.

 

[deacsrus]

That Harvey Updyke was a guy everyone listened to.

 

[DeaconSig]

And a good coach makes those plays.

More often than not.