• 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!

Wake and A D

2&2 Slider To Leyritz said:
It isn't excess drama, it is reality. In the 21 seasons since Duncan left (I'm including this season because it is over and none of the following are happening), let's go through how you are attempting to justify our relevancy:

1. 1 (out of 21) regular season ACC championship, which the ACC does not even recognize. So we're making up our own championships now. Solid. Even assuming that it was recognized, and counting the ACC regular season and tournament champions as equivalent champions (which they aren't, but whatever), we are 1 for 42 in that span. 1 for 42. That is pretty fucking irrelevant. But wait, it gets better.

2. A PRESEASON #1 ranking (by who, I don't know) and some time in the top 10 that season. When preseason rankings become relevant for anything, let me know. Over that same time, as to what actually matters, and leaving the Final 4 out of it because it would be laughable, how many Elite 8 appearances do we have? Let's see, that would be zer-fucking-o. Out of 168 possible Elite 8 spots, we are 0 for 168. Solid work there. Obviously a lot of those 168 spots overlap with the same schools from year to year, but how many different schools have been there over that time? 30? 40? 50? Whatever it is, we aren't in those schools. Meanwhile, such powerhouses as Davidson, Kent State, George Mason, VCU, Butler, Providence, and Dayton have all made it at least once. Again, pretty fucking irrelevant.

3. We were ranked #1 for ONE WEEK in that 21 year period. Assuming the college basketball season is 5 months long, that is 1 week out of 420 possible #1 weekly rankings. Again, pretty fucking irrelevant.
Click to expand...

This is a terrible post filled with excess drama and inaccuracies. We also seem to have a very different definition of "relevant" if you don't think Chris Paul's second season was relevant (as a reminder, we spent the entire season ranked in the top 7 in the country).
 
Wellman also brings in big $$ from the elderly Deacs. There's his job security. He ain't going anywhere, anytime soon unless he wants to. When I read about the McCreary donation, I knew RW was set for life here.

You'd think these older Deacs would want a winner in basketball in their lifetime, but apparently they are buying whatever excuse Ron is giving them.
 
Lohengrin said:
Just a collateral observation here: I think when speaking of ADs achieving national championships, we should limit it to team sports at least, not individual performances. ADs hire coaches, they don't recruit the players. Seems like an important line of demarcation.
Click to expand...

Agree. Nothing wrong with pointing to nat'l titles as one basis for comparing ADs, but it's pretty silly for Rafi to call out others (e.g., 2&2) on credibility issues, then point to WF's 14 nat'l titles (three of which were team titles) to show that Wellman is a superlative AD.
 
inspectah said:
Agree. Nothing wrong with pointing to nat'l titles as one basis for comparing ADs, but it's pretty silly for Rafi to call out others (e.g., 2&2) on credibility issues, then point to WF's 14 nat'l titles (three of which were team titles) to show that Wellman is a superlative AD.
Click to expand...

You think using national championships as a way to compare ADs creates a credibility issue? It's 4 team titles, by the way.
 
Rafi said:
You think using national championships as a way to compare ADs creates a credibility issue? It's 4 team titles, by the way.
Click to expand...

3 field hockey championships and 1 mens soccer championship is nothing special amongst ACC programs, especially over a 26 year period. Instead of patting this performance on the back why are we not striving to win as many as Chapel Hill and Duke? Secondly, big $ and big name sports are what matters when it comes to championships. Field hockey championships = Zero name recognition. Football, basketball, baseball = biggest levels of name recognition. I have been all over the US and Wake certainly has some name recognition, but I've also been to major cities where when I say where I went the layman says "what school is that?" You think Duke would have the same name recognition if instead of 5 basketball titles they had 5 straight field hockey championships?
 
netflixnchildres said:
3 field hockey championships and 1 mens soccer championship is nothing special amongst ACC programs, especially over a 26 year period. Instead of patting this performance on the back why are we not striving to win as many as Chapel Hill and Duke? Secondly, big $ and big name sports are what matters when it comes to championships. Field hockey championships = Zero name recognition. Football, basketball, baseball = biggest levels of name recognition. I have been all over the US and Wake certainly has some name recognition, but I've also been to major cities where when I say where I went the layman says "what school is that?" You think Duke would have the same name recognition if instead of 5 basketball titles they had 5 straight field hockey championships?
Click to expand...

I agree with all of this. I stated that Wellman has been the most successful AD in Wake's history. I thought a good way to compare him to previous ADs was with national championships and ACC championships in basketball and football.

Here's my original post, "Wellman is, without a doubt, the most successful athletic director in Wake Forest history. In his 26 years at Wake, we have won 14 national championships. Hooks was the AD for 28 years and won 6 national championships (all in golf). Gibson was the AD for 10 years and won one national championship (baseball), and Weaver was the AD for 17 years and won 2 national championships (both in golf). Wellman also presided over half of our ACC championships in basketball and football.

As I have written on here before, even more important than all of that, he was instrumental in keeping the ACC together (and hence, Wake in a P5 conference) during realignment in 2013. In my opinion, that was his greatest contribution to Wake athletics.

There is also no doubt he screwed up big time by hiring [name redacted]."
 
Rafi said:
I agree with all of this. I stated that Wellman has been the most successful AD in Wake's history. I thought a good way to compare him to previous ADs was with national championships and ACC championships in basketball and football.

Here's my original post, "Wellman is, without a doubt, the most successful athletic director in Wake Forest history. In his 26 years at Wake, we have won 14 national championships. Hooks was the AD for 28 years and won 6 national championships (all in golf). Gibson was the AD for 10 years and won one national championship (baseball), and Weaver was the AD for 17 years and won 2 national championships (both in golf). Wellman also presided over half of our ACC championships in basketball and football.

As I have written on here before, even more important than all of that, he was instrumental in keeping the ACC together (and hence, Wake in a P5 conference) during realignment in 2013. In my opinion, that was his greatest contribution to Wake athletics.

There is also no doubt he screwed up big time by hiring [name redacted]."
Click to expand...

This can not be overstated. Wellman gets zero credit around here for that but it is a 100% fact.
 
Mere focus on championships misses the point. Having consistently good teams should be the goal. Winning championships requires you to have (1) a good team and (2) some luck. That's the nature of the nature of how championships are determined in single elimination tournaments or where 1-2 losses removes you from the championship talk. Sure, it's disappointing to have good, championship-level teams fail to win a championship, but it's rather common. Here's a rundown of the best team each year by ELO rating and who won the championship:

FootballChampion/Elo
2017 - Bama/Bama
2016 - Clemson/Bama
2015 - Bama/Bama
2014 - OSU/Oregon
2013 - FSU/Bama
2012 - Bama/Bama
2011 - Bama/Bama
2010 - Auburn/Auburn
2009 - Bama/UF
2008 - UF/UF
2007 - LSU/LSU
2006 - UF/UF
2005 - UT/USC

So that's 8 of 13. A pretty good mark for the championship, but that's a bit skewed since the Elo rating generally put the #1 Elo team in the championship game every year. With the playoff, the rate dropped to 50% (small sample size) and the best Elo-rated team failed to win its conference this year. Plus, if you scrub that list of championship teams, only Bama, Clemson, and LSU have managed to win at a high level every of those years. OU has probably been more of a consistently high-winning team than any of those and they haven't won a ship in that time.

BasketballWinner/Top Seed
2017 - UNC/Nova
2016 - Nova/Kansas
2015 - Duke/Kentucky
2014 - UConn/Florida
2013 - Louisville/Louisville
2012 - Kentucky/Kentucky
2011 - UConn/OSU
2010 - Duke/Kansas
2009 - UNC/Louisville
2008 - Kansas/UNC
2007 - UF/UF
2006 - UF/Duke

That's 3 out of 12. Not exactly great. Plus, UF probably shouldn't have been the top seed in 2007 given both Memphis and OSU did better before the NCAA tourney. On top of that, consider how many #1s fail to make the final four. Sure, percentage-wise they tend to do better than most, but that's not exactly promising.

Again, the idea is to be good enough each year that if things break your way you can win.
 
NCDomer said:
Mere focus on championships misses the point. Having consistently good teams should be the goal. Winning championships requires you to have (1) a good team and (2) some luck. That's the nature of the nature of how championships are determined in single elimination tournaments or where 1-2 losses removes you from the championship talk. Sure, it's disappointing to have good, championship-level teams fail to win a championship, but it's rather common. Here's a rundown of the best team each year by ELO rating and who won the championship:

FootballChampion/Elo
2017 - Bama/Bama
2016 - Clemson/Bama
2015 - Bama/Bama
2014 - OSU/Oregon
2013 - FSU/Bama
2012 - Bama/Bama
2011 - Bama/Bama
2010 - Auburn/Auburn
2009 - Bama/UF
2008 - UF/UF
2007 - LSU/LSU
2006 - UF/UF
2005 - UT/USC

So that's 8 of 13. A pretty good mark for the championship, but that's a bit skewed since the Elo rating generally put the #1 Elo team in the championship game every year. With the playoff, the rate dropped to 50% (small sample size) and the best Elo-rated team failed to win its conference this year. Plus, if you scrub that list of championship teams, only Bama, Clemson, and LSU have managed to win at a high level every of those years. OU has probably been more of a consistently high-winning team than any of those and they haven't won a ship in that time.

BasketballWinner/Top Seed
2017 - UNC/Nova
2016 - Nova/Kansas
2015 - Duke/Kentucky
2014 - UConn/Florida
2013 - Louisville/Louisville
2012 - Kentucky/Kentucky
2011 - UConn/OSU
2010 - Duke/Kansas
2009 - UNC/Louisville
2008 - Kansas/UNC
2007 - UF/UF
2006 - UF/Duke

That's 3 out of 12. Not exactly great. Plus, UF probably shouldn't have been the top seed in 2007 given both Memphis and OSU did better before the NCAA tourney. On top of that, consider how many #1s fail to make the final four. Sure, percentage-wise they tend to do better than most, but that's not exactly promising.

Again, the idea is to be good enough each year that if things break your way you can win.
Click to expand...

OK. I agree with all of this, but when it comes down to it, I like winning championships. Plus, the more good teams/athletes you have, the more likely you are to win championships, so good athletics and championships correlate. Finally, championships are discrete events that are easy to measure.
 
NCDomer said:
Mere focus on championships misses the point. Having consistently good teams should be the goal. Winning championships requires you to have (1) a good team and (2) some luck. That's the nature of the nature of how championships are determined in single elimination tournaments or where 1-2 losses removes you from the championship talk. Sure, it's disappointing to have good, championship-level teams fail to win a championship, but it's rather common. Here's a rundown of the best team each year by ELO rating and who won the championship:

FootballChampion/Elo
2017 - Bama/Bama
2016 - Clemson/Bama
2015 - Bama/Bama
2014 - OSU/Oregon
2013 - FSU/Bama
2012 - Bama/Bama
2011 - Bama/Bama
2010 - Auburn/Auburn
2009 - Bama/UF
2008 - UF/UF
2007 - LSU/LSU
2006 - UF/UF
2005 - UT/USC

So that's 8 of 13. A pretty good mark for the championship, but that's a bit skewed since the Elo rating generally put the #1 Elo team in the championship game every year. With the playoff, the rate dropped to 50% (small sample size) and the best Elo-rated team failed to win its conference this year. Plus, if you scrub that list of championship teams, only Bama, Clemson, and LSU have managed to win at a high level every of those years. OU has probably been more of a consistently high-winning team than any of those and they haven't won a ship in that time.

BasketballWinner/Top Seed
2017 - UNC/Nova
2016 - Nova/Kansas
2015 - Duke/Kentucky
2014 - UConn/Florida
2013 - Louisville/Louisville
2012 - Kentucky/Kentucky
2011 - UConn/OSU
2010 - Duke/Kansas
2009 - UNC/Louisville
2008 - Kansas/UNC
2007 - UF/UF
2006 - UF/Duke

That's 3 out of 12. Not exactly great. Plus, UF probably shouldn't have been the top seed in 2007 given both Memphis and OSU did better before the NCAA tourney. On top of that, consider how many #1s fail to make the final four. Sure, percentage-wise they tend to do better than most, but that's not exactly promising.

Again, the idea is to be good enough each year that if things break your way you can win.
Click to expand...

Didn't Louisville have to vacate 2013? I hope 2013 is marked with at least an asterisk on the NCAA site.
 
awaken said:
Wellman also brings in big $$ from the elderly Deacs. There's his job security. He ain't going anywhere, anytime soon unless he wants to. When I read about the McCreary donation, I knew RW was set for life here.

You'd think these older Deacs would want a winner in basketball in their lifetime, but apparently they are buying whatever excuse Ron is giving them.
Click to expand...

He makes over $1mm per year...he ain't going anywhere on his own. All the blue hairs love him as he changed that culture back when he got rid of Dino, rmemeber!
 
Rafi said:
I agree with all of this. I stated that Wellman has been the most successful AD in Wake's history. I thought a good way to compare him to previous ADs was with national championships and ACC championships in basketball and football.

Here's my original post, "Wellman is, without a doubt, the most successful athletic director in Wake Forest history. In his 26 years at Wake, we have won 14 national championships. Hooks was the AD for 28 years and won 6 national championships (all in golf). Gibson was the AD for 10 years and won one national championship (baseball), and Weaver was the AD for 17 years and won 2 national championships (both in golf). Wellman also presided over half of our ACC championships in basketball and football.

As I have written on here before, even more important than all of that, he was instrumental in keeping the ACC together (and hence, Wake in a P5 conference) during realignment in 2013. In my opinion, that was his greatest contribution to Wake athletics.

There is also no doubt he screwed up big time by hiring [name redacted]."
Click to expand...

Haha, damning with faint praise if I've ever seen it. Either Wellman or Wake both.
 
Rafi said:
As I have written on here before, even more important than all of that, he was instrumental in keeping the ACC together (and hence, Wake in a P5 conference) during realignment in 2013. In my opinion, that was his greatest contribution to Wake athletics.
Click to expand...

CreamyGoodness said:
This can not be overstated. Wellman gets zero credit around here for that but it is a 100% fact.
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on this? I've never heard this claim before and the Googles has squat on it. The best I can find is the "Grant of Rights" media clause in 2013, but that seems to have zero connection to Wellman.

Certainly not saying you're wrong - just curious on the details.
 
I have never said that Wellman does not deserve credit for keeping Wake in the ACC and keeping the ACC together. He does. However that does not excuse his failures relating to the flagship program of the school. Just because he did some really great things for Wake, does that mean we all just have to accept that basketball has been a miserable failure for 8 years? I am grateful that he did what he did for Wake and keeping the ACC together. However, there is more to his job than fundraising and keeping Wake in the ACC. If the task of hiring a good basketball coach is too much for him, maybe he should delegate it to someone qualified to perform the job.

With respect to your comments about championships, it seems to me you are saying "Well, this is as good as we possibly expect with respect to basketball, and given all the great things he has done for track and tennis and women's field hockey, we are lucky to have him." I think we should demand more from him.

Plus comparing to ADs of the past is ridiculous, as none of them ever had the cash resources that Ron Wellman has had related to the various P5 contracts that Wake has. Wake's facilities improvement is not strictly due to Wellman's fundraising process, but simply due to the fact that we are in the P5. That is why losing to Drake, Georgia Southern and Liberty in the same year is so galling to so many here. Our advantages over those programs are so many that we should never lose to them.
 
lbdeac94 said:
With respect to your comments about championships, it seems to me you are saying "Well, this is as good as we possibly expect with respect to basketball, and given all the great things he has done for track and tennis and women's field hockey, we are lucky to have him." I think we should demand more from him.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I'm the opposite of LOWF. I very much believe we can win national championships in all sports - including football and sports we have not had any success in (volleyball, women's basketball, etc).

In my opinion, the situation is as follows: Ron Wellman is the most successful AD Wake has ever had. No question about it. He has done some extremely important things for Wake, namely fighting to keep the ACC together. He has also made some really bad moves in men's basketball in the last 10 years, and we need to rectify that situation.
 
With that being said, we can agree that Ron Wellman is the most succcessful AD in the history of Wake Forest. However I, along with a lot of other people think it is time for him to step aside and let the next AD come in who will focus on the success of the basketball program and restore it to its former position. Wake's national reputation has always been predicated on the basketball program and will continue to be. No one nationally cares how good our tennis, soccer, field hockey or golf team is.
 
netflixnchildres said:
3 field hockey championships and 1 mens soccer championship is nothing special amongst ACC programs, especially over a 26 year period. Instead of patting this performance on the back why are we not striving to win as many as Chapel Hill and Duke? Secondly, big $ and big name sports are what matters when it comes to championships. Field hockey championships = Zero name recognition. Football, basketball, baseball = biggest levels of name recognition. I have been all over the US and Wake certainly has some name recognition, but I've also been to major cities where when I say where I went the layman says "what school is that?" You think Duke would have the same name recognition if instead of 5 basketball titles they had 5 straight field hockey championships?
Click to expand...

Wake has 8 official team championships - 1 baseball, 3 golf, 3 field hockey and 1 soccer. No basketball or football but the 8 probably ranks higher in the ACC than you might think...
 
scooter84 said:
Wake has 8 official team championships - 1 baseball, 3 golf, 3 field hockey and 1 soccer. No basketball or football but the 8 probably ranks higher in the ACC than you might think...
Click to expand...

4 during Wellman's tenure. Now 5 as of today, although I think the May outdoor is what really counts. In the last 26 years - 1 soccer, 3 field hockey, 1 tennis as of today.
 
Last edited:
If more than 100 people care about tennis national championship, would be stunned. But, congratulations to Ron Wellman, I guess.

If this is what the AD apologists hang their hats on, there is no point continuing the discussion. I have been a loyal Deacon Club member for many years. The fact that our administration is so tone deaf is what has turned so many people off. Continue to revel in "national championships" though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top