Amount of progress needed in year 1

[bAMACANE]

Randy Shannon beat a more talented FSU team, with a very young inexperienced team, that lacked depth, with a young QB in Tallahassee.

One of our best games of recent!

 

[The Franchise]

If those things tend to even out, then why are you claiming we overachieved last year?

Because they evened out to 361 points scored and 366 points against.

A team that gets outscored and wins the majority of it's tossup games is fortunate if it wins 8 games.

Now that you've provided such a rock solid basis for your opinion, I am convinced. Thanks.

 

[Canes21]

We almost blew the Pitt and Nebraska games because of poor coaching. Is it not fair to assume this staff will be much better and if so, then it's safe to assume this team will be better overall and in late game situations.

This is why Vegas has so many sparkling casinos.

Because they go by the hard numbers and fans go by emotion and gut feelings.

So you are saying that the late game coaching in those two games was not poor?

 

[Rellyrell]

See there you go again, it doesn't matter how many points dorito gave up, in our win column we had 8 wins and you again bring up another pointless stat to try to "disprove" that we're all wrong.

Proving once again that you don't know anything about competitive athletics.

If a football team gives up 5 more points than they scored they will generally win 6 games. We won 8. That's an overachievement. That kind of thing isn't sustainable. It tends to even out over time.

If you think Richt is worth 2 wins then you need to make the adjustment from 6 and not 8.

If the over/under on Miami is 7 or 7.5 then take the over. That's a good bet. But if it's 8.5 or 9 and you take the bet then you're a sucker.

On top of that you don't even include that we lost 58-0 to clemson early and 59-21 to UNC late which significantly bumped it in the first place.

That's the actual 'point' regarding point differential. When Miami played an elite (or even very good) team they got destroyed. When they played middle of the road teams they won close (Nebraska, Pittsburgh) and even managed to lose by double digits to one (Cincinnati).

The point is that point differential is a much better gauge of true ability than simple win/loss records.

I love reading your posts, they constantly provide me with a good laugh.

Because you are absolutely clueless.

You are the typical conventional sports fanboy.

Spouting cliches that you overheard at the bar or at a tailgate party.

Since, I don't need to clog up the board with 5 different answers to prove a point.

1) We didn't overachieve, we were far from overachieving. We lost a completely winnable game to Cincy, we blew a lead to FSU, and then lost another completely winnable game to WSU. That's three games we should've won that were lost by coaching, not talent. Overachieving is taking a team that was expected to be a bottom feeder in their conference like Washington State who were expected to win 3-4 games, winning 9 games and going 6-3 in their conference...we went into the season as the favorites to win the coastal, that comes with at minimum 9-10 wins and we finished fourth with a bowl loss...that's underachieving. So if we won 8 games with a staff that did nothing but underachieve their entire time at Miami, why would you expect 8 wins from a coach that's only gone under 9 wins 4 times in 15 years with a returning 8 win squad that only lost 5 starters in total??

2) Point differential isn't a better gauge than wins and losses because it doesn't tell the full story. We averaged a rounded number of 29 PPG a game, while our opponents averaged a rounded number of 27 PPG including the losses of Clemson, UNC, the blowout win of Bethune Cookman, but not the bowl loss to WSU. You want to know the differential without those games?? a rounded number 31 PPG game, while our opponents averaged a rounded number of 25 PPG without including the Clemson and UNC loss, the blowout win of Bethune Cookman, and the bowl loss. You're right, the games were close when they finished but out of those 9 games how many did we lose due to playing calling?? Cincinnati and FSU right?? How many of those games were closer than they should've been because of late game defensive play calling?? probably 3-4 right but especially Nebraska and Pittsburgh right??

3) I laugh at your posts because you lack common sense. You literally said a 8 win team that has a supposed talent "deficiency", a horrible overall scheme and were poorly coached the year before will struggle to get 8 wins. Even though the vast majority of the same 8 win team is coming back with a overall scheme that's a complete 180 from last year's and fits their skill sets, an actual staff with 6 proven coaches out of the 9, and the staff has lauded what we perceived as an absolute weak point in our D-Line as the most talented position group outside of QB every chance they've gotten and you still think it's stupid to say 10 wins is achievable.

Crown Z, right now. Could not have articulated this any better than what he just did. Bravo on this response.

 

[TAMPA_CANE]

Randy Shannon beat a more talented FSU team, with a very young inexperienced team, that lacked depth, with a young QB in Tallahassee.

lol

 

[sitzee]

you do realize 2 games were basic blowouts...

58-0 Clemson & 59-21 North Carolina

Truth is who cares about points, the 8 wins were Bull****....

The only decent teams we beat were Duke & Pitt both 8-5, & Virginia Tech 7-6, the rest of the wins were against meaningless competition...

I'm not so sure that wins - losses are what really matter this year, as much as a team that is competitive and fights until the end....

We need a team with a heartbeat, that progressively gets better each game and that doesn't bow down to the competition...

If those things tend to even out, then why are you claiming we overachieved last year?

Because they evened out to 361 points scored and 366 points against.

A team that gets outscored and wins the majority of it's tossup games is fortunate if it wins 8 games.

 

[The Franchise]

you do realize 2 games were basic blowouts...

58-0 Clemson & 59-21 North Carolina

Truth is who cares about points, the 8 wins were Bull****....

The only decent teams we beat were Duke & Pitt both 8-5, & Virginia Tech 7-6, the rest of the wins were against meaningless competition...

I'm not so sure that wins - losses are what really matter this year, as much as a team that is competitive and fights until the end....

We need a team with a heartbeat, that progressively gets better each game and that doesn't bow down to the competition...

If those things tend to even out, then why are you claiming we overachieved last year?

Because they evened out to 361 points scored and 366 points against.

A team that gets outscored and wins the majority of it's tossup games is fortunate if it wins 8 games.

You're right, shytzee. Give me 4 wins and a gritty scrappy group of overachievers that fights till the end every week.

 

[Rellyrell]

1) We didn't overachieve, we were far from overachieving. We lost a completely winnable game to Cincy, we blew a lead to FSU, and then lost another completely winnable game to WSU.

See. This is what fanboys do. Count all the games we could've won and forget to mention all the games we could've lost.

We almost blew the Nebraska game. We could've easily lost to Duke. And Virginia. And Pittsburgh.

As I said before these things tend to even out.

Let me Ether this real quick.

1) As a Bears fan, I take great offense to you calling yourself Brian Piccolo, and I could care less if you are a fan of his or even an offspring; the illogical approach you take in your posts, I'm sure, is making him turn over in his grave.

2) You mentioned the difference between Vegas and fan boys; that Vegas goes by hard facts, while fanboys go by emotions.
Here are a few examples of the fallacy of that statement:
Hard Facts: Winner of Super Bowl L was the Denver Broncos.
Vegas: The preseason favorites to win the SB were New England, Seattle, and Pittsburgh
Vegas: Playoff Favorite: Carolina Panthers.

Hard Facts: Cleveland Cavaliers won the 2016 NBA Championship
Vegas: Preseason Favorites: GSW
Vegas: Playoff Favorites: overwhelmingly GSW

Hard Facts: Villanova won the 2016 NCAA Tournament
Vegas: Preseason Favorite: Kansas Jayhawks
Vegas: Tournament Favorite: Kansas Jayhawks

What's the point? Vegas is a business. They thrive off people losing money; they do not thrive off people winning. Vegas often times skew the bottom line just to entice people to take it, and in the end, they become very profitable from it.

Vegas is full of guys who go by statistics that have been generated from the last several years, and in turn, make their prognostication based upon that data. In sports, pieces move, so Vegas' "hard numbers" are nothing more than estimated numbers.

Vegas also put their chips on the teams who are the constants; they pay attention to the Bama's, the FSU's, the OSU's, the GSW's, the Yankees, the Red Sox of the world; yet, they often fail to predict, adequately, teams that are under the radar. With that being said, I would take their prediction of 6.5 wins w/ a grain of salt since they are going by what Miami has done under the Golden regime over the last several years.

3) Golden was by far thee worst coach this program has ever had, maybe in the history of NCAAF; I'm not just saying that, the numbers back it up. Miami has out recruited EVERY single team in the ACC Coastal. They have also out recruited the likes of TCU, Baylor, KSU, Iowa, Michigan State, Boise State, and Stanford; yet, all of the aforementioned teams I listed have played in their respective conference championship games or have won their conference outright (referring to the BIG 12). With that being said, it's safe to say that Golden did less with more.

It's been well documented by many NFL scouts that Miami players received, and I quote, "poor coaching" while being here.

Golden cost players millions of dollars, dollars they will never get back. So if Golden could pump out 9 wins from a 2013 squad, and the combo of Golden and Scott pumped out 8 wins from the 2015 squad, I think it's logical to think that the guy who holds a 74% winning pct in the SEC taking over a program who returns 96% of the same team that went 8-5 last year will win more than 8 games against a softer schedule he's accustomed to, don't you think?

4) If you don't think this team underachieved year in and year out, then either a) you're a flat out troll b) you are blind c) you are Golden or one of his family members or d) you are completely schizophrenic...if b or d are applicable to you, then I sincerely apologize....but my money, based upon "hard facts" would lean towards option a.

Again, since you want to base things upon numbers, based upon the number of blue chips that Golden recruited at Miami vs. the competition we played against, we were a better team on paper, against 75% of the opponents we faced over the last 5 years. That's called underachieving. Whenever you are favorite to win, based upon talent level, and you do not achieve or live up to that expectation, then that's called underachieving.

If you are trying to make the argument that based upon the score board, we overachieved that makes ABSOLUTELY NO SENSE. A W is a W and a L is a L; we leave "moral victories" to the Texas St, Bethune Cookman, Appalachian St, and the West Texas' of the world. This team lost games to teams that we were clearly better than, that's underachieving. We struggled against teams that we were better than...that's underachieving. I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand.

 

[Dirty Sprite]

FSU is very beatable. We have been getting out coached no out talented in those games.

Both

Houston beat FSU it doesnt take a perfect combination of Nick Saban and an NFL roster to pull upsets... They happen every year for a reason. Bc games arent played on paper.

 

[NVA CANE]

Things that determine wins and losses.
Coaching - Upgraded
Players - hard to tell but right now breaks even, maybe even downgraded cause of the DB situation. There's some talent but lack of depth
S&C - Upgraded
System - While the game planning is upgraded there may be growing pains by the players
Teams Mental State - Upgrade

Almost everything has been upgraded. Any other conference and I think ten wins would be unrealistic but let's be honest. We play three teams teams that are cake walks. Uva, VT have new coaches as well and will experience the same growing pains we will. Or biggest challenges are ND, FSU and UNC.

Even with our lack of depth we are more talented than every other team we play besides fsu, ND and UNC. With a stud QB and improvement across the board for the most part, ten wins doesn't sound as far fetched. 9 is more likely but ten shouldn't be scoffed at

 

[CanesTN]

9-3 with no rollover loses and much improved defensive play.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

So you are saying that the late game coaching in those two games was not poor?

We won 4 out of the 6 games decided by one score or less. If you think the late game coaching was generally poor then it's luck (or something else) that won those 4 games.

We over-performed in close games based on the rest of the results that season.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

Crown Z, right now. Could not have articulated this any better than what he just did. Bravo on this response.

If you can't articulate something better than him then you have a really low opinion of yourself.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

you do realize 2 games were basic blowouts...

58-0 Clemson & 59-21 North Carolina

Yes and I now realize that you haven't read anything else in this thread.

We also beat Bethune-Cookman 45-0 and FAU 44-20 in a game that was much close than the score.

Those things basically evened out and what did we have? A team that was outscored in a season where they won 2/3 of their close games.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

1) As a Bears fan, I take great offense to you calling yourself Brian Piccolo, and I could care less if you are a fan of his or even an offspring; the illogical approach you take in your posts, I'm sure, is making him turn over in his grave.

Being called illogical by a fanboy is one of my greatest honors.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

2) You mentioned the difference between Vegas and fan boys; that Vegas goes by hard facts, while fanboys go by emotions.
Here are a few examples of the fallacy of that statement:
Hard Facts: Winner of Super Bowl L was the Denver Broncos.
Vegas: The preseason favorites to win the SB were New England, Seattle, and Pittsburgh
Vegas: Playoff Favorite: Carolina Panthers.

I don't know if you're aware (which is scary) but Vegas sets their odds before the season. So saying that the Denver Broncos winning is a 'fact' is comically dumb.

I'll repeat. Scary.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

What's the point? Vegas is a business. They thrive off people losing money; they do not thrive off people winning. Vegas often times skew the bottom line just to entice people to take it, and in the end, they become very profitable from it.

They're a business who makes a lot of scratch off marks who think their team is going to be better than they really are.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

3) Golden was by far thee worst coach this program has ever had, maybe in the history of NCAAF;

See. This is what I mean.
'
Somebody has said this about every coach since Coker.

Rinse, repeat.

'We will win 10 games because [insert coach] was the worst ever!'

Golden won 9 games at Temple. Say what you want about his tenure here (and it has been said) but he's not the worst coach we've had or the worst coach in history.

Please.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

With that being said, it's safe to say that Golden did less with more.

In 5 years Golden only had 7 defensive players drafted. Only 4 of them in the first 3 rounds.

The dearth of talent on defense was startling.

I sometimes wonder what games you guys are watching. It's just a stock response from Miami fans. They always think we're so talented. It's strange and untrue.

 

[Brian Piccolo]

So if Golden could pump out 9 wins from a 2013 squad, and the combo of Golden and Scott pumped out 8 wins from the 2015 squad, I think it's logical to think that the guy who holds a 74% winning pct in the SEC taking over a program who returns 96% of the same team that went 8-5 last year will win more than 8 games against a softer schedule he's accustomed to, don't you think?

Richt is the best hire we've made in a long time but I don't think last year was an 8-win team.

Our fans also always think our schedule is softer every year. Yet they always miss the inevitable loss to Georgia Tech or Pittsburgh or NC State that usually comes.