Not believing the hype

I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.
 
Advertisement
Not going to read all that nonsense. Most unbiased observers had this as a 7 to 9 win team with ryan williams at the helm. So if you say we should win 11 and dont perform to that it's just as bad as pretending that people who had expectations that are reasonable are "lowering expectations".

aka the facts are there and I am going to play the illiterate card.

The reasons the expectations are low is because they (unbiased opinions) don't think this staff can exceed those low bars. Do you understand the concept?

It is not simply an accomplishment to exceed low expectations.

Your facts have nothing to do with the fact that most unbiased people picked this as 7 to 9 win team with a Sr. QB supposedly leading the way and seemingly we're playing to that expectation level, even with a true freshman qb.

We're going in circles. The reason the exceptions are low is because of the staff and what they have done.

Side Note: A senior QB who has hardly played in 5 years. Hey didn't we get another Senior QB in Jake Heaps?

Lulz so they said "this is a really good team, maybe even great, but because of the staff, we think it's only a 7 - 9 win team" does that even seem plausible to you?
 
That's ludicrous. So if someone evaluates a team and a schedule and says, that's a 7 to 9 win team, then we should be mad when we dont win 10 to 12 games? That's retarded. You'd have a point if it was just people here saying we should win 5 -7 games, so that they can be like "look how good we are, we exceeded expectations" ... that's not the case. Professionals who are completely unbiased, as in they don't care about us, golden etc... said based on our talent and schedule ( with a sr. Qb) that a good season for this team, this year, would fall betweem 7 and 9 wins. That's not just some number "goldenites" made up for the sake of "meeting expectations".

It's not retarded, it makes perfect sense. Let's start from the beginning and explain expectations in general (not UM related).

Stay with me please:

A. Quick Review

Expectation: a strong belief that something will happen or be the case in the future.

How do we decide expectations? Trend Analysis.

Trend Analysis: the practice of collecting information and attempting to spot a pattern, or trend, in the information.

So the way people make expectations is to study the information in the past in order to forecast the future.

B. Expectations and Trend Analysis in predicting futures (i.e. over/under wins)

What "experts" do is they study the past (of a team) and attempt to forecast the amount of wins? They will look at MOSTLY the coach and the team and see how they performed in the recent past in order to set the bar for the future. Now when a team has done poorly in the past and little has changed, the "experts" will predict similar results in the future. This is how it works.

-------------------------------------------- (BACK TO UM)
C. 7-9 Wins versus 10-12 Wins

The reason experts predict 7-9 wins is based on the following:

1. 13-11 in the ACC (over 3 seasons),
2. 0 Coastal Championships,
3. 0-3 Against FSU, and
4. 1 Win versus a team that finished with 8 or more wins (GT 2011)

For the last 3 years we averaged 3.6 Ls in the ACC. Our best win (in terms of a final record stand point) was in 2011 against GT. They had 8 wins. Together this shows experts that we have trouble beating the humps in our conference. In addition, we have trouble beating teams that are decent. The ACC schedule doesn't change that much from year to year.

Now even if we get 7-9 wins, this isn't an accomplishment. It means NOTHING. It means that we've likely repeated a similar result. The reason we will keep repeating this result is because this staff can only take us so far. Simply hitting these expectations MEANS NOTHING because they're based on our trends in the past.

So you and all the Pro-Golden guys can be proud that we matched these expectations. That is better than winning the Conference, Beating FSU, Going to BCS Games, Winning 10+ Wins and NCs. That is all that matters is meeting LOW expectations. How about a shred of accountability and standards?

Yes, that's what they did.. They said " al golden was 2 -30 at temple against fbs teams, so even though this current miami team is stacked across the board, they're only going to win 7-9 games" ..laughable, at best.
 
1. VT sucks

2. They did the same thing against Duke and Dorito went back to being Dorito against GT

3. Lets see them look competent against the UNC offense

I ain't falling for this **** again mane, it's still **** Golden and his friend until further notice

Duke is awesome though

EXACTLY. This team is still poorly coached.

We scored 6 second half points.......WTF

Candy Canes......
 
Yes, that's what they did.. They said " al golden was 2 -30 at temple against fbs teams, so even though this current miami team is stacked across the board, they're only going to win 7-9 games" ..laughable, at best.

huh
 
Advertisement
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99
 
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.
 
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Let this season play out before anyone compares 2014 with previous seasons.
 
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Not irrelevant and you're trying to cherry pick facts to suit your argument, which I don't have a problem with, because everybody in a debate does it.

The same way you could say Butch beat UCLA, I could say Butch gave up 66 points to Syracuse and lost to East Carolina.

The facts are that according to many folks here criteria for competence, Butch Davis fell well short of expectations and should have been fired.

As of now, Bunchy should be on the outs, but do know, you would have fired the guy that you're currently clamoring for after 1999
 
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Let this season play out before anyone compares 2014 with previous seasons.

That's basically what I'm saying last night should buy Bunchy the opportunity to do.

Go out and win 4 out of the last 5 games, including a bowl win, and you can keep your job.
 
We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Let this season play out before anyone compares 2014 with previous seasons.

That's basically what I'm saying last night should buy Bunchy the opportunity to do.

Go out and win 4 out of the last 5 games, including a bowl win, and you can keep your job.

I don't care about the 'job'.. I say keep on rolling 1 game at a time and watch out we don't surprise the Noles.
 
Advertisement
I don't understand what this discussion is supposed to be about. This team is obviously better than some on this board have said. It's not the worst defense in football. We're not a bad team. We beat bad teams, handily. We lose to mediocre-to-good teams when we don't play well, we beat them when we do. We're not going to beat great teams. This makes us a mediocre-to-good team.

Frankly, I'll take that with a true freshman at QB, and an improving D. Doesn't make me especially happy. It's not something to be satisfied with going forward. It's not where the U should be. But the future looks better than the recent past.

(As an aside, for those that still think the D end's up statistically where it did last year - 90th - we'd have to average giving up 650 yards of offense in the final four games.)

We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Not irrelevant and you're trying to cherry pick facts to suit your argument, which I don't have a problem with, because everybody in a debate does it.

The same way you could say Butch beat UCLA, I could say Butch gave up 66 points to Syracuse and lost to East Carolina.

The facts are that according to many folks here criteria for competence, Butch Davis fell well short of expectations and should have been fired.

As of now, Bunchy should be on the outs, but do know, you would have fired the guy that you're currently clamoring for after 1999

Also irrelevant but start another thread about UNC being a test.
 
We haven't beaten a team that finished with 9+ wins, what good teams are we beating? Our overall record in the ACC is 15-13.

We beat one team that had 8 wins (GT in 2011). This is the problem.

Not saying this is '99...but judging by this criteria, you would have fired Butch after '99

Irrelevant.

Side note in 1998 Butch Davis and Miami beat UCLA. At the time they were undefeated and #3 in the country. They finished 10-2. Our best win came against GT in 2011 (8 WINS!!!!). Please note that Miami had ACTUAL sanctions back then.

Not irrelevant and you're trying to cherry pick facts to suit your argument, which I don't have a problem with, because everybody in a debate does it.

The same way you could say Butch beat UCLA, I could say Butch gave up 66 points to Syracuse and lost to East Carolina.

The facts are that according to many folks here criteria for competence, Butch Davis fell well short of expectations and should have been fired.

As of now, Bunchy should be on the outs, but do know, you would have fired the guy that you're currently clamoring for after 1999

Also irrelevant but start another thread about UNC being a test.

irrelevant
 
Back
Top