forums

What do we consider winning?

wSmokin Sebastian

wSmokin Sebastian

Recruit
Joined
Nov 8, 2017
Messages
402
This isn't a knock on anyone or even UM. Just as to the winning arguement I see thrown around and I want to know what people feel.

I'm curious as to what you have to do to be considered "winning" these days. I mean I think consistency has some to do with the overall perception of a winning program. Off the top of my head the only winning programs the last 10 years would have to be clemson, Alabama and maybe Ohio state. Outside of that everyone has to be considered a loser at some point.

Then I see people saying Miami didnt "win" last year. Right, we took home nothing more than a division title but the team finished 13th out of 129 teams. Is it safe the say the standard of "winning" is to be top 5, behind that is not considered a winner or top flight program? I'm curious how people define winning because some say certain teams are and some arent but there isn't anything they quantify other than perception. Or is championships at the conference and overall level that determine a winner?
 
Advertisement
Everything is subjective. If your team has sucked for a decade, going 6-6 and playing in a bowl game is considered "winning". I'd say for Miami right now, double digit win seasons and trips to the ACCCG are considered "winning". With winning comes expectations though. Not many fans are complacent. They always want the program to do better. It's only a matter of time before just getting to the conference championship game isn't going to be enough. We will expect to win it. After that, winning the conference wont' be enough, we'll expect to win national titles.
 
Smokin Sebastian said:
This isn't a knock on anyone or even UM. Just as to the winning arguement I see thrown around and I want to know what people feel.

I'm curious as to what you have to do to be considered "winning" these days. I mean I think consistency has some to do with the overall perception of a winning program. Off the top of my head the only winning programs the last 10 years would have to be clemson, Alabama and maybe Ohio state. Outside of that everyone has to be considered a loser at some point.

Then I see people saying Miami didnt "win" last year. Right, we took home nothing more than a division title but the team finished 13th out of 129 teams. Is it safe the say the standard of "winning" is to be top 5, behind that is not considered a winner or top flight program? I'm curious how people define winning because some say certain teams are and some arent but there isn't anything they quantify other than perception. Or is championships at the conference and overall level that determine a winner?
Click to expand...
If Miami had its top 2 and 3 options in the bowl game Miami finishes 11-2 really 12-2 top 5 in the country. That game was 27-21 with less than 10 minutes left in the 4th we absolutely win that with Ahmmon Richards and Chris Herndon on the field
 
This is the University of Miami, not Vanderbilt, not Iowa State, not Minnesota, not Oregon State, not Rutgers, not Wake Forest. There are 5 national titles to our name in many (most?) of our lifetimes. We are in the most fertile recruiting grounds in the country. We have an international city, a top 50 private university, great weather, great food, great women.

If you aren't attracting the caliber of players you need to be playing for titles, you have underachieved what this school is capable of. I understand that there are up years and down years, but this is one of only a handful of schools that has a non-delusional claim to expecting to be ultra competitive the majority of seasons. And ultra competitive isn't winning the ACC coastal as the crown achievement.
 
Advertisement
10+ wins every year.

Getting to the ACCCG 8 times a decade

Winning national titles

Never losing to UF. Ever. I would rather lose to the ****'s.
 
Win the ACC & make it to the playoffs, that's the standard.

You want the big name high 4/5-star recruits to turn down the bags & pick us, that's what we have to do every year.

Kids in today's era are frontrunners, they will only believe it when they see it with their own eyes. For us to have a top 5 class every year, we'll have to win a National title within the next 2 years.

Either we're competing with Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma & Oh St, or we're fighting for the spots just below them on an annual basis. There's no moral victories in this game.
 
Liberty City El said:
Win the ACC & make it to the playoffs, that's the standard.

You want the big name high 4/5-star recruits to turn down the bags & pick us, that's what we have to do every year.

Kids in today's era are frontrunners, they will only believe it when they see it with their own eyes. For us to have a top 5 class every year, we'll have to win a National title within the next 2 years.

Either we're competing with Bama, Clemson, Oklahoma & Oh St, or we're fighting for the spots just below them on an annual basis. There's no moral victories in this game.
Click to expand...


I agree with everything you said, just not sure I put Oklahoma in there yet. Give them 2-3 years and then for sure. It has more been about how bad their conference has been.
 
Smokin Sebastian said:
This isn't a knock on anyone or even UM. Just as to the winning arguement I see thrown around and I want to know what people feel.

I'm curious as to what you have to do to be considered "winning" these days. I mean I think consistency has some to do with the overall perception of a winning program. Off the top of my head the only winning programs the last 10 years would have to be clemson, Alabama and maybe Ohio state. Outside of that everyone has to be considered a loser at some point.

Then I see people saying Miami didnt "win" last year. Right, we took home nothing more than a division title but the team finished 13th out of 129 teams. Is it safe the say the standard of "winning" is to be top 5, behind that is not considered a winner or top flight program? I'm curious how people define winning because some say certain teams are and some arent but there isn't anything they quantify other than perception. Or is championships at the conference and overall level that determine a winner?
Click to expand...

I'm guessing you're under 30?

Growing up in the 80's, we learned that a top 5 final ranking wasn't even worth putting in the car to bring home. We laughed at teams that bragged about top ten or top 5 rankings. Playing a top 20 or top 15 team was considered a bye week.

Consider this, Miami owns 5 national titles that no one can take away from us. Do you know we played our bowl game with a shot at the national title like 8 more times from 1983-2002 in addition to that? I'm just going off the top of my head, but that's a pretty reasonable/conservative number.

That's the standard of "winning" at the University of Miami. Everything else is just what happens on the way to the goal of playing for national championships. A successful year means winning a national championship. A successful decade means winning multiple national championships and playing for half (or more) of them. It is still a game played against other teams with good coaches, good players, and an oblong sphere that can bounce funny at times, so we don't expect to win a national championship every year, but being in the hunt and winning more than our fair share of national championships is what "winning" means for UM Football.
 
Advertisement
brock said:
If Miami had its top 2 and 3 options in the bowl game Miami finishes 11-2 really 12-2 top 5 in the country. That game was 27-21 with less than 10 minutes left in the 4th we absolutely win that with Ahmmon Richards and Chris Herndon on the field
Click to expand...

Safe to say if we had beaten Wisky, we would be sitting where they are now in this weeks AP poll.
 
Themadcane said:
I agree with everything you said, just not sure I put Oklahoma in there yet. Give them 2-3 years and then for sure. It has more been about how bad their conference has been.
Click to expand...
Oklahoma has always been a perennial National title contender, even back in the BCS era.
 
Advertisement
Our goals when we hired Mark Richt:

1. Win Division. - Completed.
2. Win ACC.
3. Win Orange Bowl.
4. Make CFP.
5. Make National Championship.
6. Win National Championship.

We completed step one last season by winning the Coastal. For now on Winning the Coastal is just an expectation, if we do not win the Coastal than the season is a failure, plain and simple.

The primary goal now is winning the ACC. If we play in the ACCCG but lose, will I consider this season a "loss/failure"? Not necessarily; it depends on our record. Like If we go undefeated but lose to Clemson this year, I wont say this season was a failure - especially if we win a big bowl game too. But I wouldn't consider it an excellent season either, because ultimately we didn't quite reach our goals. Just a good season, but not great kinda thing.

After we win the ACC the next goal is making, then winning, the CFP. The higher our goals are, the less likely we will reach them EVERY year (except winning the division). And thats a good thing. Goals aren't supposed to be easy to reach.
 
calinative umstudent said:
Our goals when we hired Mark Richt:

1. Win Division. - Completed.
2. Win ACC.
3. Win Orange Bowl.
4. Make CFP.
5. Make National Championship.
6. Win National Championship.

We completed step one last season by winning the Coastal. For now on Winning the Coastal is just an expectation, if we do not win the Coastal than the season is a failure, plain and simple.

The primary goal now is winning the ACC. If we play in the ACCCG but lose, will I consider this season a "loss/failure"? Not necessarily; it depends on our record. Like If we go undefeated but lose to Clemson this year, I wont say this season was a failure - especially if we win a big bowl game too. But I wouldn't consider it an excellent season either, because ultimately we didn't quite reach our goals. Just a good season, but not great kinda thing.

After we win the ACC the next goal is making, then winning, the CFP. The higher our goals are, the less likely we will reach them EVERY year (except winning the division). And thats a good thing. Goals aren't supposed to be easy to reach.
Click to expand...

You forgot to include:

1. Beating FSU for 1st time since 2009
2. 10 win season 1st time since 2004
3. Win a bowl game 1st time since 2006

We have come a long way in 2 seasons under Richt.
 
Advertisement
PGrady24 said:
You forgot to include:

1. Beating FSU for 1st time since 2009
2. 10 win season 1st time since 2004
3. Win a bowl game 1st time since 2006

We have come a long way in 2 seasons under Richt.
Click to expand...
I didn't forget to include those things. If we win the ACC we'll have 10 wins guaranteed, so no reason to post that. And I DID write win a bow game - the Orange Bowl AND a CFP game. Idgaf if we win a ****** bowl game.
Beating FSU is obviously something that we expect to do.
 
g8rh8rMD said:
I'm guessing you're under 30?

Growing up in the 80's, we learned that a top 5 final ranking wasn't even worth putting in the car to bring home. We laughed at teams that bragged about top ten or top 5 rankings. Playing a top 20 or top 15 team was considered a bye week.

Consider this, Miami owns 5 national titles that no one can take away from us. Do you know we played our bowl game with a shot at the national title like 8 more times from 1983-2002 in addition to that? I'm just going off the top of my head, but that's a pretty reasonable/conservative number.

That's the standard of "winning" at the University of Miami. Everything else is just what happens on the way to the goal of playing for national championships. A successful year means winning a national championship. A successful decade means winning multiple national championships and playing for half (or more) of them. It is still a game played against other teams with good coaches, good players, and an oblong sphere that can bounce funny at times, so we don't expect to win a national championship every year, but being in the hunt and winning more than our fair share of national championships is what "winning" means for UM Football.
Click to expand...


Well said, sir!
 
Advertisement
Back
Top