What is successful season benchmark in 2017-18?

Look no further than the 2016 Gophers to support my claim. If you don't like that example then go 4-hours east and look at either the 2006 or 2013 Badgers.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nitpick time! I feel like 2016 was an anomaly as in 2015 the coach left due to medical reasons, wasn't fired, and 2015 was somewhat underachieving year and such.

Having said that generally I agree. I don't think there's a sure pattern either way that you can count on as a benchmark as CFB such an uneven league. School to school, schedule to schedule things are so different.
 


I don't know if this makes me prudent - or chicken - but I don't like to set out specific goals or requirements for a successful season. With me, it's like the Supreme Court justice said about pornography - I can't define it, but I know it when I see it.

The thing is - if I say "The Gophers Must Beat WI" for this to be a successful season - and they don't beat WI - then I've backed myself into a corner. What if the Gophs win 9 games - but lose to WI? how can anyone say 9 wins is not a successful season. At the end of the year, I look back at the entire season - weight the plusses and the minuses, and I decide if it was a successful season - from my point of view. Which is to say - I may judge 2017 to be a successful season, but another poster may decide it was not successful from their point of view. And that's fine. to each his own.

I don't like to say a specific number either because there are many ways to get to a win total. Say 7 wins. If they squeak by the teams they are supposed to beat, but then get blown out by the others, I wouldn't be very happy. But if they struggle early on and lose a few they shouldn't but then improve a lot later on and upset a few teams, then I'd be a little more excited. Same win total, different feeling.
 

There is no number or benchmark. The eyes will tell the story. A slow start with a team clicking on all cylinders at the end of the year would be successful to me. They might come out the first game and just look like a whole new team on offense. If the season yields excitement and optimism, I will consider it a success, and there's many paths to that end.
 

There is no number or benchmark. The eyes will tell the story. A slow start with a team clicking on all cylinders at the end of the year would be successful to me. They might come out the first game and just look like a whole new team on offense. If the season yields excitement and optimism, I will consider it a success, and there's many paths to that end.

You said it a lot better than me. Exactly this.
 


I think there should be a benchmark. If Tracy had stayed I would have expected at least a 7 win season (we still would have had a new qb).
Our d-line and line backing core combined with Shannon Brooks should be more than enough to win 6 games given some of the teams we're playing.
Anything under a 6-win season means that Fleck didn't have his guys ready to go, and that's the coaches fault.
 

And those comparisons are always apples vs oranges. The current Gophers program is still nowhere near where the Badgers have been for 20 years.

As has been painfully pointed out to you numerous times on this point, it is a relative thing. Your apples to oranges comment is a red herring. If you can't get that, I'm sorry, there's no hope.
 

All that is fine and good. Go ahead and re-read my post that you objected to. I was challenging the statement that teams typically need a year to "adjust" to a new coach. Not sure why you are now pulling in QB, WR, OL, DL (where we aren't thin), and DB. Let's try to stay on topic - OK GWG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's what GWG does...massage or pivot however needed to make himself feel "right".
 




And facts show you're always wrong. But you're consistent in repeating wrong things over and over again.

...and your response once again proves my point. Also, forgot to add that you eventually go to some sort of 5th grade personal attack when all else fails...
 

...and your response once again proves my point. Also, forgot to add that you eventually go to some sort of 5th grade personal attack when all else fails...

You don't have a point, you never do. Still waiting for Kaler and Coyle to be fired this summer as you repeated would happen over and over again...
 

You don't have a point, you never do. Still waiting for Kaler and Coyle to be fired this summer as you repeated would happen over and over again...

You really do live in your own made up world...

Board investigation is ongoing, genius.
 

All that is fine and good. Go ahead and re-read my post that you objected to. I was challenging the statement that teams typically need a year to "adjust" to a new coach. Not sure why you are now pulling in QB, WR, OL, DL (where we aren't thin), and DB. Let's try to stay on topic - OK GWG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spoofin - you really don't think we are "thin" at WR or QB? You think our QB and WR depth is average for a P5-conference team?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 



Spoofin - you really don't think we are "thin" at WR or QB? You think our QB and WR depth is average for a P5-conference team?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

HA. My bad. That note was only meant for the position listed right before it (DL).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

HA. My bad. That note was only meant for the position listed right before it (DL).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was about to tell you to stop drinking too much Fleck-Ade!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 


If we get decent QB play, I'll go with Bowl Eligible.

We lost our leader so this is a whole new team with Leidner gone, but I'm certainly not going to go in expecting Croft or Rhoda plays well enough to make this team better. If he was better he would have been the QB last year when we had a chance to make a run for the West title.

Both could unseat Leidner so why do we think it will be as good?
 

If we get decent QB play, I'll go with Bowl Eligible.

We lost our leader so this is a whole new team with Leidner gone, but I'm certainly not going to go in expecting Croft or Rhoda plays well enough to make this team better. If he was better he would have been the QB last year when we had a chance to make a run for the West title.

Both could unseat Leidner so why do we think it will be as good?

But - are we judging Croft or Rhoda by what they did under a previous coaching staff, with a different offensive system?

I think most people are aware the Gophers do have a new coach - (it was in the papers) - and along with that, a new coaching staff and a new offensive system.

Look - we don't know for sure yet how any of the returning players will adapt and adjust to the new system. Some may struggle. some players may be less effective. But, other players may be more effective in the new system. From what I've read, Fleck's whole offensive philosophy is based around putting playmakers in position to make plays. in other words, put people in a position where they have the most chance of success. Sure, they have to have a minimal level of athletic ability and intelligence - but assuming that all of the QB candidates have a minimal level of athleticism and intelligence, then I believe there is a good chance that Fleck will find at least one person on this roster who can run the offense.

The Gophs don't have to have a QB turn into Payton Manning - they just need someone who can hit an open receiver and run the offense in a competent fashion.

Here's my prediction - the Gophers will not have the best QB play in the B1G this year - but they will not have the worst QB play in the B1G, either.
 


I don't even know who the QB is.
Considering we don't have a starting QB, it's hard for me to say more than 4 wins should be expected in any coach's first year.

Anything above 4 wins on a team without a starting QB is really asking too much.

Stop. Your bit is old and tired, along with not being entertaining.
 

The Gophs don't have to have a QB turn into Payton Manning - they just need someone who can hit an open receiver and run the offense in a competent fashion.

Here's my prediction - the Gophers will not have the best QB play in the B1G this year - but they will not have the worst QB play in the B1G, either.

How many times have we had those the last 6 years? Not many thanks to the lack of talent at WR. Some of the true freshman are promising, but they are true freshman.
 

Someone said it best, I want to see gelling as a team and a much better team at the end of the season. It could take many routes, this could be typical:
With reps, Rhoda/Croft gains confidence and has a better completion average than previous years. But overall team leadership comes from Richardson the RBs and a break-through redshirt we haven't seen much from yet. DBs settle in and play on par with past squads. LBs dominate the league and give everyone fits but the most experienced QBs. Santoso averages over 50 yrs/punt and Carpenter turns in an All American year. Fleck and co. get a signature win.

The little kid down the street replaces his Packers jersey with a Gophers one, and when I take off my rose-colored glasses, this team is ranked in the top 25, and all the nattering nabobs on the GH have moved on.
 

Honestly as long as the program doesn't cause the university a national embarrassment it is probably a successful year in the minds of the athletics dept
 





Top Bottom