Expectations Going Forward

Donate To GopherHole
PMWinSTP said:
It was meant to be a range as stated...I used it as reference to what the win level was immediately proceeding Fleck's hire.
Click to expand...

But that means 8-4 every year over the next ten years is unacceptable to you. You can’t be serious?
 

RememberMurray said:
Would Ferentz / Fitzgerald type success increase attendance at TCF? Would it move the needle on season ticket sales? Would it help make the football program competitive in this market? Would it increase recruiting success levels?

Because if not... I'm not sure it will cut it. Mason was fired because of the reasons listed. So was Claeys (for those reasons, plus the scandal).
Click to expand...

I would think it would.

If the only acceptable coach is one that has us consistently winning B1GW we'll be firing a lot of coaches. My expectations:

1. Typically in B1GW hunt. There will be down years
2. Occasional B1GW win
3. Not decade + streaks to Wisconsin or Iowa
 

salzie said:
I would think it would.

If the only acceptable coach is one that has us consistently winning B1GW we'll be firing a lot of coaches. My expectations:

1. Typically in B1GW hunt. There will be down years
2. Occasional B1GW win
3. Not decade + streaks to Wisconsin or Iowa
Click to expand...

So you're okay with, say, beating Wisconsin once every 3-5 years?

If that's the case, you and I disagree. I think we can and should be striving to get to Wisconsin's level. If not, I'd be puzzled as to why we've decided to concede that the Badgers are permanently better than us. I am not willing to shrug and accept that as our fate.

Especially after what I saw from this team at the end of this season. I think we can do better than what you've outlined. I don't see why we can't aim higher, and achieve better than an "occasional B1GW win".
 

RememberMurray said:
So you're okay with, say, beating Wisconsin once every 3-5 years?

If that's the case, you and I disagree. I think we can and should be striving to get to Wisconsin's level. If not, I'd be puzzled as to why we've decided to concede that the Badgers are permanently better than us. I am not willing to shrug and accept that as our fate.

Especially after what I saw from this team at the end of this season. I think we can do better than what you've outlined. I don't see why we can't aim higher, and achieve better than an "occasional B1GW win".
Click to expand...

I think you took me a little too literal.

I don't want beating Wi to be this epic moment like this past year. I would like it to be competitive and win our fair share. Maybe even a 2-3 win streak, 1-2-3 game losing streak, back and forth.
 

Gophers_4life said:
But that means 8-4 every year over the next ten years is unacceptable to you. You can’t be serious?
Click to expand...

I did not post if he consistently won 8 games, I posted a range to reflect the range of wins immediately proceeding Fleck's hire, meaning if he continued that level. So the second part of your post earlier.
 


so, we seem to have people who expect, or believe, that Fleck is going to reach a level of success that Gopher FB has not seen since Bierman and Warmath.

hey, if it happens, that's great. Just saying that means that the Gophers would have to start recruiting on a level that this program has never reached in the modern era. the early 60's teams were boosted by segregation in the south, sending black athletes to northern schools. That situation no longer exists.
Some of the other great Gopher teams were boosted by older players returning from WWII. That situation no longer exists.

so, all Fleck has to do to meet some people's expectations is to recruit at a level never seen in the modern era, and win games at a frequency only seen in years when the Gophers were contending for National honors. good luck.
 

PMWinSTP said:
I did not post if he consistently won 8 games, I posted a range to reflect the range of wins immediately proceeding Fleck's hire, meaning if he continued that level. So the second part of your post earlier.
Click to expand...

Then you didn't communicate effectively, sorry. A range means that each year can be any of the numbers within the range specified. So 5,5,5,.... and 8,8,8,... are equally valid. I guess, you thought you were clearly communicating something like 5,7,8,6,5,7, .... That type of sequence I agree won't be acceptable long term.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
so, we seem to have people who expect, or believe, that Fleck is going to reach a level of success that Gopher FB has not seen since Bierman and Warmath.

hey, if it happens, that's great. Just saying that means that the Gophers would have to start recruiting on a level that this program has never reached in the modern era.
Click to expand...

Well ............. isn't that kinda the fundamental debate???

How on earth has Wisconsin achieved the success it has achieved, if it has never been able to recruit like Michigan???
 

Gophers_4life said:
Then you didn't communicate effectively, sorry. A range means that each year can be any of the numbers within the range specified. So 5,5,5,.... and 8,8,8,... are equally valid. I guess, you thought you were clearly communicating something like 5,7,8,6,5,7, .... That type of sequence I agree won't be acceptable long term.
Click to expand...

Multiple posts in response to others on this very subject where the post was talking about the baseline established immediately proceeding Fleck's hire. I did connect them together directly in at least one of those posts.
 




Livingat45north said:
Vegas (apparently) has 50,000:1 odds on our winning the nat'l champship next year. I'd say we've got better odds than that, at least 49,999:1. Does anyone know when Vegas will release the over/under number for 2019 games won?

https://www.oddsshark.com/ncaaf/odds#futures
Click to expand...

The link didn't take me to any actual odds (maybe I'm not opening it properly).

But I can't believe the odds would be 50,000 to 1.

Maybe it's bet $100 on the Gophers to win the National Championship, and they'd pay $50,000.

I could be wrong; it's happened many times!
 

short ornery norwegian said:
so, we seem to have people who expect, or believe, that Fleck is going to reach a level of success that Gopher FB has not seen since Bierman and Warmath.

hey, if it happens, that's great. Just saying that means that the Gophers would have to start recruiting on a level that this program has never reached in the modern era. the early 60's teams were boosted by segregation in the south, sending black athletes to northern schools. That situation no longer exists.
Some of the other great Gopher teams were boosted by older players returning from WWII. That situation no longer exists.

so, all Fleck has to do to meet some people's expectations is to recruit at a level never seen in the modern era, and win games at a frequency only seen in years when the Gophers were contending for National honors. good luck.
Click to expand...

Well, let's see...

Warmath and Bierman won National Championships.

Wisconsin is not at that level currently. In fact, I don't think they've ever won a National Championship in football.

I'll ask again: why must we concede that the Minnesota Golden Gopher football program will be permanently inferior to Wisconsin?

I like this coach. I think we can do it. I'm not willing to concede anything.
 

RememberMurray said:
The link didn't take me to any actual odds (maybe I'm not opening it properly).

But I can't believe the odds would be 50,000 to 1.

Maybe it's bet $100 on the Gophers to win the National Championship, and they'd pay $50,000.

I could be wrong; it's happened many times!
Click to expand...

You are correct. If you risk a $100 stake, and the Gophers win the title, you will profit $50k. (+50000)

The lowest odds are Clemson at +175, meaning a $100 wager profits $175. Everyone else is higher.


Naively, it would seem like they can't make any money. But if you think about it, there are what 130 teams and only one can win. And realistically, it probably will only be one of like four or five teams. So all the long-shot bets on all the other teams are pure profit for them, plus all the people who pick the wrong one of the those four or five likely teams.

The only way they really go belly-up is probably if a team like the preseason #10-15 wins it. Then enough people will have bet on it, and the profits will be pretty significant.
 



Gophers_4life said:
You are correct. If you risk a $100 stake, and the Gophers win the title, you will profit $50k. (+50000)

The lowest odds are Clemson at +175, meaning a $100 wager profits $175. Everyone else is higher.


Naively, it would seem like they can't make any money. But if you think about it, there are what 130 teams and only one can win. And realistically, it probably will only be one of like four or five teams. So all the long-shot bets on all the other teams are pure profit for them, plus all the people who pick the wrong one of the those four or five likely teams.

The only way they really go belly-up is probably if a team like the preseason #10-15 wins it. Then enough people will have bet on it, and the profits will be pretty significant.
Click to expand...

Does it give odds on Minnesota to win the B1G? How about odds on Gophers to win B1G West?
 

My expectations don't necessarily look to total wins or losses but to who the Gophers beat. I expect Minnesota to beat Wisconsin at a 60% rate, along with Nebraska and Iowa. I expect Minnesota to garner the Little Brown Jug at least once every 4 attempts. I expect the trophy case to have a minimum of 2 each year and once in the next five years have 4. I expect Minnesota to win the West twice in the next 5 years. I expect Minnesota to win the conference championship twice in the next 10 years. I have very high expectations for Fleck and company and I'll bet he would embrace my expectations if asked. He might say I'm shooting too low.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
so, we seem to have people who expect, or believe, that Fleck is going to reach a level of success that Gopher FB has not seen since Bierman and Warmath.

hey, if it happens, that's great. Just saying that means that the Gophers would have to start recruiting on a level that this program has never reached in the modern era. the early 60's teams were boosted by segregation in the south, sending black athletes to northern schools. That situation no longer exists.
Some of the other great Gopher teams were boosted by older players returning from WWII. That situation no longer exists.

so, all Fleck has to do to meet some people's expectations is to recruit at a level never seen in the modern era, and win games at a frequency only seen in years when the Gophers were contending for National honors. good luck.
Click to expand...

To be clear, you don't have to hit any certain level of achievement in recruiting to win on the field. It just makes it much, much easier.
 

We schedule our own non-conference games. I would think that we would be smart enough to schedule 3 wins. That means that we need to post a 5-4 BIG record each year to get to 8 total wins. That should be the bottom line every season from here out. Northwestern, Nebraska, Iowa, Wisconsin, we should win half of these games every year and 3/4 most years. that should be where the program is at right now.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
so, we seem to have people who expect, or believe, that Fleck is going to reach a level of success that Gopher FB has not seen since Bierman and Warmath.

hey, if it happens, that's great. Just saying that means that the Gophers would have to start recruiting on a level that this program has never reached in the modern era. the early 60's teams were boosted by segregation in the south, sending black athletes to northern schools. That situation no longer exists.
Some of the other great Gopher teams were boosted by older players returning from WWII. That situation no longer exists.

so, all Fleck has to do to meet some people's expectations is to recruit at a level never seen in the modern era, and win games at a frequency only seen in years when the Gophers were contending for National honors. good luck.
Click to expand...
So you're saying ... what? Since we haven't won a Big Ten championship in 50 years we should stop trying?

I understand that it's hard. But if that's not the goal, what's the point?

The Gophers were right there with Wisconsin and Iowa for years. Then they hired the right coaches and made a commitment and won championships. But we can't?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 

Hates Monikers said:
So you're saying ... what? Since we haven't won a Big Ten championship in 50 years we should stop trying?

I understand that it's hard. But if that's not the goal, what's the point?

The Gophers were right there with Wisconsin and Iowa for years. Then they hired the right coaches and made a commitment and won championships. But we can't?

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You are spot on.

And I think there's a pretty good chance that we have hired the right coach.
 

RememberMurray said:
The link didn't take me to any actual odds (maybe I'm not opening it properly).

But I can't believe the odds would be 50,000 to 1.

Maybe it's bet $100 on the Gophers to win the National Championship, and they'd pay $50,000.

I could be wrong; it's happened many times!
Click to expand...

Yep, you're right, that's for a $100 bet. Wager $100 and get $50,000 when we win the Nat'l Championship. Click here, and then click on the "Futures" option and scroll down.
 

When is the last time a team outside of "the usual suspects" has won a national championship?
 

BroncoRedux said:
My expectations don't necessarily look to total wins or losses but to who the Gophers beat. I expect Minnesota to beat Wisconsin at a 60% rate, along with Nebraska and Iowa. I expect Minnesota to garner the Little Brown Jug at least once every 4 attempts. I expect the trophy case to have a minimum of 2 each year and once in the next five years have 4. I expect Minnesota to win the West twice in the next 5 years. I expect Minnesota to win the conference championship twice in the next 10 years. I have very high expectations for Fleck and company and I'll bet he would embrace my expectations if asked. He might say I'm shooting too low.
Click to expand...

I agree that who we beat is important and provides context. People like to mock 9* wins, but the fact is we didn’t beat a rival or top 25 team that year. This year’s victories over Fresno St and Wisconsin were better than any wins we’ve had since the Mason years.
 


John Galt said:
I agree that who we beat is important and provides context. People like to mock 9* wins, but the fact is we didn’t beat a rival or top 25 team that year. This year’s victories over Fresno St and Wisconsin were better than any wins we’ve had since the Mason years.
Click to expand...

I mean, you play that schedule, and winning those 9 wins is nice provided that's the schedule we got.
In 2016 only 4 of our games were in that 15th - 70th range which would be good wins.

In 2018, we had 8 games in that area of rankings (Sagarin).

In 2016 we won most games we should and lost most games we should, similar to this year.
The difference is the 2018 schedule had a lot more games against respectable teams instead of horrible teams.
 

Face The Facts said:
I mean, you play that schedule, and winning those 9 wins is nice provided that's the schedule we got.
In 2016 only 4 of our games were in that 15th - 70th range which would be good wins.

In 2018, we had 8 games in that area of rankings (Sagarin).

In 2016 we won most games we should and lost most games we should, similar to this year.
The difference is the 2018 schedule had a lot more games against respectable teams instead of horrible teams.
Click to expand...

This past season was strange, in that you can point to a few key events:

... burning Faalele's redshirt and inserting him as starter

... Morgan replacing Annexstad

... Robb Smith firing, replaced by Rossi

I don't know if we would have lost to Maryland, Nebraska and Illinois if all of those events had already occurred previously to those games.
 

Gophers_4life said:
When is the last time a team outside of "the usual suspects" has won a national championship?
Click to expand...


Well, 2017 with UCF of course.

Other than that, it depends who is considered the usual suspects.
Right now Florida State isn't really a usual suspect, but they have a strong history. Auburn.... questionable.
Florida, LSU, Texas, USC, Miami?

1998 Tennessee might be the best example, but they are still a recognized brand.

1990 Georgia Tech / Colorado is probably the best example.

In almost all cases of an lesser known, they got there from excellent QB play.
Cam Newton, Peyton Manning, etc.
 

RememberMurray said:
This past season was strange, in that you can point to a few key events:

... burning Faalele's redshirt and inserting him as starter

... Morgan replacing Annexstad

... Robb Smith firing, replaced by Rossi

I don't know if we would have lost to Maryland, Nebraska and Illinois if all of those events had already occurred previously to those games.
Click to expand...


It's a good question.
I think the Nebraska game is a loss either way. Nebraska was not horrible and were getting better each week. It should have been a close loss however at worst.
Maryland and Illinois though...

Of the three things you mentioned. Biggest impact was Rossi, then Faalele. Then I still like to believe the QB change wasn't as significant, but I could be wrong. It's really hard to tell because the change of QB and Faalele were almost simultaneous.
 


Face The Facts said:
It's a good question.
I think the Nebraska game is a loss either way. Nebraska was not horrible and were getting better each week. It should have been a close loss however at worst.
Maryland and Illinois though...

Of the three things you mentioned. Biggest impact was Rossi, then Faalele. Then I still like to believe the QB change wasn't as significant, but I could be wrong. It's really hard to tell because the change of QB and Faalele were almost simultaneous.
Click to expand...


I think Annexstad and Morgan might be quite evenly matched as potential starting QBs going forward. But at the time of the switch, it appeared to me that Zach was simply too banged up. He couldn't move properly. Morgan had more juice (again, at that particular time) because he was, quite simply, healthy.
 

RememberMurray said:
I think Annexstad and Morgan might be quite evenly matched as potential starting QBs going forward. But at the time of the switch, it appeared to me that Zach was simply too banged up. He couldn't move properly. Morgan had more juice (again, at that particular time) because he was, quite simply, healthy.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Healthy with better line, vs hobbling and weaker line.

At the end of the season, looking at Tanners efficiency numbers, he played pretty darn well.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom