Expectations Going Forward

Donate To GopherHole
fmlizard said:
I don't think Wisconsin fans could have reasonably expected what they got over some of their runs. Frankly, almost no fanbase should expect that. Not with the basic disadvantages Wisconsin has to work with. Does that mean we should believe it to be impossible? No!

I wish I didn't have to use Wisconsin as the example, but frankly they are the best example nationally of my point. Their success in a very similar situation as the Gophers should be the proof it's possible that keeps us going.

There's been very few programs that have elevated into the annual top 15 teams when they were far from it before. Expecting that is likely to leave a person disappointed. The far more reasonable goal is something like Iowa where we're almost never awful, consistently good, and occasionally great. It's the stopover on the way to the top Wisconsin and Oregon did between 1993-200x. That would be a big step up for Gopher football.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but your equivocation leaves me a bit confused.

I'll ask the question again:

Are the Minnesota Golden Gophers and the Wisconsin Badgers RIVALS in football, or not?

To me, if the fanbase of School A says that it would be unreasonable to expect to achieve equal success as School B, then the two schools are NOT rivals. The rivalry is over. Guess which school lost the rivalry.
 

fmlizard said:
I don't think Wisconsin fans could have reasonably expected what they got over some of their runs. Frankly, almost no fanbase should expect that. Not with the basic disadvantages Wisconsin has to work with. Does that mean we should believe it to be impossible? No!

I wish I didn't have to use Wisconsin as the example, but frankly they are the best example nationally of my point. Their success in a very similar situation as the Gophers should be the proof it's possible that keeps us going.

There's been very few programs that have elevated into the annual top 15 teams when they were far from it before. Expecting that is likely to leave a person disappointed. The far more reasonable goal is something like Iowa where we're almost never awful, consistently good, and occasionally great. It's the stopover on the way to the top Wisconsin and Oregon did between 1993-200x. That would be a big step up for Gopher football.
Click to expand...

Oregon was (and arguably still is or could easily be again) great because they built amazing facilities and then for a time was able to recruit the top players in California to go to Eugene instead of going to USC, UCLA, Stanford, etc.

Wisconsin's run of success isn't the same thing. I'm sure they have OK facilities, but not bleeding edge amazing. And they don't go down to Texas, Florida, wherever and get top 15 classes of 4 and 5 star players, right?
 

RememberMurray said:
Sorry, but your equivocation leaves me a bit confused.

I'll ask the question again:

Are the Minnesota Golden Gophers and the Wisconsin Badgers RIVALS in football, or not?

To me, if the fanbase of School A says that it would be unreasonable to expect to achieve equal success as School B, then the two schools are NOT rivals. The rivalry is over. Guess which school lost the rivalry.
Click to expand...

I think it's unreasonable for Wisconsin fans to expect their same level of success to continue. Those guys have become the #2 football program in the B1G this century, but I don't think that will continue.
That once again does not mean it won't or can't happen, but expecting what they have gotten in recent years is likely to leave disappointment in Wisconsin. Which I hope for.

I also think Minnesota can achieve that, but isn't likely to. I don't think anyone outside of Ohio State and maybe Michigan or Penn State should expect to achieve that.

Minnesota isn't measured on if it can get to the exact levels Wisconsin has in the past. All that matters is that the Gophers eclipse Wisconsin in seasons going forward. Which I do think we can expect as fans.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Oregon was (and arguably still is or could easily be again) great because they built amazing facilities and then for a time was able to recruit the top players in California to go to Eugene instead of going to USC, UCLA, Stanford, etc.

Wisconsin's run of success isn't the same thing. I'm sure they have OK facilities, but not bleeding edge amazing. And they don't go down to Texas, Florida, wherever and get top 15 classes of 4 and 5 star players, right?
Click to expand...

Correct.

I strongly disagree with the position that we, as a fanbase, are being "unreasonable" if we expect to get to the point where we are on an equal footing with a team that is supposed to be our RIVAL.

Again, that's contradictory.

We either have a rivalry, or we don't have one.
 

RememberMurray said:
Correct.

I strongly disagree with the position that we, as a fanbase, are being "unreasonable" if we expect to get to the point where we are on an equal footing with a team that is supposed to be our RIVAL.

Again, that's contradictory.

We either have a rivalry, or we don't have one.
Click to expand...

You're kind of tossing stuff out there and trying to make it a rule.
Yes, WI is a "rival" but it's based on a long history.

Some "rivals" develop because of annual close matchups.
Some rivals develop because of personal relationships. Coaches leaving for the other team.
Some rivals are geographically based.

MN / WI is a rival because of Geography and due to long history.
No 5 year expectation on wins can be made because the definition is they are a rival.

Regarding expectations for this year, I hope MN wins more games than WI. Do I expect that? 50-50.
Do I expect it for 5 years? Based on last 5 year history, no. Not yet.
 


Perhaps a more reasonable counter argument is that so many of the West teams, or non-great Big Ten teams, have been bogged down for a while and that in turn allowed Wisconsin to get more wins. I would argue that Minnesota, NW, Purdue, Nebraska are trending up, and we saw what happened to Wisco. They had a down year. Will be interesting to see if they bounce back, or if this is a start of a new trend. I hope so!

But also at the same time, with all these teams trending up ... makes it that much harder for Minnesota to get to 6-0 over the West.
 

fmlizard said:
I think it's unreasonable for Wisconsin fans to expect their same level of success to continue. Those guys have become the #2 football program in the B1G this century, but I don't think that will continue.
That once again does not mean it won't or can't happen, but expecting what they have gotten in recent years is likely to leave disappointment in Wisconsin. Which I hope for.

I also think Minnesota can achieve that, but isn't likely to. I don't think anyone outside of Ohio State and maybe Michigan or Penn State should expect to achieve that.

Minnesota isn't measured on if it can get to the exact levels Wisconsin has in the past. All that matters is that the Gophers eclipse Wisconsin in seasons going forward. Which I do think we can expect as fans.
Click to expand...

???????

I wonder if those were the expectations that Coyle set down for P.J. Fleck when he hired the new coach.

And if they were, I wonder if the coach replied...

"Wow!

I....

...uhhh...

... huh? Come again...?"
 

Face The Facts said:
You're kind of tossing stuff out there and trying to make it a rule.
Yes, WI is a "rival" but it's based on a long history.

Some "rivals" develop because of annual close matchups.
Some rivals develop because of personal relationships. Coaches leaving for the other team.
Some rivals are geographically based.

MN / WI is a rival because of Geography and due to long history.
No 5 year expectation on wins can be made because the definition is they are a rival.

Regarding expectations for this year, I hope MN wins more games than WI. Do I expect that? 50-50.
Do I expect it for 5 years? Based on last 5 year history, no. Not yet.
Click to expand...

No I am definitely not "tossing stuff out there".

I am replying to the question of expectations going forward, which is the topic of the thread.

I am giving a very clear, specific picture of my particular expectations, without any equivocation or double talk.

So, last time (because this discussion is becoming circular): If Wisconsin is our rival, we should aim to be at least as good as Wisconsin. That's certainly not an "unreasonable" point of view.

Simple, and to the point. Feel free (of course) to disagree.
 

RememberMurray said:
No I am definitely not "tossing stuff out there".

I am replying to the question of expectations going forward, which is the topic of the thread.

I am giving a very clear, specific picture of my particular expectations, without any equivocation or double talk.

So, last time (because this discussion is becoming circular): If Wisconsin is our rival, we should aim to be at least as good as Wisconsin. That's certainly not an "unreasonable" point of view.

Simple, and to the point. Feel free (of course) to disagree.
Click to expand...

You're making this more difficult than it needs to be, (perhaps intentionally).

1. Set whatever expectation you want for the Gophers. You control your own expectations. No one else's. You can try to influence them, but you control your own.
2. Coyle and Fleck are trying to win every game. (despite what you or someone else might think). Fleck and Coyle both try to win 12 games a year.
3. Results are judged after games are played.
4. "Rivalry" status has no influence on games won or lost. Rivalry is too subjective of a term to utilize. Go ahead and draw whatever conclusions you want and use it to win any internet argument you want. In the end, Coyle, the President, nor Fleck are going to self-disqualify them for not winning X number of games over the next 5 years because of what WI has done in the past.
 



Face The Facts said:
You're making this more difficult than it needs to be, (perhaps intentionally).

1. Set whatever expectation you want for the Gophers. You control your own expectations. No one else's. You can try to influence them, but you control your own.
2. Coyle and Fleck are trying to win every game. (despite what you or someone else might think). Fleck and Coyle both try to win 12 games a year.
3. Results are judged after games are played.
4. "Rivalry" status has no influence on games won or lost. Rivalry is too subjective of a term to utilize. Go ahead and draw whatever conclusions you want and use it to win any internet argument you want. In the end, Coyle, the President, nor Fleck are going to self-disqualify them for not winning X number of games over the next 5 years because of what WI has done in the past.
Click to expand...

Holy... cow!

Do you think I am being "unreasonable" in stating that my expectations are that the Gophers' goal should be to achieve Wisconsin status?
 

RememberMurray said:
Holy... cow!

Do you think I am being "unreasonable" in stating that my expectations are that the Gophers' goal should be to achieve Wisconsin status?
Click to expand...

Expectations and goals are different things to me. I think that's what's derailing us all here. It should be the Gophers goal to win the Big Ten and make the CFP. It should not be an expectation.

Expectations for me are things that if they aren't met, Fleck should be fired.

Also, I have been saying that we should expect the Gophers to pass up Wisconsin in future seasons. We already might be getting pretty close. But saying Fleck needs to reach Wisconsin's historical success and go to 3 straight Rose Bowls and win 10+ games a year or he should be fired (expectation) is ridiculous.
 

Face The Facts said:
You're kind of tossing stuff out there and trying to make it a rule.
Yes, WI is a "rival" but it's based on a long history.

Some "rivals" develop because of annual close matchups.
Some rivals develop because of personal relationships. Coaches leaving for the other team.
Some rivals are geographically based.

MN / WI is a rival because of Geography and due to long history.
No 5 year expectation on wins can be made because the definition is they are a rival.

Regarding expectations for this year, I hope MN wins more games than WI. Do I expect that? 50-50.
Do I expect it for 5 years? Based on last 5 year history, no. Not yet.
Click to expand...

He didn't say rival - he said RIVAL! Pay attention
 

fmlizard said:
Expectations and goals are different things to me. I think that's what's derailing us all here. It should be the Gophers goal to win the Big Ten and make the CFP. It should not be an expectation.

Expectations for me are things that if they aren't met, Fleck should be fired.

Also, I have been saying that we should expect the Gophers to pass up Wisconsin in future seasons. We already might be getting pretty close. But saying Fleck needs to reach Wisconsin's historical success and go to 3 straight Rose Bowls and win 10+ games a year or he should be fired (expectation) is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Thank you, fmlizard. I think you have made clear to me something that I should have picked up on before.

The whole Fleckster-Killster-Claeyster argument that is always there, beneath the surface of almost any conversation here.

Let me make two things abundantly clear:

I loved Kill. Liked Claeys. Loved Mason. And am now a huge fan of P.J. Fleck. I don't want to see him fired — which is why I never mentioned it!

I do not believe in using "either this happens, or you're fired" ultimatums; not as an effective way to build a program.

All I was trying to do was state my opinion regarding expectations, which is the thread's topic.

Sheesh!
 





fmlizard said:
Expectations and goals are different things to me. I think that's what's derailing us all here. It should be the Gophers goal to win the Big Ten and make the CFP. It should not be an expectation.

Expectations for me are things that if they aren't met, Fleck should be fired.

Also, I have been saying that we should expect the Gophers to pass up Wisconsin in future seasons. We already might be getting pretty close. But saying Fleck needs to reach Wisconsin's historical success and go to 3 straight Rose Bowls and win 10+ games a year or he should be fired (expectation) is ridiculous.
Click to expand...


Re: the bolded part: Did someone actually say that Fleck should be fired?

If not, I'm not sure why you would bring it up!
 

Expectations going forward?

Seems this is more the thread about whether or not the Gophers can establish a ten+ year period of dominance.

Here is an incomplete list of what it takes to have a dominate period in Power 5 football:

1. Impressive facilities and an awesome game day experience to show recruits. - Well, we have nice facilities but do we have an awesome game-day experience? Not if you can't sell out every home game we don't.

2. A very good coach with a dynamic personality capable of motivating young men and teaching them. - I'd like to say, "YES"! I'd like to play for PJ. But I'm still not convinced he is a great x's and o's guy.

3. Deep pocketed boosters. - nope, we don't have em. At least none with any pull to the University.

4. Organizational support - I can't remember ever having a pro-sports group of regents and decision makers at the U.

Can we get all 4 of these? I don't see it happening, especially 3 and 4. PJ would need to become a legend in order to flip 4. Could we get a deep pocketed Nike or Under Armor type donor? Maybe, but it seems like success would have to come first to make it worth the company's while. Game day environment could shoot up. But can it go high enough to overcome the Minnesota weather? Need a lot more rabid fans to come to do that and that requires success.

It's all up to PJ, our Atlas, trying to support the program.
 

What has the president and/or regents, since the days of Kill, done to actively prohibit Gopher football from being successful? Again, I don't think the firing of Claeys counts, because they were already working to hire the coach Coyle wanted.

I just don't think there are any examples of this. I think people just still hold a grudge from the times back in history when the admin were anti-football. But I think those days are long past.
 

Gophers_4life said:
What has the president and/or regents, since the days of Kill, done to actively prohibit Gopher football from being successful? Again, I don't think the firing of Claeys counts, because they were already working to hire the coach Coyle wanted.

I just don't think there are any examples of this. I think people just still hold a grudge from the times back in history when the admin were anti-football. But I think those days are long past.
Click to expand...


Kaler gets a lot of grief on here, but he was very friendly towards athletic department. University primary function isn't the athletics, nor will it be. But we've upped our coaching budget, AD budget, got TCF stadium, new training facilities, all with anti-athletic leadership?
 

salzie said:
Kaler gets a lot of grief on here, but he was very friendly towards athletic department. University primary function isn't the athletics, nor will it be. But we've upped our coaching budget, AD budget, got TCF stadium, new training facilities, all with anti-athletic leadership?
Click to expand...


Good points.

Also, correct me if I'm wrong but I got the impression that the new, incoming president is a great sports fan, and comes from a sports-friendly family.
 

Gophers_4life said:
How on earth were they able to do it ??
Click to expand...


It helps if:
1. Purdue is horrible
2. Nebraska has bad coaching
3. Illinois keeps sucking
4. Minnesota can never beat you
5. You win more times than not against Iowa and Northwestern

So for the Gophers to do it, we need to.

#1 Beat Purdue
#2 Beat Nebraska
#3 Beat Illinois
#4 Beat Wisconsin consistently
#5 Beat Iowa
#6 Beat Northwestern.

If we take care of those 6 things we'll have a great start.
 

Face The Facts said:
It helps if:
1. Purdue is horrible
2. Nebraska has bad coaching
3. Illinois keeps sucking
4. Minnesota can never beat you
5. You win more times than not against Iowa and Northwestern

So for the Gophers to do it, we need to.

#1 Beat Purdue
#2 Beat Nebraska
#3 Beat Illinois
#4 Beat Wisconsin consistently
#5 Beat Iowa
#6 Beat Northwestern.

If we take care of those 6 things we'll have a great start.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly.

You can't consistently have 10+ win seasons if you can't consistently get to 7-8 wins in the Big Ten, and going 6-0 against West teams is a great start.

I think until proven otherwise, this is my hypothesis: Wisconsin has had its run because the Western Big Ten teams have been down, and they've been more lucky than they should have been against Minn and Iowa.

I hope 2018 was the solidifying of a new trend, of 7-8 win Wisco seasons.
 

Gophers_4life said:
Maybe that was true in the past .... but I feel at least since Kaler that the admin has not been actively trying to sabotage the success of football. He told Maturi to hire the best football coach he thought he could, and he got Kill. He hired Coyle and told Coyle to hire the best football coach he think he could, and he got Fleck.

New stadium, new practice facilities. And I really doubt that, within reason, Fleck is being denied any request for the team due to monetary issues.


I feel that they've been giving the football team every thing they possibly can, to do the best that they can do, at least since Kill was hired.

Someone please correct me if this is simply wrong.


(note: firing Claeys isn't a valid example in my opinion, because they went right to work to hire the best coach they thought they could get ...... some even argue that they fired Claeys in ORDER to go after a specific coach .... so that would not be a valid example of trying to sabotage the success of the team)
Click to expand...

Agree firing Claeys has nothing to do with this conversation. Coyle fires Claeys after he had Fleck lined up so, yes, Claeys was fired in order to hire Fleck.

Kaler did nothing to address the issues/animosity between the title nine office and the football program when there need to be some guidance to both parties before the scandal that might have helped both sides communicate and perhaps stave off what happened.

He actively made things worse during the scandal.

Issues within the faculty and their animosity towards football have largely been unaddressed since hiring Fleck.

Long term success for Fleck or any coach for that matter depends on the willingness of the president to get the administration and faculty behind athletics. Absent that, the program will continue to be subject to the whims of a political animal willing to sacrifice others to protect their own hides.

Disclaimer: I’m not suggesting we go the Wisconsin route to the point we ignore beating women, sweep drug use under the rug, and suspend players for games against directional schools in 3 weeks vs the better opponents in the next two weeks. Looking for support. Real support from the Admin isn’t too big of an ask. Does our new leader have the stamina to lead the entire university? I hope so, but there are a lot of cats to corral and no one has had the ability or desire to tackle it for decades now.

I hope she does. Time will tell.






Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

OK sure faculty. But that has always, and will always, be true.

But the faculty can't do diddily poo about it. Let them moan and complain, so what?
 

Keep in mind...

When WI made the three Rose Bowls in a row.

Legends / leaders...

Year 1. Penn State, last year for JoePa as he got fired.
Luke Fikell coached OSU
Danny Hope, Ron Zook, Kevin Wilson were coaches of the other three teams.

Year 2 (2012)
OSU and PSU both not eligible.
Wisconsin went 4-4
They beat Nebraska (Bo Pelini) 70-31 in Big Ten Title.

Year three (2013)
OSU wins division and advances to CFP
Wisconsin gets Rose Bowl.


So I need to amend what I said earlier.

We can also make the Rose Bowl by going 5-4 in conference as long as there are only two better teams than us in the West and they are both on probation.
 

Couple of people asked how Wisconsin did what it did?

my short response - support from the administration helps. having the entire campus behind you helps. having active boosters and fans helps.

But what WI did IMHO was pretty basic - they developed an identity, went out and recruited kids that fit that identity, and they stayed with it. and the results happened. Really the same thing IA did. WI has basically been doing the same thing under Alvarez and all later coaches. IA has had Fry and Ferentz. Continuity in coaching, systems and recruiting philosophy. With the gophers, the philosophy seems to get reset every few years. Mason had a 10-year run, and had some success, but other than short periods, never got the defense and offense to mesh.

to have a level of success like WI, the Gophers will have to have a similar level of continuity. And have a philosophy that works, when combined with recruiting the right kids to fit that system. So far, we've seen a hint of what Fleck's philosophy is. Now, he needs to sustain that for another 5-6 years at least, and we'll see if that puts the Gophers into the same level as WI.
 

To me, the Wisconsin model for winning was/is:

1) Put a big, strong offensive line on the field
2) Have at least two outstanding backs who can run, block and catch
3) Have a smart QB who doesn't beat his own team with mistakes, understands the offense in depth, and gets the ball out to the right spot, on time
4) Play solid, consistent defense

They would use those elements to wait the other team out. As games wore on, the opponent often began to press, and the Badgers would get a turnover or two. They would pounce, capitalize, get a lead... and then simply pound the opponent to dust and eat the clock with their excellent run game.

HEY! That sounds a lot like our Gophers over the last 4 games of this past season!

Hmmmmm...
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Couple of people asked how Wisconsin did what it did?

my short response - support from the administration helps. having the entire campus behind you helps. having active boosters and fans helps.

But what WI did IMHO was pretty basic - they developed an identity, went out and recruited kids that fit that identity, and they stayed with it. and the results happened. Really the same thing IA did. WI has basically been doing the same thing under Alvarez and all later coaches. IA has had Fry and Ferentz. Continuity in coaching, systems and recruiting philosophy. With the gophers, the philosophy seems to get reset every few years. Mason had a 10-year run, and had some success, but other than short periods, never got the defense and offense to mesh.

to have a level of success like WI, the Gophers will have to have a similar level of continuity. And have a philosophy that works, when combined with recruiting the right kids to fit that system. So far, we've seen a hint of what Fleck's philosophy is. Now, he needs to sustain that for another 5-6 years at least, and we'll see if that puts the Gophers into the same level as WI.
Click to expand...

The coaching philosophy has more or less remained the same, but Wisconsin has had 3 different coaches in the 13 years since Alvarez "retired", not counting Alvarez's stints as interim coach. A new coach every 4+ years, on average.

Bielema and Chryst are/were very "Barry-like" in coaching style and philosophy. Anderson, I think, had some strong philosophical differences with AD Alvarez.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom