Reasonable Expectations

[RailBaronYarr]

Ok I know there was another thread where I posted on this, but in the midst of all this coach discussion going on, I'd like to get a feel for what people's expectations for the coach are, assuming steady state operation (not 1st year rebuild or maybe 2nd year). What is the expectation for the performance of our team on any average year?


My take:
Given the way the Big Ten will shape up next year with the new team and divisions, here is who we play yearly: Iowa, Nebraska, Michigan, Michigan State, Northwestern, and protected rival Wisconsin.

We also get 2 of the following (assuming 8 game B10 slate): Ohio State, Penn State, Illinois, Indiana, and Purdue.

We then have 4 non-conference games a year, with most years in the foreseeable future including 1 quality BCS foe and 3 non-BCS and possible FCS teams.

My expectation is that we should win, on average, at LEAST 50% of our games against rivals Michigan, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska (by that I mean win 1 game every 2 years at a minimum). We should win 50% of our games against Michigan State and take at least half of the games against a quality BCS foe. I feel that a solid coach and recruiting pipeline should also give us the ability to win 75% of our games against teams like Purdue, Illinois, and Indiana. I am NOT claiming they should be or are cellar teams, more that our institution, history, and hopefully new coach should allow us to achieve that. I think it reasonable that every 2 times we play Penn State we win 1 of them (given their coaching changes and ours as well). The only team I expect or would be fine with not having a winning or .500 record against is Ohio State, given how extremely dominant they are and have been in the past 10 years (and show no signs of stopping). If we won 1 out of 4 games with them, I would be ok with that.

Given all this, an "average year" will see the following wins:

NC1 1
NC2 1
NC3 1
BCS NC 0.5
Michigan 0.5
MSU 0.5
Nebraska 0.5
Iowa 0.5
Wisconsin 0.5
Northwestern 0.75
Other Division 2 1.2

With the "Other Division 2" coming from taking (2/5)*(total "wins" from other teams mentioned, assuming the scheduling on any given year could be a random mix 2 of the 5)
OSU 0.25
PSU 0.5
Purdue 0.75
Illinois 0.75
Indiana 0.75

So, what does that give us? Average 7.95 wins a year (not including bowl), 4.45 (.556) in the Big Ten. I think that this should be a minimum expectation for any sports fan - going .500 against rivals and winning a good number of the games you SHOULD win, and a respectable number of games we have a lesser chance on (the OSUs of the world). This puts us ina good position for recruiting (locking down borders to IA/WI, proving to outstate recruits that we CAN win on a regular basis, etc) as well as to our fans that in a given year they will see a competitive team, with a chance that once in a while our schedule and bounces go our way and we win 10+ games in the regular season.

My thoughts. Yours?

 

[Silvio]

My expectation is to be above .500 in conference play and to be competitive with every team in the BigTen. I also expect the future coach to be able to win the BigTen in the years that the gophers have a soft BigTen Schedule (No Ohio State or PSU), I realize this may take a few years. I expect the new coach to improve the U of M faster then RichRod or his replacement can improve Michigan. For every team that wants to ascend up the conference ranks a team must descend. The U needs to capitalize on the current state of Michigan football given that they are in the same division. I want a level of football that is higher than the level that Glen Mason brought us to. I appreciate what Glen did make the program respectable (average) again, but I want U of M football to be thought of in a similar manner with WI and IA. Teams that are mainly slightly above average, but go on strong 2-3 year runs during a 5-7 year period.

My fear is that WI will be able to capitalize on the current state of MI not MN.

 

[dpodoll68]

My thoughts are that your expectations are horribly unrealistic.

Not only for Minnesota, but for every Big Ten program not named Ohio St.

 

[Gopher07]

.500 in the Big Ten, on average, is my goal. 4-4 years mixed with the occasional 5-3, 6-2 or 3-5 year should be the norm.

 

[RailBaronYarr]

I guess if my thoughts are "horribly unrealistic," anything less is having the expectation of .500 or below seasons in the Big Ten on average. If my expectations are too high, we never should have fired Glen Mason for he was providing exactly the step below what I want out of our program - a consistent winner, but not dominant, with the occasional off-year due to schedule, talent, or bad luck. I refuse to believe that we can't be an 8-win team on average every year.

 

[Gopher07]

Glen Mason was 32-48 in 10 years. That ain't .500 ball.

 

[dpodoll68]

I guess if my thoughts are "horribly unrealistic," anything less is having the expectation of .500 or below seasons in the Big Ten on average. If my expectations are too high, we never should have fired Glen Mason for he was providing exactly the step below what I want out of our program - a consistent winner, but not dominant, with the occasional off-year due to schedule, talent, or bad luck. I refuse to believe that we can't be an 8-win team on average every year.

Not saying we "can't", just that having an expectation for a minimum of .500 in-conference every year is unrealistic. Look at the last 10, 20, 30 years in the Big Ten, and see how many teams can consistently do that. You won't find many.

 

[Gopher07]

FWIW, Wisconsin and Penn State's record in the Big Ten from 2002-2009 was 37-27 (.578), Iowa's 42-22 (.656). Shooting for .500 would put us just below Wisconsin and Penn State, and above MSU/Purdue/Illinois/Northwestern/Indiana. I could live with that, especially considering the division we'll be playing in. I'm not saying 10 years of ONLY .500 ball would make me happy, but an average, with a few years of 6-2 sprinkled in, is realistic.

 

[Tom Dace]

I want U of M football to be thought of in a similar manner with WI and IA.

Are you serious? Those programs are terrible. Only one national title combined between them. 6>1

 

[RodentRampage]

Mason was below .500 half of the time in Big Ten play, and above .500 only 2/10 seasons. I'd rather have the team be occasionally great than for it to be consistently so-so.

 

[GopherJake]

Are you serious? Those programs are terrible. Only one national title combined between them. 6>1

Hey Tommy Boy, how many of those 6 title teams' games did you see? Zero? Oh. How many of those titles occurred less than twice your lifetime ago? Zero? Oh. Shall I keep going?

I love history as much as the next guy and those 6 titles are worth something for sure. But the Gophers haven't been any good in my entire 42 year lifetime. Wisconsin and Iowa have been. In fact, they are better RIGHT NOW than the Gophers have been in my lifetime.

I am a Gopher fan, but your take sucks. (Nothing personal.)

 

[Brick House]

Minnesota has only had 4 seasons with a winning Big Ten record since 1972. Mason twice and Stoll twice. Expecting to do this on a regular basis is wishful thinking. I would like to win in the Big Ten, but I just hope we can start to win 6-8 games a year on a reguler basis and then try to improve from there.

 

[RodentRampage]

Minnesota has only had 4 seasons with a winning Big Ten record since 1972. Mason twice and Stoll twice. Expecting to do this on a regular basis is wishful thinking. I would like to win in the Big Ten, but I just hope we can start to win 6-8 games a year on a reguler basis and then try to improve from there.

You forgot Gutekunst. The twice had winning Big Ten records. In his 6 years, the Gophers went 5-3, 3-5, 0-6-2, 4-4, 5-3, 1-7. His teams did stumble hard 2 of his 6 years here, bit the other other 4 were mediocre to decent. Played some tough nonconference schedules though.

 

[RodentRampage]

Let's get this team out of the ditch before we decide how fast we want to drive.

 

[dpodoll68]

Hey Tommy Boy, how many of those 6 title teams' games did you see? Zero? Oh. How many of those titles occurred less than twice your lifetime ago? Zero? Oh. Shall I keep going?

I love history as much as the next guy and those 6 titles are worth something for sure. But the Gophers haven't been any good in my entire 42 year lifetime. Wisconsin and Iowa have been. In fact, they are better RIGHT NOW than the Gophers have been in my lifetime.

I am a Gopher fan, but your take sucks. (Nothing personal.)

You suck. You're also terrible at math.

Stick to being a "baller" on the basketball board.

 

[RailBaronYarr]

Ok, how about these numbers for comparison. Since 1993, these teams have gone...

Northwestern: Conference 61-75 (.449), Overall 97-105 (.480)
Ohio State: Conference 106-29 (.785), Overall 170-43 (.798)
Michigan: Conference 94-42 (.691), Overall 146-64 (.695)
Wisconsin: Conference 80-53 (.602), Overall 145-65 (.690)
Iowa: Conference 71-64 (.526), Overall 119-86 (.580)
Penn State: Conference 86-50 (.632), Overall 147-62 (.703)

You claim that my aspirations of being .556 in Big Ten play are unrealistic for anyone NOT Ohio State. The numbers prove otherwise (Wisconsin, Michigan, Penn State did it, Iowa came very close). Even a schizophrenic team like Northwestern that has as many disadvantages, if not more, to recruiting/fan base/pro sports/etc as we do can field a nearly .500 Big Ten record and conference title shares (how they go from 1-7 one year to 6-2 the next and 2-6 the following year in 99, 00 ans 01 is beyond me).

Point is my goals shouldn't be watered down. Yes Ohio State and Michigan are Ohio State and Michigan and can put together long strings of super teams to wash out the few years where they are mediocre to bad, which is why I didn't say I expect a .785 conference record over the next 10-15 years. An above .500 record shouldn't be too difficult given our stadium/facilities, campus, and a competent coach.

And I don't mean to say that I expect every season to be above .500. On average, we should be. Just like, on average, I think we should win at least half our games against rival teams.

Now, what coach can bring us there?..

 

[jovs]

A team that every 4 or 5 years competes for a Big Ten Title and goes 6-2 or 7-1. A team that averages around .500 in the Big Ten, there are going to be losing seasons mixed in. A team that beats FCS and non BCS teams routinely and decisively.

 

[Monty519]

You know what I want? I just want my team to be able to go to Madison, Iowa City, Columbus, or Ann Arbor, and I not assume we're gonna lose cause we're probably overmatched. I want to honestly think year in, year out, that my team can win these types of games with some type of regularity. No more of these ridiculous 41-16 games, no more of this 38-7 stuff when we play OSU practically every time. It's gone on way too long to be still at the point where we can't consistently go on the road to these places and play right at that level. It's not just about records, you can have bounces that turn 3-5 to 5-3 or 6-2 in an instant. But I want a program where I feel like MOST seasons, I can't just automatically mark an "L" on the schedule cause they're a top 15 team.

And when we get them here at our house, we should be in position to EXPECT wins, not just hope. When we lose to OSU at the Bank, it should feel disappointing, not just "Well, we tried hard". Teams need to be leery of coming here, knowing that it's gonna be real tough to leave with a W. We haven't had that since I've been alive, really.

Of course, reality is, it probably won't quite be like that, but if the next coach can at least provide us some stability, some great "storm the field" wins, some good performances on the road, I'll be happy. A BT title run in the next five years would be great, but you just don't know how the landscape will unfold, especially with Nebraska coming into the fold.

 

[jovs]

You know what I want? I just want my team to be able to go to Madison, Iowa City, Columbus, or Ann Arbor, and I not assume we're gonna lose cause we're probably overmatched. I want to honestly think year in, year out, that my team can win these types of games with some type of regularity. No more of these ridiculous 41-16 games, no more of this 38-7 stuff when we play OSU practically every time. It's gone on way too long to be still at the point where we can't consistently go on the road to these places and play right at that level. It's not just about records, you can have bounces that turn 3-5 to 5-3 or 6-2 in an instant. But I want a program where I feel like MOST seasons, I can't just automatically mark an "L" on the schedule cause they're a top 15 team.

And when we get them here at our house, we should be in position to EXPECT wins, not just hope. When we lose to OSU at the Bank, it should feel disappointing, not just "Well, we tried hard". Teams need to be leery of coming here, knowing that it's gonna be real tough to leave with a W. We haven't had that since I've been alive, really.

Of course, reality is, it probably won't quite be like that, but if the next coach can at least provide us some stability, some great "storm the field" wins, some good performances on the road, I'll be happy. A BT title run in the next five years would be great, but you just don't know how the landscape will unfold, especially with Nebraska coming into the fold.

You had that with Mason, they were very competitive. Ohio State especially, with a break or two going their way they might have won a couple times at the Metrodome. Mason's teams had a habit of falling apart at the end after playing hard for 3 1/2 quarters.

 

[Silvio]

You had that with Mason, they were very competitive. Ohio State especially, with a break or two going their way they might have won a couple times at the Metrodome. Mason's teams had a habit of falling apart at the end after playing hard for 3 1/2 quarters.

Mason's teams played some competitive games, but overall they were not competitive. Was Mason every competitive in Madison? Mason did good things for this program, but he was not competitive with the upper tier of the BigTen.

 

[Brick House]

You forgot Gutekunst. The twice had winning Big Ten records. In his 6 years, the Gophers went 5-3, 3-5, 0-6-2, 4-4, 5-3, 1-7. His teams did stumble hard 2 of his 6 years here, bit the other other 4 were mediocre to decent. Played some tough nonconference schedules though.

My mistake, it was Guty and not stoll

 

[RodentRampage]

My mistake, it was Guty and not stoll

Stoll did have one winning Big Ten season, a 6-2 record in 1973. He was fired after three consecutive 4-4 Big Ten seasons. That's the firing that may have put us into a slide.

 

[monk10]

I don't have reasonable expectations. Like I expect an Iowa fan to know the public bathroom isn't a place for fornication. I expect a Wisconsin fan to know not to fornicate with dead animals.

 

[GopherJake]

You suck. You're also terrible at math.

Stick to being a "baller" on the basketball board.

Pray tell, Tommy Boy, how am I terrible at math? Do tell.

 

[dpodoll68]

Pray tell, Tommy Boy, how am I terrible at math? Do tell.

I don't know who Tommy Boy is.

Your quote was:

How many of those titles occurred less than twice your lifetime ago? Zero? Oh.

If you are 42, that means "twice your lifetime ago" brings us back to 1926. How many national titles have the Gophers won in that timeframe? Six. Idiot.

You're using your own age as a baseline and you can't do math.

Or, you're being presumptuous and assuming the poster is much younger than you, and using his supposed age to make a ridiculous argument.

Either way, you're a dumbass.

P.S. Sequester your terrible takes to the basketball board.

 

[GopherJake]

I don't know who Tommy Boy is.

My mistake, I thought the 2nd post (yours) was from Tom Dace.

If you are 42, that means "twice your lifetime ago" brings us back to 1926. How many national titles have the Gophers won in that timeframe? Six. Idiot.

You're using your own age as a baseline and you can't do math.

Uh, no, quite capable in the math department. A little English lesson here for you, however: When someone uses the second person, he isn't talking about himself; he's talking about someone else - in this case, Tommy Dace.

Or, you're being presumptuous and assuming the poster is much younger than you, and using his supposed age to make a ridiculous argument.

Ya got me there. Bet I'm right though. You? Also, for the sake of argument, if Tommy is 21 years old, how is my argument ridiculous?

P.S. Sequester your terrible takes to the basketball board.

I will, for the most part. Let's just say, as a long-time football and basketball season ticket holder, I feel entitled to weigh in occasionally here - whether you like it or not. Don't worry; until they become relevant, I won't be all that interested. I only came over here to see what the Brewster apologists were up to.

Either way, you're a dumbass.

Geezo beezo dpodoll68. A little harsh, don't you think?

 

[dpodoll68]

Geezo beezo dpodoll68. A little harsh, don't you think?

Not at all. I don't take kindly to Gopher "fans" belittling the history of my program. Keep it up, and you'll get more of the same.

 

[GopherJake]

Not at all. I don't take kindly to Gopher "fans" belittling the history of my program. Keep it up, and you'll get more of the same.

"Your" program has sucked since 1967 - that's 43 fu%&ing years, man. I oughtta know. I have been a season ticket holder for the better part of 2 decades. Saying this isn't a personal affront to you, dude. I want them to win as much as you, but to say they have underachieved lately is an epic understatement. I was there when Northwestern beat us on a hail mary. I was there for the collapse against Michigan. I was there when AC tore us up at Memorial Stadium. I was there when Drew Brees threw for 6000 yards against us. I was there when effing SDSU beat us. I was there when NDSU beat us. It goes on-and-on.

Yeah, we won 9 or 10 games with Mason at the helm. We collapsed at the end though and he was fired. At least he could walk-over the walkovers!!

I'm excited for the new hire, but if they blow the hire - like they did the last one - it wouldn't shock me. I don't know how old you are dpodoll68, but if you've seen the losing I've seen, including epic collapses of late, I'd think you'd be a bit jaded too. There is no reason Wisconsin and Iowa can build sustained winning programs and we can't. They have, we haven't. Ok, if we go back 50+ years, we had a better program. That is farther back than most people here have been alive. THAT IS MY POINT. It's been a long time.

You say you are glass half-full? I'm just looking for a view of some sort of liquid. Preferably beer.....