Why I am happy with 4-2

[NewEngland_Gold]

With all due respect to Gopher Nation...

At best, "medicore" seems an emotive code word for "average" or "mid-tier"...maybe I'm misinterpreting what is meant with that term. If it means, below "mid-tier", I tend to agree since I don't believe we have enough data to put the Gs firmly in that bracket...but they are getting there.

Seems to me, that if a team starts at "lower-tier" or below average, they must pass through "average" or "mid-tier" to get to "top-tier". Along with the GGs, BT opponents in the "lower-tier" have been trying to do that for years and they are still trying hard to accomplish that goal. Obviously, it's not easy because the biggies are not sitting on their hands waiting for the "wanna-be's" to catch up...they are notching up their talent level (bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic) as well.

Unfortunately, as many GHers have pointed out repeatedly: "Rome was not built in a day." Most everyone on this board seems to agree that the GGs are making a great deal of progress from a lower level of performance...esp re certain areas of D, STs and now perhaps the running game. Patience tends to be a scarce commodity when we tend to lead our lives on internet speed...building up a program to return to the days of GG fb glory does not operate at that speed level and to expect so is simply unrealistic IMHO.

 

[Khaliq]

At best, "medicore" seems an emotive code word for "average" or "mid-tier"...maybe I'm misinterpreting what is meant with that term. If it means, below "mid-tier", I tend to agree since I don't believe we have enough data to put the Gs firmly in that bracket...but they are getting there.

Seems to me, that if a team starts at "lower-tier" or below average, they must pass through "average" or "mid-tier" to get to "top-tier". Along with the GGs, BT opponents in the "lower-tier" have been trying to do that for years and they are still trying hard to accomplish that goal. Obviously, it's not easy because the biggies are not sitting on their hands waiting for the "wanna-be's" to catch up...they are notching up their talent level (bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic) as well.

Unfortunately, as many GHers have pointed out repeatedly: "Rome was not built in a day." Most everyone on this board seems to agree that the GGs are making a great deal of progress from a lower level of performance...esp re certain areas of D, STs and now perhaps the running game. Patience tends to be a scarce commodity when we tend to lead our lives on internet speed...building up a program to return to the days of GG fb glory does not operate at that speed level and to expect so is simply unrealistic IMHO.

Well, the thing is building a program is not necessarily a linear process. It's iterative and some tiers, for lack of a better term, can be either repeated or skipped on the process to building a top program.

In the case of the Big Ten I actually do think the biggies are sitting on their hands waiting for the wanna-bes to catch up. Ever since Ohio State won the BCS Championship the Big Ten has been in a tail spin that has made it more upwardly mobile than ever. There is genuine motility in the conference now.

Now I do think the Ohio States and Michigans of the world will ultimately right their ships and get on the right track again, but the next few years are going to provide a unique window of opportunity for the program to take a major step up and build momentum toward something greater than any of us have seen in our lifetime.

The question is whether we are seeing a program that's being built to maximize that opportunity.

 

[Gopherprof]

If we win out at home, that means we will have likely climbed over two teams (MSU and Northwestern) in the Big Ten pecking order since last year. (And I might add Illinois to that, too; we beat the Illini last and finished ahead of them last year, but I think some might see that as somewhat of a fluke.) All three of those teams have been pretty much around our area of the standings for years, but you have to start at the first step. That's not bad progress in one season.

If we pull off an upset on the road, too, we finish 5-3/8-4 with at least one pretty nice win and a strong finish. I'd call that a very successful season.

I would call that a very successful season too, but it has to happen first.

As far as program standings, climbing over Northwestern is nothing to be that happy about. Outside of a few miracle years under Gary Barnett, the Wildcats have been nothing but loveable losers, which is apparently where they are again. Illinois is another program which, despite a few flukey seasons and solid recruiting, is simply not a good program. Historically we are a better program than both NW and Illinois (although Illini is a lot like us in that they used to be great), so nothing has really changed there, it's just adjusted to the aggregate.

Michigan State is probably a good measuring stick from where we've been the last 10-15 years or so. We'd probably have to beat them a few years in a row to really say we've climbed over them though.

Not a whole lot has really changed in the big picture in the B10 the last decade or so. Purdue is down a bit from the Joe Tiller heydays. Michigan has had a hard time the last few years, but it's premature to call that an organization slip, and Iowa is probably a little stronger under Ferentz than Fry, but they are still a team that has yet to put together a truly great season. Maybe that changes this year.

If anything, it's become more predictable. OSU or Michigan has shared or won the title outright the last 7 years in a row. Between 1983-2001, there were 7 years where neither Michigan or OSU won the B10, that's still a pretty strong showing by the Big 2, but nothing like the last decade.

 

[jovs]

I think last week's game was important in so many ways. Lose that game and you are looking at a 2-6 or 1-7 big ten record. Going into the Michigan State game at 1-4 spelled disaster. Last weeks win breathes new life into the season. No matter what happens in the next two weeks you gotta feel they have a chance against Michigan State. I think 4-3 going into Iowa is a distinct possibility. That is a huge difference.

 

[Maximus]

I would call that a very successful season too, but it has to happen first.

As far as program standings, climbing over Northwestern is nothing to be that happy about. Outside of a few miracle years under Gary Barnett, the Wildcats have been nothing but loveable losers, which is apparently where they are again.

They won a Big Ten title this decade (3 in the last 14 years) and had nine wins last season.

Not to mention the same record as the Golden Gophers.

 

[Gopherprof]

They won a Big Ten title this decade (3 in the last 14 years) and had nine wins last season.

I made an exception for the Gary Barnett years (really just 95 and 96). The entirety of Northwestern says that they aren't a good football program due to a number of variables. They have an all-time losing record and are 1-7 in bowl games all time. I take no pride in being better than they are.

 

[frozengopher]

Gopher Nation - I assumed your initial response was in regards to Gray playing, as everything seems to be nowadays. I was wrong. Apologies.

 

[Schnoodler]

When you're talking about building a program and analyzing the growth the record is useless. We need to be smarter than this.

The problem is that while growth may be linear, with a small number of games as in football, the results are not.

When the growth phase is complete or nearing completion then I'll judge it by the record. Until then I only need to answer if the program is improved over the previous year. And that's pretty much it. From there it's only about enjoying the journey.

To me there is no doubt in my mind that the program is improved.

The same will be true next year.

 

[IDFM]

Defining Win

Brewster needs to have a defining win this season to bring hope that this program is turning the corner. Every Coach has that defining win that changes the landscape that they are heading to the next level. Coach Brewster has not had that defining win. Beating Penn State could very well be that defining win for the program.

 

[Gopherprof]

When you're talking about building a program and analyzing the growth the record is useless. We need to be smarter than this.

The problem is that while growth may be linear, with a small number of games as in football, the results are not.

When the growth phase is complete or nearing completion then I'll judge it by the record. Until then I only need to answer if the program is improved over the previous year. And that's pretty much it. From there it's only about enjoying the journey.

To me there is no doubt in my mind that the program is improved.

The same will be true next year.

Wins and losses isn't a good barometer of progress?

 

[Schnoodler]

Absolutly not, except on the extremes. Not in a building phase.

In another sport with more games it has more meaning. Here none. Except as I said, the extremes.

 

[GoldInDirt]

.
Looking at this year's schedule and who the Gophers had back, I predicted an 8-4 season, with the only losses coming against Cal, Penn State, Ohio State and Iowa. 8-4 would be a very good season

So, sure, they could still go 7-5 and go to a bowl. If they do that, I wouldn't call it a failure of a season, obviously. But I also would not be overly excited about it. Because it's just another mediocre season by any rational definition.

But if the Gophers go 5-7 this year, for example, I think Brewster will and should be fired given all the variables.

Wow! So you think 8-4 is a "very good season". Damn right, 8-4 would be awesome. But 7-5 is "mediocre" and Brewster should be fired for going 5-7? Those are some pretty tight specifications you've got there. The players don't make a couple of plays and the coach loses his job two years before he has his own group of seniors? How about showing a little support for the program and giving Brewster a little chance? Sure, I'd love to win a couple more game and beat Wisconsin and Iowa. But I'm in for the long haul. I've seen some horrible football, at least a decade longer then you it appears. Without a little patience and support we'll never build a program unless we get a miracle.

 

[Gopherprof]

Absolutly not, except on the extremes. Not in a building phase.

In another sport with more games it has more meaning. Here none. Except as I said, the extremes.

So...what exactly is the point of organized sports if we don't judge teams off of wins and losses?

I'm not saying we shouldn't take a step back and look at the bigger picture. But it still comes down to winning and losing.

 

[Schnoodler]

So...what exactly is the point of organized sports if we don't judge teams off of wins and losses?

I'm not saying we shouldn't take a step back and look at the bigger picture. But it still comes down to winning and losing.

In any phase of a program there is fun and value in predictions. Hope and desire for good outcomes is important. Competition is also good. Beating a rival is a beautiful thing.

Judging a team?? To what end? If the question is where are we going to finish in the Big Ten, there can be nothing else but wins and losses. If the question is who are we better or worse than, then wins and losses are still very important but requires a little more thought. These things, in an established program is really all there is. But we, alas, are not an established program.

We are in a building phase. So in judging a program the question is are we in fact building? Are we better than we were, is there a foundation to be better than we are. Our record can shed some light, but very little to answer this question. Except as I said on the extremes of outcomes.

Case in point: We could very easily have lost the Northwestern game. We could have had some bumbling luck of a play and won in the fleeting seconds against Wisconsin. Our record could just as easily be 3-3 or 5-1. Very different, but the same team. By being hyperfocused on records you can come to two totally different conclusions when in reality we are no nearer or farther along in our building efforts. Same players, same recruits, same coaches, same everything.

So how then do you judge a team? Pay attention. Are we faster, bigger, stronger. Are we more or less competitive. How are we losing, how are we winning. Can our deficiencies be corrected, or are we doomed to repeat? What is needed to get to the next tier? And how do we attain it.

Focusing on the record will leave you blind to the building process. Just as the fools pre celebrated a New Years day bowl after a 7-1 start, and predicted the teams demise after an 0-5 finish. The team was the same before and after. Until we establish the foundation to succeed a good record is merely luck, and destined to be a memory. Go ask Zook about that.

 

[Gopherprof]

Fair enough, I can buy into that. That said, the big picture will still require that we start winning games. Next year will be year #4 of the Brewster regime. At some point simply getting bigger and faster doesn't mean you're a better team. Go ask Zook about that.

 

[Schnoodler]

exactly. We can argue about when that begins at another time. But yes indeed that day will come.

 

[EG#9]

Losing at home to Wisconsin is a bad loss, no matter when it happens.

To me, this team at 4-2, is at the low end of where I expected it to be. I think I am most surprised that the team hasn't been able to show dominance in any game played so far. While Purdue was a blowout on the scoreboard, it certainly wasn't a dominant performance.

 

[Ron Johnson Super Fan]

In any phase of a program there is fun and value in predictions. Hope and desire for good outcomes is important. Competition is also good. Beating a rival is a beautiful thing.

Judging a team?? To what end? If the question is where are we going to finish in the Big Ten, there can be nothing else but wins and losses. If the question is who are we better or worse than, then wins and losses are still very important but requires a little more thought. These things, in an established program is really all there is. But we, alas, are not an established program.

We are in a building phase. So in judging a program the question is are we in fact building? Are we better than we were, is there a foundation to be better than we are. Our record can shed some light, but very little to answer this question. Except as I said on the extremes of outcomes.

Case in point: We could very easily have lost the Northwestern game. We could have had some bumbling luck of a play and won in the fleeting seconds against Wisconsin. Our record could just as easily be 3-3 or 5-1. Very different, but the same team. By being hyperfocused on records you can come to two totally different conclusions when in reality we are no nearer or farther along in our building efforts. Same players, same recruits, same coaches, same everything.

So how then do you judge a team? Pay attention. Are we faster, bigger, stronger. Are we more or less competitive. How are we losing, how are we winning. Can our deficiencies be corrected, or are we doomed to repeat? What is needed to get to the next tier? And how do we attain it.

Focusing on the record will leave you blind to the building process. Just as the fools pre celebrated a New Years day bowl after a 7-1 start, and predicted the teams demise after an 0-5 finish. The team was the same before and after. Until we establish the foundation to succeed a good record is merely luck, and destined to be a memory. Go ask Zook about that.

Very eloquently put, Schnoodler.

 

[Gopher Nation]

Wow! So you think 8-4 is a "very good season". Damn right, 8-4 would be awesome. But 7-5 is "mediocre" and Brewster should be fired for going 5-7? Those are some pretty tight specifications you've got there. The players don't make a couple of plays and the coach loses his job two years before he has his own group of seniors? How about showing a little support for the program and giving Brewster a little chance? Sure, I'd love to win a couple more game and beat Wisconsin and Iowa. But I'm in for the long haul. I've seen some horrible football, at least a decade longer then you it appears. Without a little patience and support we'll never build a program unless we get a miracle.

You mean, like, by buying season tickets? And getting multiple friends to buy season tickets too? And by donating my money to the program? And a booster club? And a message board? And tailgating every game for the last three years? And not missing a single play for the last three years? You mean like that? You can be critcal of the coach and/or the program and still support it, you know. That concept seems awfully tough for some to understand around here.

 

[Gopher Nation]

Case in point: We could very easily have lost the Northwestern game. We could have had some bumbling luck of a play and won in the fleeting seconds against Wisconsin. Our record could just as easily be 3-3 or 5-1. Very different, but the same team. By being hyperfocused on records you can come to two totally different conclusions when in reality we are no nearer or farther along in our building efforts. Same players, same recruits, same coaches, same everything.

Schnoodler, I'm not saying I totally disagree with your point. Certainly there is more to it than just wins and losses. But that is a huge part of it. You say that a win or loss is irrelevant because we'd have the same players, coaches, etc. Well, yes, that's true, but with a win over Wisconsin, for example, the key difference would be that those players and coaches have now proven that they have the ability to pull out a big win. But the fact that they didn't shows that, at least so far, they are incapable of doing that. To say that's irrelevant is a concept I just can't comprehend.

 

[The 12th Man]

I'm not picking a fight, but I think anyone based in reality can see they don't have any realistic shot of beating PSU, OSU or Iowa. So 7-5 best case now that they lost to Wisconsin. Possibly 6-6. Both of those are mediocre by my definition.

They play the games for a reason. We have lost two games- to two very good teams- by a total of 17 points. Why is there no realistic chance? I'm confused here.