Would you take an 11-1 season if the one loss was the season opener?

Would you take an 11-1 season if the one loss was the season opener?

  • Yes

    Votes: 94 94.0%
  • No

    Votes: 6 6.0%

  • Total voters
    100
I mean, I would be livid, but to also go on to keep the Axe and the Chair, plus get Floyd back and beat Penn State during their white out? Yeah, I could live with that.
 

I'm near the point I'd take a 1-11 season if the only win was versus Iowa.
 

It can't happen. Minnesota can't finish 11-1. Maybe 11-3 or 12-2 or 13-1 or 14-1 or 13-2.
 


It can't happen. Minnesota can't finish 11-1. Maybe 11-3 or 12-2 or 13-1 or 14-1 or 13-2.
..."going to the Big Ten Championship"... means we are talking at the end of regular season play.
 


In the hypothetical, we go 11-1 I absolutely would not care whom that 1 loss was against.
 


..."going to the Big Ten Championship"... means we are talking at the end of regular season play.
No mention of that and that’s not at all what the poll said, genius. Minnesota cannot go 11-1.
 





I can assure you, losing the first game this year would make it impossible to win the next 11. The only way to lose the game would be to have catastrophic injuries or most of the team leaves.
Exactly. Just like losing to Bowling Green last year...oh wait. We have a history of shitting the bed in the early going under Fleck. We've been able to pull out games we had no business winning. The "Magical" 2019 season included games against South Dakota State and Georgia Southern that we were extremely lucky to win. That season turned out OK.
 

Even if Robb Smith and Mike Sanford came back just for this one game, there isn't anyway they lose to the Aggies!
Nor could we possibly lose to Bowling Green last year. Never underestimate Fleck's abilty to not have the team prepared for a game. He's consistently done that in his time here.
 

The thread in case anyone else was interested:
Figured NM st was the only non-conference loss that some people might say no to even if we went 11-1
It will cause the Flecktites sphincters to tighten up a bunch that the inventor of college football at Minnesota lost to Jerry Kill, but if we ended up 11-1 and in the Big Championship game, they'd be ok at the end of the season.
 
Last edited:



Exactly. Just like losing to Bowling Green last year...oh wait. We have a history of shitting the bed in the early going under Fleck. We've been able to pull out games we had no business winning. The "Magical" 2019 season included games against South Dakota State and Georgia Southern that we were extremely lucky to win. That season turned out OK.

PJ Fleck is 11-1 in non-conference games at Minnesota. The Bowling Green loss was mostly due to terrible play calling by the OC who was fired.

But I know you're here just to troll like usual....
 

PJ Fleck is 11-1 in non-conference games at Minnesota. The Bowling Green loss was mostly due to terrible play calling by the OC who was fired.

But I know you're here just to troll like usual....
Like I said, even though we should have started 2019 0-2, we didn't, and that season turned out OK. I guess that's trolling? You kids these days, it's hard to keep up with your ever changing use of facts to support your narrative.

I'm anxiously awaiting the GWG Advanced Metric of College Team Talent for 2022. Maybe we'll rank above 10th this year. You used to assure us that was the only metric that mattered when Maryland beat the crap out of us, and that our new super recruiter would elevate us to new heights. Well, I'm also anxiously awaiting to see after 5 years, if we'll end up ranked higher than 10th (the exact same ranking we had when he got here). Now, in 2019 we had a great record with only the 10th ranked class so maybe that doesn't matter. At least you've stopped using that as an excuse for losses, so kudos for you for growth.

I've been consistently critical of Fleck, you've consistently positted that he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Five years in, how much has changed on the field? We're essentially the same team we were in 2017, but have benefited from lesser schedules.

We still haven't beaten Iowa, but did solve Wisconsin (when Fleck has showed up and not played to lose from the first snap). The only change in 2021 was instead of finding a way to beat the lesser teams in Bowling Green and Illinois when we failed to show up (coaches shitting the bed, again), we lost both of those games.

Do I like that? You may think I do, but I don't. In Five years, Fleck is closer to what I think of him than what you think of him, but I'm the troll.
 
Last edited:

Like I said, even though we should have started 2019 0-2, we didn't, and that season turned out OK. I guess that's trolling? You kids these days, it's hard to keep up with your ever changing use of facts to support your narrative.

I'm anxiously awaiting the GWG Advanced Metric of College Team Talent for 2022. Maybe we'll rank above 10th this year. You used to assure us that was the only metric that mattered when Maryland beat the crap out of us, and that our new super recruiter would elevate us to new heights. Well, I'm also anxiously awaiting to see after 5 years, if we'll end up ranked higher than 10th (the exact same ranking we had when he got here). Now, in 2019 we had a great record with only the 10th ranked class so maybe that doesn't matter. At least you've stopped using that as an excuse for losses, so kudos for you for growth.

I've been consistently critical of Fleck, you've consistently positted that he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Five years in, how much has changed on the field? We're essentially the same team we were in 2017, but have benefited from lesser schedules.

We still haven't beaten Iowa, but did solve Wisconsin (when Fleck has showed up and not played to lose from the first snap). The only change in 2021 was instead of finding a way to beat the lesser teams in Bowling Green and Illinois when we failed to show up (coaches shitting the bed, again), we lost both of those games.

Do I like that? You may think I do, but I don't. In Five years, Fleck is closer to what I think of him than what you think of him, but I'm the troll.
I was a big fan of Kill and Claeys and think Coyle treated Claeys poorly.

That said, if you think that Fleck's results aren't better than Kill/Claeys, you're delusional.
 


Like I said, even though we should have started 2019 0-2, we didn't, and that season turned out OK. I guess that's trolling? You kids these days, it's hard to keep up with your ever changing use of facts to support your narrative.

I'm anxiously awaiting the GWG Advanced Metric of College Team Talent for 2022. Maybe we'll rank above 10th this year. You used to assure us that was the only metric that mattered when Maryland beat the crap out of us, and that our new super recruiter would elevate us to new heights. Well, I'm also anxiously awaiting to see after 5 years, if we'll end up ranked higher than 10th (the exact same ranking we had when he got here). Now, in 2019 we had a great record with only the 10th ranked class so maybe that doesn't matter. At least you've stopped using that as an excuse for losses, so kudos for you for growth.

I've been consistently critical of Fleck, you've consistently positted that he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Five years in, how much has changed on the field? We're essentially the same team we were in 2017, but have benefited from lesser schedules.

We still haven't beaten Iowa, but did solve Wisconsin (when Fleck has showed up and not played to lose from the first snap). The only change in 2021 was instead of finding a way to beat the lesser teams in Bowling Green and Illinois when we failed to show up (coaches shitting the bed, again), we lost both of those games.

Do I like that? You may think I do, but I don't. In Five years, Fleck is closer to what I think of him than what you think of him, but I'm the troll.

Yes, stating that 'Fleck has a history of shitting the bed early in the season' is a troll comment because it's false.

College team talent is a metric that matters, but I've never once said it's the only thing that matters. They were ranked 12th when Fleck took over, not 10th, but facts have never really been your thing.

We not only have better talent today, but Fleck continues to beat better teams with lesser talent, because he's a significantly better coach than what we've had previously here.
 

I was a big fan of Kill and Claeys and think Coyle treated Claeys poorly.

That said, if you think that Fleck's results aren't better than Kill/Claeys, you're delusional.
VERY poorly. I think Claeys is a great guy. Wish he was still coaching.
 

Like I said, even though we should have started 2019 0-2, we didn't, and that season turned out OK. I guess that's trolling? You kids these days, it's hard to keep up with your ever changing use of facts to support your narrative.

I'm anxiously awaiting the GWG Advanced Metric of College Team Talent for 2022. Maybe we'll rank above 10th this year. You used to assure us that was the only metric that mattered when Maryland beat the crap out of us, and that our new super recruiter would elevate us to new heights. Well, I'm also anxiously awaiting to see after 5 years, if we'll end up ranked higher than 10th (the exact same ranking we had when he got here). Now, in 2019 we had a great record with only the 10th ranked class so maybe that doesn't matter. At least you've stopped using that as an excuse for losses, so kudos for you for growth.

I've been consistently critical of Fleck, you've consistently positted that he's the greatest thing since sliced bread. Five years in, how much has changed on the field? We're essentially the same team we were in 2017, but have benefited from lesser schedules.

We still haven't beaten Iowa, but did solve Wisconsin (when Fleck has showed up and not played to lose from the first snap). The only change in 2021 was instead of finding a way to beat the lesser teams in Bowling Green and Illinois when we failed to show up (coaches shitting the bed, again), we lost both of those games.

Do I like that? You may think I do, but I don't. In Five years, Fleck is closer to what I think of him than what you think of him, but I'm the troll.
Quite the revisionist history on 2017 season
 

Nor could we possibly lose to Bowling Green last year. Never underestimate Fleck's abilty to not have the team prepared for a game. He's consistently done that in his time here.
Ohio State, 2021?
 


I was a big fan of Kill and Claeys and think Coyle treated Claeys poorly.

That said, if you think that Fleck's results aren't better than Kill/Claeys, you're delusional.
kill/claeys best finish was 2nd in the west. PJ's best finish...2nd in the west. Not sure how that is better but ok.
 

kill/claeys best finish was 2nd in the west. PJ's best finish...2nd in the west. Not sure how that is better but ok.
Kill/Claeys 38-33 (.535), 19-25 Big Ten (.432), 2-3 in bowls. Best season 9 wins. Didn't finish a single season ranked.

Fleck 35-23 (.603) 21-22 Big Ten (.488). 3-0 in bowls. Best season 11 wins. Finished a season #10 in the country.

Seems pretty clear who is better, but I know you're just a troll.
 

kill/claeys best finish was 2nd in the west. PJ's best finish...2nd in the west. Not sure how that is better but ok.
And clearly the Twins and Yankees are equally good this year because they're both in first place in their division.
 

kill/claeys best finish was 2nd in the west. PJ's best finish...2nd in the west. Not sure how that is better but ok.

Wrong. PJ's best finish is tied for 1st in the west, with the tiebreaker going to Wisconsin. They were co-B1G west champions.

Kill's best finish was a tie for 2nd in the west, 2 games behind 1st place Wisconsin. PJ also finished tied for 2nd last season. PJ's second best season here = Kill's best season.
 

Wrong. PJ's best finish is tied for 1st in the west, with the tiebreaker going to Wisconsin. They were co-B1G west champions.

Kill's best finish was a tie for 2nd in the west, 2 games behind 1st place Wisconsin. PJ also finished tied for 2nd last season. PJ's second best season here = Kill's best season.
If you don't play in the conf champ game...you didn't come in first in your division.
 


You can tie for first and not play in the championship game. You are trying to twist reality.
put down the koolaid and listen to yourself. reality is if you didn't play in the conf champ game...you didn't win your division or come in first. Saying we tied for first in the west makes us look ridiculous. you are twisting reality thinking we came in first. We may have had the same conference record as wisconsin, but when we played them for the west champ...we got smoked. We came in 2nd.
 

put down the koolaid and listen to yourself. reality is if you didn't play in the conf champ game...you didn't win your division or come in first. Saying we tied for first in the west makes us look ridiculous. you are twisting reality thinking we came in first. We may have had the same conference record as wisconsin, but when we played them for the west champ...we got smoked. We came in 2nd.
None of us are saying that, the official B10 rules are. You can disagree with how they determine that, but the fact is we were co-champions. I'm not suggesting we hang a banner and have t-shirts printed, but you are the one trying to make your own set of rules here, not the rest of us.
 




Top Bottom