We are better than many ABers think

[BuffWarHog]

I do believe we are better-than-we-have-played the last couple of years. But I also agree with this:

"3. All the major college football awards -- and most of the minor ones, too -- unveiled their “watch lists.” I don’t believe in watch lists. The lists serve only as public relations tools for the awards and for the programs whose players are named. But the standards to make the list are virtually non-existent. Besides, in this day and age, performance on the field is the most important element. Johnny Manziel, unknown before last September, proved that once and for all." - ESPN 3-Point Stance

 

[boydbuff]

Adam, et. al. in their Stampede Radio backed up my point that the difference between 124th and 70th this year could be coaching, that our starters are good enough to be competitive but the biggest issue could be lack of depth.

I.e. our starters are good enough to be WAY more competitive and win some games this year, but the biggest risk we have is injuries like in recent years could doom us b/c our depth is not good.

 

[Duff Man]

Adam, et. al. in their Stampede Radio backed up my point that the difference between 124th and 70th this year could be coaching, that our starters are good enough to be competitive but the biggest issue could be lack of depth.

I.e. our starters are good enough to be WAY more competitive and win some games this year, but the biggest risk we have is injuries like in recent years could doom us b/c our depth is not good.

You realize that this does not necessarily support your argument... right?

 

[boydbuff]

You realize that this does not necessarily support your argument... right?

Explain. They said the same thing I have been saying. Our talent level isn't that bad-especially our starters, and that with better coaching than last year, we could reasonably reach top 70 in the nation. That is almost exactly what I have been saying.

 

[Creebuzz]

Explain. They said the same thing I have been saying. Our talent level isn't that bad-especially our starters, and that with better coaching than last year, we could reasonably reach top 70 in the nation. That is almost exactly what I have been saying.

And Washington State is #69.

 

[boydbuff]

And Washington State is #69.

Are you suggesting that it would be a bad season if we ended up around 70 in the nation this year? If that is the benchmark for a bad season after finishing around 124th last year, than I am going to be happy.

 

[Creebuzz]

Are you suggesting that it would be a bad season if we ended up around 70 in the nation this year? If that is the benchmark for a bad season after finishing around 124th last year, than I am going to be happy.

Mostly, I'm ****ing with you. But, yes finishing at 70 would be an improvement but would still have CU last or near last in the PAC12. And that's not better than what most ABers think to answer the statement made in the thread title.

 

[MtnBuff]

Being the worst team in the PAC would be a step up from being worse than any team in the MAC or the WAC like last year.

 

[Duff Man]

Finishing #70 this season does not mean we should have finished #70 last season...

 

[boydbuff]

Finishing #70 this season does not mean we should have finished #70 last season...

Whatever Duff. If you had heard the broadcast you would have heard almost a repetition of what I have been saying in this thread and others. If you don't want to believe that a significant upgrade in coaching without a significant upgrade in talent (which is our situation right now) can make a massive difference in on-field performance, that is your prerogative.

If we do indeed finish in the top 70 this year, an improvement of more than 50 places over last year's team, you are going to have a hard time arguing that it is because of a lack of attrition (we've had it), an easier schedule (not easier), or a significant upgrade in talent (I believe you and many others have been clear in arguing we in fact are not upgrading our talent enough).

 

[Duff Man]

Mike MacIntyre would have struggled to finish with a few wins with last year's team. Embree was horrible, but three things doomed last season:

1. No experience at QB (Good or bad, Wood at least played last season and has another Spring under his belt)
2. Paul Richardson's injury left a questionable WR core in shambles
3. The defensive line was stupid young

You keep wanting to ignore facts (and the above three statements are facts) in some weird attempt to make 2012 into some sort of positive. Have at it, but I can guarantee you MacIntyre is happier coaching the 2013 than he would have been in 2012.

 

[boydbuff]

Mike MacIntyre would have struggled to finish with a few wins with last year's team. Embree was horrible, but three things doomed last season:

1. No experience at QB (Good or bad, Wood at least played last season and has another Spring under his belt)
2. Paul Richardson's injury left a questionable WR core in shambles
3. The defensive line was stupid young

You keep wanting to ignore facts (and the above three statements are facts) in some weird attempt to make 2012 into some sort of positive. Have at it, but I can guarantee you MacIntyre is happier coaching the 2013 than he would have been in 2012.

1.) You are going to tell me that starting 1 game and being yanked for crappy play gives Wood a big leg up this year when he is learning a new offense again? If he plays better this year it is because of scheme, coaches working with him, and improved confidence (not from his ****** play last year).

2.) Not denying PRich makes a big difference. He's a stud.

3.) DL youth doesn't do much for me as justification for a way better team this year. We have youth across the board, the team is learning a brand new offense and defense, have brand new coaches, etc.

You can use whatever justification works for you Duff, but I am not buying it. If we are 50 teams+ better than last year, noone is going to convince me that coaching doesn't have a whole lot to do with it. The team from last year to this year is not different enough in terms of talent to justify such an improvement.

Of course if we end up near 120 or so again, than I will have been proven wrong. And I won't use any excuses about injuries, attrition, etc. If we end up around 120 again than I am wrong about the role of coaching. If however we end up 70th or better, you won't convince me that coaching isn't the biggest difference b/w last year and this.

 

[Duff Man]

So I can expect a MacIntyre = Football Jesus post come November?

As far as your DL thought... uh wow. Not sure what to say about that one.

 

[White_Rabbit]

To be clear, what overall W/L record do we have in this scenario where we've improved to be 70th in the country?

 

[boydbuff]

To be clear, what overall W/L record do we have in this scenario where we've improved to be 70th in the country?

The other day I looked that up and it would put is in the range of 3-4 wins and a margin of "victory" of like -4 or something like that.

So Duff, here is my final word on this one. Comparing apples and apples...

Let's say Embree & Co were to come back right now, with his former staff and the same exact players we have now. Based on their coaching ability and last year's performance, and the "much better" situation from your perspective for the 2013 season-how many victories would Embree & Co get and where would we rank out of the 124 teams by the end of the year?

Now what is your same prediction about victories and top 124 teams with HCMM & Co?

I would be shocked, absolutely, if Embree & Co with their level of ineptitude across the board from scheme, coaching down more than up, bad play calling and game-time adjustments would break into the top 100 this year. On the other hand I believe that HCMM & Co. are failures if we don't break the top 100 this year.

I am guessing this is our biggest point of difference. I.e. that you would find a way to rationalize that Embree just was dealt a bad hand and he and his staff would have very similar results as HCMM & Co. will have this year.

If you do feel that way, I suspect you are amongst less than 5% of Buff fans and I would bet less than 1% of all college football analysts

 

[Duff Man]

I was a huge fan of Embree, that's true.

 

[DBT]

I was a huge fan of Embree, that's true.

I will say that Embree was set up to fail. But he did not handle failure well. Or at least as well as one can handle such epic failure. And it wasn't just the losses. It was the magnitude of the losses. I know little of how his recruiting was going but have little doubt last season did great damage to his credibility with recruits. A change had to be made.

 

[CVilleBuff]

To be clear, what overall W/L record do we have in this scenario where we've improved to be 70th in the country?

Even if we were 70th, hard to see how anything over 4 wins occurs. Even with the OOC, this isn't a schedule made to sneak a team to 6-6 bowl eligibility. The 9 game conference schedule is a disadvantage to those in conferences who did/are play(ing) 8 game conference schedules.

 

[boydbuff]

Even if we were 70th, hard to see how anything over 4 wins occurs. Even with the OOC, this isn't a schedule made to sneak a team to 6-6 bowl eligibility. The 9 game conference schedule is a disadvantage to those in conferences who did/are play(ing) 8 game conference schedules.

I agree. I looked this up a few weeks ago and put a link into another thread. 70th place based on 2012 teams would have resulted in around 3-4 wins but a much lower margin of defeat (i.e. much more competitive even in losses). I am not going to put upper and lower bounds on this team because there are too many unknowns.

However, if you ask me, a 70th place result 1 year removed from a 124th place result, and few more wins this last year, and more competitive in losses would be a good start to the HCMM tenure. You would hope that gives him something to build from for recruiting and builds confidence in the team that they are capable of better.

 

[CUFan]

I will say that Embree was set up to fail. But he did not handle failure well. Or at least as well as one can handle such epic failure. And it wasn't just the losses. It was the magnitude of the losses. I know little of how his recruiting was going but have little doubt last season did great damage to his credibility with recruits. A change had to be made.

As much as CU may have set Embree up to fail, he was the one that failed. He sought this job under the premise he was qualified, he divided the locker room, and the list goes on and on of all the things he ed up.

 

[boydbuff]

As much as CU may have set Embree up to fail, he was the one that failed. He sought this job under the premise he was qualified, he divided the locker room, and the list goes on and on of all the things he ed up.

I agree. He was inept and on top of that he made some very bad decisions regarding who he hired to support him. Any smart leader looks to surround themselves with people who have strength in areas they don't. Embree, for whatever reason, surrounded himself with position coaches like himself, rather than experienced coordinators. That could have made a big difference.

Anyway, my whole point with this thread, which was supported by Adam, et. al, yesterday and also, in my opinion is supported by the 7 current players on watch lists (yes I recognize that doesn't mean those players are top 10 in the nation but they are good enough to make the lists), as well as the aggregate recruiting rankings of our players, is that good coaches should have been able to get around a top 60-80 finish last year (and great coaches could have done even better). Because we had probably the worst coaching staff in all of Div1 last year, we severely underperformed.

If HCMM & Co are good coaches, with the talent they have on the roster this year, it is reasonable to argue that we should be a top 70 team this year. While that is not what we should aspire to, it represents an approximate 40% improvement in terms of competitiveness, year over year. Follow that up in year 2 with a similar improvement given more time to have some of HCMM's recruits in, more time in their system, more confidence from the players, more unity, etc. and perhaps we make a jump to say top 40.

If HCMM can go from 124th in 2012 to 70th in 2013 and 40th in 2014 than we are on the right track and he will have gone a long way in proving my point that good coaching can make a big difference.

 

[CUFan]

I think the points you are making are certainly possible, but potentially improbable. I think a lot of things have to got right for us to improve that much this year. The two keys in my mind are injuries and quarterback:

1) Injuries are part of the game and we have little to no depth across the roster.
2) Our QB situation could be better than last year or just as bad.

We will know on Saturdays, but that might even take a few Saturdays before we really know.

 

[boydbuff]

I think the points you are making are certainly possible, but potentially improbable. I think a lot of things have to got right for us to improve that much this year. The two keys in my mind are injuries and quarterback:

1) Injuries are part of the game and we have little to no depth across the roster.
2) Our QB situation could be better than last year or just as bad.

We will know on Saturdays, but that might even take a few Saturdays before we really know.

Both super valid points. I have a tendency to error on the optimistic side (I know that is a shock to you guys).
We are not deep-no doubt. I am hopeful that even with some injuries, our coaching staff is going to have the 2 and 3 deep guys way better prepared than our last staff, so we would have a drop in performance with injuries, but as long as most of our top guys stay relatively healthy, I still think it is possible.

As for the QB situation, I agree as well-what do we really know about Connor? We know he sucked last year. But we also know he has a world of talent and was a top 3-4 QB coming out of HS. That suggests that with better coaching and better schemes that fit him, (assuming he has more of the mental part and confidence this year) I think it is pretty reasonable to suggest, especially in line with his performance in the spring game, etc. that he is going to be likely much better than what we saw from him and Webb and Hirsch last year.

But going back to your first point, I worry that there could be a big drop off if he gets hurt. We really know little about Gehrke, especially being able to compete at a Pac 12 level.

 

[WizzersGhost]

I will say that Embree set himself up to fail. But he did not handle failure well. Or at least as well as one can handle such epic failure. And it wasn't just the losses. It was the magnitude of the losses. I know little of how his recruiting was going but have little doubt last season did great damage to his credibility with recruits. A change had to be made.

FIFY

Why didn't he take advantage of those on his staff who had "been there, done that, and got a T-shirt" for their efforts, particularly Mac???
His first effort should have been to lock himself up with all the former HCs on his staff and Mac to come up with a plan---but he didn't! Why did he insist upon imposing a "pro-style attack" without looking at the personnel available and their strengths? Why did he allow a mish mash of pro coaching styles, rather than developing a unified staff aimed at coaching a bunch of college kids?

 

[sackman]

I think the points you are making are certainly possible, but potentially improbable.

What does "potentially improbable" mean?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[sackman]

FIFY

Why didn't he take advantage of those on his staff who had "been there, done that, and got a T-shirt" for their efforts, particularly Mac???
His first effort should have been to lock himself up with all the former HCs on his staff and Mac to come up with a plan---but he didn't! Why did he insist upon imposing a "pro-style attack" without looking at the personnel available and their strengths? Why did he allow a mish mash of pro coaching styles, rather than developing a unified staff aimed at coaching a bunch of college kids?

I'll tell you why- it's because he was unqualified to be a head coach. He never should have been out in that position to begin with. It was a mistake to hire him. I could apply for the job as CFO of Citibank. If I did, and they were dumb enough to hire me, whose fault is it when I fail?
I certainly would bear some of the blame, but Citibank would be just as culpable. The people who hired Embree are just as much to blame for his epic failure as he is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

 

[absinthe]

Mike MacIntyre would have struggled to finish with a few wins with last year's team. Embree was horrible, but three things doomed last season:

1. No experience at QB (Good or bad, Wood at least played last season and has another Spring under his belt)
2. Paul Richardson's injury left a questionable WR core in shambles
3. The defensive line was stupid young

You keep wanting to ignore facts (and the above three statements are facts) in some weird attempt to make 2012 into some sort of positive. Have at it, but I can guarantee you MacIntyre is happier coaching the 2013 than he would have been in 2012.

To play devils advocate, MacIntryer wins probably 4 games with last years team:

1.) We were much more experienced at QB last year, not saying it was GOOD experience but Webb had started what 2 dozen games?
2.) Agreed
3.) Will Preciak - only all pac-12 player on the line.

PRich aside (and we dont know how he is coming back) I am not sure I'd say either team is clearly better, our brutal receiving core did just lose Hobbs and Thomas who contributed last year, and of course Kasa who is as of the moment in the NFL, that is 60 balls caugth roughly 700 yards of offense and three td's gone as well as the TE spot decimated.

 

[NW Buff]

We are as bad as I think we are until proven otherwise on the field. I have no interest in believing the team is better than it appears and being proven horribly wrong... again.

 

[CUFan]

What does "potentially improbable" mean?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

It means improbable, but maybe only potentially. :lol:

 

[White_Rabbit]

I agree. He was inept and on top of that he made some very bad decisions regarding who he hired to support him. Any smart leader looks to surround themselves with people who have strength in areas they don't. Embree, for whatever reason, surrounded himself with position coaches like himself, rather than experienced coordinators. That could have made a big difference.

Anyway, my whole point with this thread, which was supported by Adam, et. al, yesterday and also, in my opinion is supported by the 7 current players on watch lists (yes I recognize that doesn't mean those players are top 10 in the nation but they are good enough to make the lists), as well as the aggregate recruiting rankings of our players, is that good coaches should have been able to get around a top 60-80 finish last year (and great coaches could have done even better). Because we had probably the worst coaching staff in all of Div1 last year, we severely underperformed.

If HCMM & Co are good coaches, with the talent they have on the roster this year, it is reasonable to argue that we should be a top 70 team this year. While that is not what we should aspire to, it represents an approximate 40% improvement in terms of competitiveness, year over year. Follow that up in year 2 with a similar improvement given more time to have some of HCMM's recruits in, more time in their system, more confidence from the players, more unity, etc. and perhaps we make a jump to say top 40.

If HCMM can go from 124th in 2012 to 70th in 2013 and 40th in 2014 than we are on the right track and he will have gone a long way in proving my point that good coaching can make a big difference.

If all you've been arguing is that we should've been better last year than the worst ****ing team to have ever existed, then I most definitely agree.