POLL: Football record this year.
- Thread starter WVURobinHood
- Start date
The real key will be to see if even ONE of the Holgorsen zombies can admit the truth: This year's team would need to be 8-5 just to keep running in place since the schedule trades off Alabama for Georgia Southern.
Can't wait for the stormtroopers to start spinning that in 3, 2, 1...
Can't wait for the stormtroopers to start spinning that in 3, 2, 1...
That's an aggressive post based off a very neutral and non threatening OP. If Dana has a good year he'll be kept around for another season, if he sucks it up he'll be fired, no sweat off my back either way. It's amazing how much some will defend or bash the man on here.
My opinion - He's a slightly above average head coach.
This post was edited on 4/8 7:58 PM by GetYaNumbersUp
My opinion - He's a slightly above average head coach.
This post was edited on 4/8 7:58 PM by GetYaNumbersUp
My vote is an optimistic 9 - 3, as the conference is going to be tough again with only a couple of games, at this point, that I would consider to be 'should wins'. Just don't know enough about the other teams in the conference as of yet.
But I like the depth and distribution on this Mountaineer team.
This post was edited on 4/8 8:15 PM by PaintedontheSky
But I like the depth and distribution on this Mountaineer team.
This post was edited on 4/8 8:15 PM by PaintedontheSky
7-5 wouldn't be a surprise
The conference road schedule is daunting -- Oklahoma, TCU, Baylor, K-State and Kansas. Anything better than 7-5 is gravy, is what I'm thinking.
WVU opens with 3 winnable games at home -- Liberty, Georgia Southern and Maryland. It gets 4 league games in Morgantown -- OK State, Texas, Texas Tech and Iowa State.
The conference road schedule is daunting -- Oklahoma, TCU, Baylor, K-State and Kansas. Anything better than 7-5 is gravy, is what I'm thinking.
Everyone knows what they say . . .
opinions; they are all like a$$holes, everyone has one most all are stinky as hell.
opinions; they are all like a$$holes, everyone has one most all are stinky as hell.
That statement coming from you is what is amazing...a guy who would take a bullet for Joe DeForest.
You can act like your opinion on the coaching staff is now one of indifference with statements like "no sweat off my back either way" but you were routinely one of their biggest defenders on these boards during the season. So you are literally saying that you amaze yourself in this post...
8-4 is how I voted.
We take care of business at home and win @Kansas.
We have a good defense and good DC. We have a good Head Coach. We have a great stable of RBs and a QB who averaged 90 yards passing and 1 TD per quarter of play. If we can develop stronger WR threats this summer, we might even get 9 regular season wins.
We take care of business at home and win @Kansas.
We have a good defense and good DC. We have a good Head Coach. We have a great stable of RBs and a QB who averaged 90 yards passing and 1 TD per quarter of play. If we can develop stronger WR threats this summer, we might even get 9 regular season wins.
6-6. Most of the big games are on the road. The passing game is going to struggle. The defense while experienced lacks size and will be overpowered by the good teams much like last year. Look for the OL to have some issues as well.
10-2
This is the most talented football team we have seen in a long time. Add depth to that. We are young at QB and WR. These are the positions that DH was supposed to excel at when Luck hired him. There is a new sheriff in town and the coach has one more year to prove himself or his contract(thru 2017 season) will not be renewed, IMO.
There will be some talent at key positions in '17, but a lot of the football team will finish up in '16. Therefore, I do not think there is a tomorrow for the coach without great success. Coaching staff looks solid for recruiting, and that has to be converted into wins.
Conference champs? Yes, depending on what other teams do.
This is the most talented football team we have seen in a long time. Add depth to that. We are young at QB and WR. These are the positions that DH was supposed to excel at when Luck hired him. There is a new sheriff in town and the coach has one more year to prove himself or his contract(thru 2017 season) will not be renewed, IMO.
There will be some talent at key positions in '17, but a lot of the football team will finish up in '16. Therefore, I do not think there is a tomorrow for the coach without great success. Coaching staff looks solid for recruiting, and that has to be converted into wins.
Conference champs? Yes, depending on what other teams do.
Start spinning? Only those who cannot comprehend the upgrade in conferences since the Big East split to join the Big 12 would even suggest that. The fools who argue it's an excuse are those who truly believe the Big 12 and Big East were on equal footing. The truth is, an 8-5 record in the Big 12 is likely the equivalent of 11-2 or 12-1 in the Big East. The days of being a big fish in a small pond are over.
I'll be the optimist or maybe the delusional one in the group and go with our first (and surprising) 10 win season in several years.......10-2. If things come together, they may win a few of those road games that most think they will lose.
GSU - Win
Liberty - Win
Maryland - Swing Game
@ OU - Loss
oSu - Swing Game
@ Baylor - Swing Game
@ TCU - Loss
Texas Tech - Win
Texas - Swing Game
@ KU - Win
ISU - Win
@ KSU - Loss
I say 7-5 with possibility of a swing one way or another. Wont call a win or a loss in the bowl as there is no telling how we are looking with injuries/dissention/momentum/matchup until the game is actually announced and about a week away.
Liberty - Win
Maryland - Swing Game
@ OU - Loss
oSu - Swing Game
@ Baylor - Swing Game
@ TCU - Loss
Texas Tech - Win
Texas - Swing Game
@ KU - Win
ISU - Win
@ KSU - Loss
I say 7-5 with possibility of a swing one way or another. Wont call a win or a loss in the bowl as there is no telling how we are looking with injuries/dissention/momentum/matchup until the game is actually announced and about a week away.
AT WVU Dana has not been even close to offensive Guru...
Not sure why that's the case, but it is. Also, breakdown the last part of the last two seasons not acceptable.
Not sure why that's the case, but it is. Also, breakdown the last part of the last two seasons not acceptable.
Re: AT WVU Dana has not been even close to offensive Guru...
Before Clint got concussed, he was leading the nation in passing
Does Dana not get credit for that?
Before Clint got concussed, he was leading the nation in passing
Does Dana not get credit for that?
Re: AT WVU Dana has not been even close to offensive Guru...
How many losses were because of his mistake (of not pulling the injured QB)...?
Yes... ...Dana does get credit for playing a QB who 'got concussed'.
How many losses were because of his mistake (of not pulling the injured QB)...?
Re: AT WVU Dana has not been even close to offensive Guru...
Clint passed his impact test and was cleared to play.
Exactly what was Dr. Holgorsen supposed to do in his diagnosis of Clints injury?
Oh wait....Dana isn't a doctor.
Clint passed his impact test and was cleared to play.
Exactly what was Dr. Holgorsen supposed to do in his diagnosis of Clints injury?
Oh wait....Dana isn't a doctor.
Question for Doom
Doom, with all due respect, I'm not starting crap, I had a player tell me they never gave Clint the concussion tests during the TCU game. They did give him the test during the KSU game when he got his second concussion and he failed that one. Do you have direct info that they DID give him the full battery of tests during halftime of TCU? I was told they asked him a few questions and that was it but never checked physical symptoms.
Again, not asking anyone else's opinion, just asking doom. not trying to start a conspiracy thread. just asking.
Doom, with all due respect, I'm not starting crap, I had a player tell me they never gave Clint the concussion tests during the TCU game. They did give him the test during the KSU game when he got his second concussion and he failed that one. Do you have direct info that they DID give him the full battery of tests during halftime of TCU? I was told they asked him a few questions and that was it but never checked physical symptoms.
Again, not asking anyone else's opinion, just asking doom. not trying to start a conspiracy thread. just asking.
The pond we came out of dried up a bit. But we were holding our own in it even when it had sharks. Moving to another pond doesn't change who we are. We've always been an above average team with runs at greatness scattered in. Now we are woeful with runs of above average being our ceiling. If that's what we are destined to be why bother improving facilities, hiring coaches that can recruit, or spend money recruiting top flight talent. Do I expect us to have dominant years back to back to back like the pat white years while we are in the Big XII? No! But not being the 4-8 doormat isn't too much to ask I wouldn't think.
Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
The tricky thing is the addition of an automatic I-AA win, sometimes two. The old MAC games we used to play were not automatic like playing Ga Southern or the Liberty game. Ohio, Bowling Green, Marshall -- those games were often dogfights for 3 quarters. I agree last year with Alabama was the toughest schedule ever, but this year isn't two games tougher than, say the early 90s schedules.
On the typical year
Maryland was better than today's MD.
Miami was tougher than any team in the Big XII.
Kansas is worse than any old Big East team of the 90s.
Plus, we didn't have two auto-wins.
That being said, I think a 4 loss team in the 90s would be a 5 loss team in the 2015 Big XII. With extra game auto wins on the schedule, to compare apples to apples, you have to look at the losses. Last year we basically had a 6-5 team. I think that same team would have gone 7-4 with our 90s or early 200s schedule. It would have lost to the old MD teams, VaTech, Miami and either Pitt or Syracuse to finish 7-4.
(I agree that the post Miami version of the BE was awful).
This post was edited on 4/9 11:12 PM by WVUDisciples
The tricky thing is the addition of an automatic I-AA win, sometimes two. The old MAC games we used to play were not automatic like playing Ga Southern or the Liberty game. Ohio, Bowling Green, Marshall -- those games were often dogfights for 3 quarters. I agree last year with Alabama was the toughest schedule ever, but this year isn't two games tougher than, say the early 90s schedules.
On the typical year
Maryland was better than today's MD.
Miami was tougher than any team in the Big XII.
Kansas is worse than any old Big East team of the 90s.
Plus, we didn't have two auto-wins.
That being said, I think a 4 loss team in the 90s would be a 5 loss team in the 2015 Big XII. With extra game auto wins on the schedule, to compare apples to apples, you have to look at the losses. Last year we basically had a 6-5 team. I think that same team would have gone 7-4 with our 90s or early 200s schedule. It would have lost to the old MD teams, VaTech, Miami and either Pitt or Syracuse to finish 7-4.
(I agree that the post Miami version of the BE was awful).
This post was edited on 4/9 11:12 PM by WVUDisciples
Re: Question for Doom
They followed protocol.
They HAVE too. They open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits.
It not just concussion testing during the game, there a computer test they take as well.
They take a baseline test every year and compare it with post concussion results to determine the comeback timetable.
They I doubt he got the 'full battery' of tests, but I know he saw a doctor as well as the training staff at TCU.
You can't do the impact test at halftime of a game, it takes too long.
They followed protocol.
They HAVE too. They open themselves up to all kinds of lawsuits.
It not just concussion testing during the game, there a computer test they take as well.
They take a baseline test every year and compare it with post concussion results to determine the comeback timetable.
They I doubt he got the 'full battery' of tests, but I know he saw a doctor as well as the training staff at TCU.
You can't do the impact test at halftime of a game, it takes too long.
Re: Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
Wrong on all accounts. The old Big East didn't have 2 automatic wins, it had 3; Temple, Rutgers, Pitt. All three averaged 0-3 wins per year during the 1990's. Secondly, we didn't hold our own either. Nehlen averaged 7 wins a year and out of 8 teams we averaged a 4-5th place finish. Thirdly, there was only 1 shark; Miami. The Big 12 has 3 sharks; Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas State. It's debatable if Miami was better than any Big 12 school. They won a couple NC's. So hasn't Texas and Oklahoma. Lastly, Maryland is better now than they used to be. Aside from a brief run in the 1980's with Boomer what else did they do besides win 5-6 games or less a year? Get a clue
Wrong on all accounts. The old Big East didn't have 2 automatic wins, it had 3; Temple, Rutgers, Pitt. All three averaged 0-3 wins per year during the 1990's. Secondly, we didn't hold our own either. Nehlen averaged 7 wins a year and out of 8 teams we averaged a 4-5th place finish. Thirdly, there was only 1 shark; Miami. The Big 12 has 3 sharks; Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas State. It's debatable if Miami was better than any Big 12 school. They won a couple NC's. So hasn't Texas and Oklahoma. Lastly, Maryland is better now than they used to be. Aside from a brief run in the 1980's with Boomer what else did they do besides win 5-6 games or less a year? Get a clue
Re: Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
Temple and Rutgers were not great but they were much better than these I-AA teams we play today. Not even close.
Pitt averaged 7 wins per season during the 90s. What stats are you looking at? Hardly an auto win for us. We pretty much split with them.
VaTech was a top 10 team for a number of years in the 90s and early 2000s. They played in the national championship game once and only Miami held them back twice. They were just as good or better than Oklahoma of today.
Texas hasn't been any good since we joined the Big XII. They barely qualified for a low-level bowl. Shark? Not since we joined. Kansas State is good -- but a shark? Hardly. Year in and year out, our recruits are better than KSU -- facilities are better -- if they can be a "shark" then we should be too. Though we're not a shark, we can still be a big fish, just like KSU is.
To say that MD is better now than they were in the 90s and early 2000s is just crazy. They were a top 3 ACC team, top 25 in the country for 5 years under Fridge. They played in New Year's Bowls half the years from 97-05. They haven't been anywhere close to that since we joined the Big XII, haven't been in the top 25 one year. That's just crazy for you to say that they are better under Randy Edsell. Are you drunk?
How many more clues do you need?
Big XII > Big East (92-02). Yes. Current schedule should equal 2 more losses a year compared to then = no way! Nehlen's teams would not have averaged 6 losses a year in this Big XII. No way.
Temple and Rutgers were not great but they were much better than these I-AA teams we play today. Not even close.
Pitt averaged 7 wins per season during the 90s. What stats are you looking at? Hardly an auto win for us. We pretty much split with them.
VaTech was a top 10 team for a number of years in the 90s and early 2000s. They played in the national championship game once and only Miami held them back twice. They were just as good or better than Oklahoma of today.
Texas hasn't been any good since we joined the Big XII. They barely qualified for a low-level bowl. Shark? Not since we joined. Kansas State is good -- but a shark? Hardly. Year in and year out, our recruits are better than KSU -- facilities are better -- if they can be a "shark" then we should be too. Though we're not a shark, we can still be a big fish, just like KSU is.
To say that MD is better now than they were in the 90s and early 2000s is just crazy. They were a top 3 ACC team, top 25 in the country for 5 years under Fridge. They played in New Year's Bowls half the years from 97-05. They haven't been anywhere close to that since we joined the Big XII, haven't been in the top 25 one year. That's just crazy for you to say that they are better under Randy Edsell. Are you drunk?
How many more clues do you need?
Big XII > Big East (92-02). Yes. Current schedule should equal 2 more losses a year compared to then = no way! Nehlen's teams would not have averaged 6 losses a year in this Big XII. No way.
Re: Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
KSU is a shark because they have a once in a lifetime type coach. The chances of hitting on a hire like that has got to be less than 1%. We already saw the nosedive they took when Snyder retired the first time, I expect nothing difference once he retires for the second time.
KSU is a shark because they have a once in a lifetime type coach. The chances of hitting on a hire like that has got to be less than 1%. We already saw the nosedive they took when Snyder retired the first time, I expect nothing difference once he retires for the second time.
Re: Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
Temple 1991-2000 records (Temple joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 2-9
1992 1-10
1993 1-10
1994 2-9
1995 1-10
1996 1-10
1997 3-8
1998 2-9
1999 2-9
2000 4-7
Average win total: 1.9 wins per year
Rutgers 1991-2000 records (Rutgers joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 3-8
1992 7-4
1993 4-7
1994 5-5
1995 4-7
1996 2-9
1997 0-11
1998 5-6
1999 1-10
2000 3-8
Average win total: 3.4 wins per year
Pitt 1991-2000 records (Pitt joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 6-5
1992 3-9
1993 3-8
1994 3-8
1995 2-9
1996 4-7
1997 6-6
1998 2-9
1999 5-6
2000 7-5
10 seasons. Average win total: 4.1 wins per year
*You might want to check your math skills. How did you get Pitt averaging 7 wins during this time? hahahaha!!!
Maryland 1986-2000 (Post Boomer Esiason and HC Bobby Ross years): 2 Winning Seasons from 1986-2000
1986 5-5
1987 4-7
1988 5-6
1989 3-7
1990 6-5
1991 2-9
1992 3-8
1993 2-9
1994 4-7
1995 6-5
1996 5-6
1997 2-9
1998 3-8
1999 5-6
2000 5-6
15 seasons. Average win total: 4 wins per year
Maryland has 9 winning seasons since 2001 and 9 bowl games. That equals MUCH BETTER!
Nehlen would indeed average more than 6 losses a year in the Big 12. He averaged 5-6 losses a year in the OLD Big East where he finished on average 4th to 5th place out of 8 teams. Of those 8 teams, 3 were automatic wins with Temple, Pitt, and Rutgers. So really, the only team with a pulse he could beat was Boston College. Your comment about MAC teams being a dogfight should tell you how stupid your comments are. NEVER has Bowling Green, Miami,OH, or Marshall been a damn dog fight except the 1997 Marshall/WVU game and the time Bill Stewart almost lost to Marshall. The other 10 times were never a dogfight and usually a blowout.
Also it looks, as I provided above, the statistics by year prove that Nehlen enjoyed 3 automatic wins in the Old Big East and an automatic win each and every year with scrub Maryland. Thats 4 wins. Add Boston College, and 2 more OC games against MAC schools, you can see how Nehlen averaged 6-7 wins per season. HE beat NOBODY. His usual wins were Temple, Rutgers, Pitt, Boston College, Maryland, 2 MAC schools. No way in hell could he hang in the Big 12 today.
Your comment comparing Virginia Tech to Oklahoma is absurd. Good grief. Oklahoma is top 5 all-time winning seasons. Multiple National Titles. Multiple bowl wins. The Big 12 has 3 sharks, Oklahoma, Texas, KSU. 2 of those teams; Oklahoma, Texas are 2 legitimate elite programs on par with any of the truest bluebloods of the NCAA. The Old Big East had Miami and ONLY Miami. The Big 12 has several schools the caliber of Virginia Tech; WVU, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor. And yes, WVU is much better now than back in the old Big East under Nehlen. The program has grown to that level.
Now, do YOU need any more clues??? Are YOU drunk??? Go back to knitting. hahaha!
What a doufus....
Temple 1991-2000 records (Temple joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 2-9
1992 1-10
1993 1-10
1994 2-9
1995 1-10
1996 1-10
1997 3-8
1998 2-9
1999 2-9
2000 4-7
Average win total: 1.9 wins per year
Rutgers 1991-2000 records (Rutgers joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 3-8
1992 7-4
1993 4-7
1994 5-5
1995 4-7
1996 2-9
1997 0-11
1998 5-6
1999 1-10
2000 3-8
Average win total: 3.4 wins per year
Pitt 1991-2000 records (Pitt joined the Big East in 1991):
1991 6-5
1992 3-9
1993 3-8
1994 3-8
1995 2-9
1996 4-7
1997 6-6
1998 2-9
1999 5-6
2000 7-5
10 seasons. Average win total: 4.1 wins per year
*You might want to check your math skills. How did you get Pitt averaging 7 wins during this time? hahahaha!!!
Maryland 1986-2000 (Post Boomer Esiason and HC Bobby Ross years): 2 Winning Seasons from 1986-2000
1986 5-5
1987 4-7
1988 5-6
1989 3-7
1990 6-5
1991 2-9
1992 3-8
1993 2-9
1994 4-7
1995 6-5
1996 5-6
1997 2-9
1998 3-8
1999 5-6
2000 5-6
15 seasons. Average win total: 4 wins per year
Maryland has 9 winning seasons since 2001 and 9 bowl games. That equals MUCH BETTER!
Nehlen would indeed average more than 6 losses a year in the Big 12. He averaged 5-6 losses a year in the OLD Big East where he finished on average 4th to 5th place out of 8 teams. Of those 8 teams, 3 were automatic wins with Temple, Pitt, and Rutgers. So really, the only team with a pulse he could beat was Boston College. Your comment about MAC teams being a dogfight should tell you how stupid your comments are. NEVER has Bowling Green, Miami,OH, or Marshall been a damn dog fight except the 1997 Marshall/WVU game and the time Bill Stewart almost lost to Marshall. The other 10 times were never a dogfight and usually a blowout.
Also it looks, as I provided above, the statistics by year prove that Nehlen enjoyed 3 automatic wins in the Old Big East and an automatic win each and every year with scrub Maryland. Thats 4 wins. Add Boston College, and 2 more OC games against MAC schools, you can see how Nehlen averaged 6-7 wins per season. HE beat NOBODY. His usual wins were Temple, Rutgers, Pitt, Boston College, Maryland, 2 MAC schools. No way in hell could he hang in the Big 12 today.
Your comment comparing Virginia Tech to Oklahoma is absurd. Good grief. Oklahoma is top 5 all-time winning seasons. Multiple National Titles. Multiple bowl wins. The Big 12 has 3 sharks, Oklahoma, Texas, KSU. 2 of those teams; Oklahoma, Texas are 2 legitimate elite programs on par with any of the truest bluebloods of the NCAA. The Old Big East had Miami and ONLY Miami. The Big 12 has several schools the caliber of Virginia Tech; WVU, Oklahoma State, TCU, Baylor. And yes, WVU is much better now than back in the old Big East under Nehlen. The program has grown to that level.
Now, do YOU need any more clues??? Are YOU drunk??? Go back to knitting. hahaha!
Re: Just don't agree about old schedules being that much weaker
Temple of the 90's was so bad they got kicked out of the Big East. Back then they'd have trouble beating a D2 team, forget about the 1AA doormats. Rutgers was hardly any better, being a punchline for jokes back then.
Maryland and Pitt are pretty much the same today as they were in the 90s, very average.
Temple of the 90's was so bad they got kicked out of the Big East. Back then they'd have trouble beating a D2 team, forget about the 1AA doormats. Rutgers was hardly any better, being a punchline for jokes back then.
Maryland and Pitt are pretty much the same today as they were in the 90s, very average.
