Success vs Failure

[brophog]

The average new coach tends to improve by about 2 games or so between seasons 1 and 2. When you look at the year 1 tape of those that exceed that average you see plays where players were in the right spot, but they missed the tackle or they had a receiver open on a passing concept but they just needed to hold a block a bit longer. If the recipe is there, but you just need to refine it, then that’s a really good sign of future success.

 

For me, year 1 is about setting up year 2. Very rarely in a rebuilding situation does a coach come in and shock the world in year 1. Year 2 is usually the big year, sometimes not until year 3, but practically never after year 3.

[Scofrosghost]

-Win, lose, or draw I just want this team to break the trend of s#!tting the bed at the worst possible times.
-Stay mentally tough and focused. Meaning don’t take our foot off the throttle if we have the lead. Also have the fortitude to be able to make adjustments to come from behind and pull out a win. 

-If we lose, it’s because the other team was better that day and not because we beat ourselves and handed them the game on a silver platter.

- PLAY ALL FOUR QUARTERS!!

Anything more than that will be icing on the cake as far as I’m concerned for year one

[JJ Husker]

Of course I’d love to see anything above .500 but I’m not sure a team like this with a new coach and new systems can be judged on record alone in year 1. While still In satisfying at 4-5-6 wins, I could be fairly happy if the team shows improvement throughout the season. So much depends on the OL and unfortunately that will be one of the slowest things to correct and get right. I guess we’ll just have to see how it goes.

 

Would be pretty darned happy if we can start 3-1 or 4-0 (duh), but then managing expectations for the remainder of the year will be extra difficult.

[Fru]

I’m probably setting myself up for disappointment, but making a bowl game. 

[GSG]

15-0

 

World Champs

 

[Toe]

More than anything, I want to see some actual player development. Frost recruited well enough, but he was shockingly bad at development.

[Red Five]

Unless this year is an unmitigated disaster, I am going to do my best to not draw any conclusions until after the 2024 season.

[commando]

if we win 6 and go bowling i think that would have to be considered a successful year 

[Ulty]

Ever since the Callahan years, there have been countless moments where I was totally sure that we have hit rock bottom and things can't get any worse, only to keep sinking to new lows. 

 

This season will be a success if we ever get to a point where we can confidently (and accurately, with evidence) say that the worst is actually behind us. 

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, JJ Husker said:

Would be pretty darned happy if we can start 3-1 or 4-0 (duh), but then managing expectations for the remainder of the year will be extra difficult.

I'm willing to try managing expectations after we start 3-1 or 4-0.  

[J-MAGIC]

I think we have a higher level of talent than fans are letting on and I'd love to see 6 wins and some sort of bowl, which I think is very achievable against our schedule if we don't catch insane bad luck again. But mostly I just want to see the beginnings of a program that pays attention to details, is maximizing its resources, and not constantly stepping on rakes (which seems to be happening so far in one offseason at least).

[Mavric]

52 minutes ago, J-MAGIC said:

I think we have a higher level of talent than fans are letting on and I'd love to see 6 wins and some sort of bowl, which I think is very achievable against our schedule if we don't catch insane bad luck again. But mostly I just want to see the beginnings of a program that pays attention to details, is maximizing its resources, and not constantly stepping on rakes (which seems to be happening so far in one offseason at least).

 

Exactly this.  

 

People look at the record and insist that we've been terrible.  The record is what matters most and it has been terrible.

 

But it's not a simple dichotomy.  A win doesn't mean you're great and a loss doesn't mean you're terrible.  We've done a lot of things well or at least above average.  We've been very competitive in most games.  We just haven't found enough ways to turn those close games into wins.

 

Prime example: all the people who were insisting that Iowa had dominated us the previous seven years (before last year).  They had absolutely done no such thing.  They had beaten us badly a couple of times but the last four games had all been one-score games that came down to the last few minutes.  Did we have to be that much better of a team to finally get a win against them?  Obviously we weren't.  But we played just enough better to come out ahead.  Nothing amazing.  Just an incremental improvement.

 

It won't take much to do that in a few more games.  We barely have to be any better than we've been to get into the 6-7 win range.

[Scofrosghost]

6 minutes ago, Mavric said:

 

Exactly this.  

 

People look at the record and insist that we've been terrible.  The record is what matters most and it has been terrible.

 

But it's not a simple dichotomy.  A win doesn't mean you're great and a loss doesn't mean you're terrible.  We've done a lot of things well or at least above average.  We've been very competitive in most games.  We just haven't found enough ways to turn those close games into wins.

 

Prime example: all the people who were insisting that Iowa had dominated us the previous seven years (before last year).  They had absolutely done no such thing.  They had beaten us badly a couple of times but the last four games had all been one-score games that came down to the last few minutes.  Did we have to be that much better of a team to finally get a win against them?  Obviously we weren't.  But we played just enough better to come out ahead.  Nothing amazing.  Just an incremental improvement.

 

It won't take much to do that in a few more games.  We barely have to be any better than we've been to get into the 6-7 win range.

All of this ^^

shoot if we do just a couple of the things I mentioned we could very well win 8 games

[JJ Husker]

3 hours ago, BigRedBuster said:

I'm willing to try managing expectations after we start 3-1 or 4-0.  

I hear ya. It’s just at that point it won’t matter where we’ve been previously.  If we start with 3-4 wins the expectations will rise for the remainder and it will seem worse if then we only manage 4-5 total wins. But yeah, I’ll take those Ws anywhere we can get em. Bowling would be nice for a change.

[BigRedBuster]

1 hour ago, Mavric said:

 

Exactly this.  

 

People look at the record and insist that we've been terrible.  The record is what matters most and it has been terrible.

 

But it's not a simple dichotomy.  A win doesn't mean you're great and a loss doesn't mean you're terrible.  We've done a lot of things well or at least above average.  We've been very competitive in most games.  We just haven't found enough ways to turn those close games into wins.

 

Prime example: all the people who were insisting that Iowa had dominated us the previous seven years (before last year).  They had absolutely done no such thing.  They had beaten us badly a couple of times but the last four games had all been one-score games that came down to the last few minutes.  Did we have to be that much better of a team to finally get a win against them?  Obviously we weren't.  But we played just enough better to come out ahead.  Nothing amazing.  Just an incremental improvement.

 

It won't take much to do that in a few more games.  We barely have to be any better than we've been to get into the 6-7 win range.

Heck, how many games last year were lost just because of horrible coaching decisions. Now, I believe we have a better, more experienced, more mature staff. That alone could have counted for at least a couple more wins last year.