re: So There's A Good Chance We Go 10-3

Wait... So what bar should smart fans expect ?

quote:

---

Yes. By year 15, 3 losses should be considered a down year.

---

Ya, I am pretty sure we all are under the impression that this is a down year.

Ok, so that still meets your defined baseline.

quote:

---

You are STILL missing his point. It isn't we would be good if we didn't play good teams. his point is that the teams you guys hold in such high regard are not playing good teams either. SURELY you understood what he was saying and are just trying to be obtuse.

---

I'm not missing the point at all. I just have a fundamental disagreement with both of you on what the expectation level at Georgia should be. For me, suffering humiliating losses at a frequency higher than that of other great programs is not acceptable.

quote:

---

And every complaint can be countered. Not beating good teams? neither are TCU, OSU, Michigan, Iowa etc.

Can't win the National Championship? Neither has Jim Harbaugh...a coach many on this board salivate over. Not at Stanford and not at Michigan, although he is new at Michigan...only time will tell.

Loses big games? Look at Michigan. The only big games he has played he has lost. Les Miles lost to his big opponent, Alabama, then followed that up with a loss to Arkansas!

We can go and on. The point being that you guys hold Georgia...and Richt up to standards that you do not hold other coaches or programs to. There is nothing wrong with Richt...you just want a change because change is exciting and you think we will catch lightening in a bottle. And....it's possible that we could. It's more probable that we won't, though

---

I won't blame Richt for not having a NC, but once again you provide single game/season examples while ignoring any kind of context that may go into them. I, on the other hand, have the last 8 or so years of data to show both a trend and what I believe are reasonable conclusions from that data based on the fact that I can link all of this data together instead of providing occasional instances which appear to be outliers.

Michigan is in year 1 of a new coach. That kind of matters...
OSU hasn't beaten any good teams this year, but they proved themselves in the playoffs last year. And, if we go on what you said earlier they will have a couple of quality wins soon enough.

You don't get to pick your schedule, but you can control how you manage that schedule. With roughly 130 FBS teams and very little overlap in terms of head-to-head matches you have to take into consideration a multitude of things when evaluating a team, which I believe is how this particular conversation got started (Georgia would be a top 15 team ...)

quote:

---

PLEASE. At least be honest. I've never seen anyone compare Richt to Mason.

As for your other statement about playing a difficult SEC schedule? that's not what you said. You said a TYPICAL SEC schedule. And Georgia does in deed play a typical SEC schedule. And with Alabama on it this year, we play a more difficult SEC schedule than several teams. You say something, then when we shoot down what you say you want to change your wording.

---

Well actually you changed my wording. I said "traditional" :P

Please though, try not to take everything so literal? Is the concept of a metaphor lost on you? I have never changed my words, but I have apparently given too much credit to my readers for being able to read a passage to derive the meaning (of course I've had words put in mouth even when I spelled something out in detail, so it doesn't seem to matter either way). I didn't think that I would need to spell out the obvious that "yes, of course UGA played the schedule that the SEC mandated to them and the rest of the conference, but through through simple luck of the draw, the teams on that schedule have not lived up to the standard of what a SEC schedule is traditionally credited for". Context clues are your friend.

My point is that Georgia is held to a different standard than most of the country. At least it is to me anyway. Vanderbilt and Derrick Mason are an exaggerated example for emphasis, which should have been further obvious given the second half of the original statement.
Success is a measure of who you are and who you want to be. Success is not the same for all programs, and the disagreement for what is successful at Georgia seems to be where the disconnect is among fans.

quote:

---

But to call Richt a bad coach, or to call the program a dumpster fire is so off base, don't you think? I mean, honestly. Do you put UGA in the same category as Tennessee 3-10 years ago? Or Florida just a couple of years ago? All I am saying is that Richt is a excellent coach. I am frustrated with the progress. But Richt could do nothing to keep Gurley healthy or out of trouble...or keep Chubb from getting hurt this year. THOSE are the reasons (In my opinion) that we have no shown improvement.

---

I actually agree with this. I don't think that Richt is a bad coach, and in fact I think he is a good coach that a lot of programs would love to have today. You don't fake your way to 9-10 wins most years, with any schedule, by not being at least good at your job. There are a lot of 'good' coaches though who can win at a fairly decent clip given the right situation. Whatever the reason though the last decade of data suggests that he is not the same coach that he was when he first arrived at Georgia. It is my belief (based observations and some assumptions) that most people who are still on the Richt side are still pointing to things that happened when I, as a nearly 29 year old, was still in high school. Because just from a simple W/L standpoint, over the last 8 to 10 years Richt is no better than his predecessor who just did not have a great 5 year run to start his career to fall back on. Now, the early success does matter, but at some point he has to be held accountable for the more recent happenings right?

We're not a great program. Nor have we ever been one. There's your problem. We aren't a blue blood.

quote:

---

We aren't a blue blood

---

What exactlyis your definition?Obvoiusly Bama and OSU currenty but were they 20 years ago?Is Nebraska or Miami?Oklahoma?LSU pre Saban or even now?FSU?Notre Dame (pre Kelly for 20 years)?Clemson?Auburn?Texas?

Are only "bluebloods" allowed to win a NC?

The landscape of CFB is always changing.

quote:

---

We're not a great program. Nor have we ever been one. There's your problem. We aren't a blue blood.

---

True statement, but we could be.

quote:

---

So, once a coach has tenure, he is expected to win all his games?

---

You're better than this.

quote:

---

Please fill us in on what out desired "baseline" should be? Keep in mind we haven't beat a single team with a winning record

---

Yes we have. When we beat them there was a couple of teams that had winning records. And, at the end of the season there will probably be a few teams with winning records. Missouri and Kentucky have a shot. Do you guys ever get tired of being gloom and doom. You must be a riot at parties. Let's not enjoy any of our wins. Good fans won't celebrate a win if we don't win a National Championship.

The narrative has gone from we haven't won a National Championship to we haven't won a SEC Championship to we haven't beaten a ranked team to we haven't beaten a team with a winning record....to.....to....I remember in 2012 everybody was all up in arms wanting to fire Richt after the South Carolina game. Then we came within an eyelash of playing for the National Championship and all we could hear was how Richt didn't call a timeout. Georgia fans can never enjoy a win because we are so busy crying about what we don't have.