BobcatAttack.com - For Fans of Ohio University Sports

Welcome Guest!
Create an Account

site search

about us

advertise with us

help

BobcatAttack.com Message Board

Ohio Football

Topic: Stacking the Deck

Topic: Stacking the Deck

Author

Message

Paul Graham
General User

Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline

Stacking the Deck

Posted: 10/14/2014 11:59:22 AM

In another thread my chief rival Bcat2 asked "is this a bad year w.r.t Solich standards or Ohio Football standards?" Of course, he expects us to once again kowtow to the great Frank and all he has done for us and our families.

But this question brought about my curiosity. So I decided to take a look at the Knorr era results with an eye toward comparing to this season.

What immediately struck me was the strength of schedule. The Knorr teams played against better competition and that is undeniable. Look at the OOC games from the Knorr years:

2001 (1-10)
West Virginia
Iowa State
North Carolina State
They also played two top 25 teams: Toledo and Marshall

2002 (4-8)
Pittsburgh
Northeastern
Florida (ranked 12)
UConn

2003 (2-10)
SE Missouri State
Iowa State
Minnesota
Kentucky
They also played two top 25 teams: Northern Illinois and Miami Oh (this was one of the best years for the MAC)
Bowling Green - this Urban Meyer team gets special treatment here. They beat us 72-21 LOL!

2004: (4-7)
VMI
Pittsburgh
Kentucky

2001 and 2003 are clearly the harder schedules with 3 tough OOC games and two games against ranked MAC opponents. Not to mention games against Pruett-lead Marshall teams...which were almost always losses.

What's my point? Our record at this point in the season is meaningless. We've played the worst teams in CFB. If this team played the Knorr 2001 or 2003 schedule we'd have similar results (1 or 2 wins).

I firmly believe that much of the Frank "legacy" was built on paper. Win-able OOC games combined with a weak MAC East. It also explains why the fall from "class of the MAC" to Bottom 10 could happen so quickly. We were never that good to begin with.

Last Edited: 10/14/2014 12:01:42 PM by Paul Graham

GoCats105
General User

Member Since: 1/31/2006
Location: Seattle, WA
Post Count: 7,430

Status: Offline

RE: Stacking the Deck

Posted: 10/14/2014 12:10:53 PM

This was semi-related and brought up in another thread by a Buffalo fan. Apparently they are following a similar model with their new(ish) AD by scheduling light, winnable games.

The problem is, Ohio won those games. Buffalo hasn't. Well, enough, according to Danny White.

I think that it was a great way to build the program at Ohio, considering the history (or unhistory) of the program as a whole. But at some point the schedule has to get better doesn't it? Players want to play in big games and Ohio plays in 1-3 a year depending on the MAC strength, if Marshall is any good, what power conference school it plays and lately, bowl games.

But then that begs another question: Do players care more about winning football games or playing in big football games?

Last Edited: 10/14/2014 12:11:50 PM by GoCats105

Bobcat1998
General User

Member Since: 11/7/2012
Post Count: 2,515

Status: Offline

RE: Stacking the Deck

Posted: 10/14/2014 12:47:13 PM

You're stupid if you're a mid major and you schedule all tough Big 5 conference teams OOC. I like OU's mentality. One payoff game against solid team, a couple against decent mid majors and a few winnable games. I have a Kent buddy who is so fed up with Kent going for the money and then having a terrible record.

OUcats82
General User

Member Since: 1/9/2005
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,879

Status: Offline

RE: Stacking the Deck

Posted: 10/14/2014 1:11:58 PM

I have heard this was the approach that Bill Snyder took (along with other tactics) in trying to build up Kansas State. The difference is, however, that they have in large part gone away from this now that the program is firmly established and has been a strong competitor if the Big 12/10, winning a few championships. They have traded Austin Peay for Auburn.

I personally think that a school in our situation (conference affiliation, talent etc.) should not play more than one big name opponent a year. I am also OK with not going to play the Oklahomas/Alabamas of the world regularly to have our heads bashed in. I know to be the best you have to beat them but realistically there is little to gain from these games other than a paycheck.

Going up against middle of pack Big 5 teams out of conference is not a bad thing and my preferred approach. At some point you need wins for the sake of winning as it builds confidence and satisfaction.

I would rather play Iowa than Michigan State, Kansas rather than Baylor, Syracuse rather than Florida State because I see a strong potential for victory and notoriety. I don't think there is a perfect formula for scheduling and our current approach is down the list on my concerns/frustrations with the program as it sits now.

What is my bigger frustration is that, with a coaching staff 10 years in, we should be making more steps instead of what I view as a plateau. We are light years better than we were with Knorr etc. but are we better than say year 5 with Frank? I don't think I have seen us strongly build on the initial success and improvement. I also know how difficult it can be to sustain success so I am grateful that we are not a punchline anymore. Forgive me though if I am still hungry for us to create headlines from success.

We are a solid mid-major team with a decent record and could beat any team in the conference on a given Saturday. On the flip side we have had a lackluster record against winning teams in our conference recently and lose often to teams we should beat. Count me in as someone who is still winded from the gut punch that was the end of the 2012 season after an amazing start that is haunted by what-ifs. While there have been some bright spots (Independence Bowl win, beating Marshall and Miami again) it's been frustrating too because we seemed so close to break out over the hump and currently it seems to be fading further into the distance.

With the regime in place we should not lost to Marshall by 30+ points, even if they are having a banner year and we are rebuilding. Rebuilding should still be competitive. A team that is progressing strongly probably could have beat Kentucky earlier this year. There have been some significant recruiting shortcomings over the past few years.

I love Ohio and want us to want more than a 6-6. 7-5 record. I want a team that is as dominant as our fan base is at putting butts in seats at home and on the road. All of us on here represent what is the gold standard for fan support in our conference (in good times and bad) and for that I want a championship team to reflect it.

Last Edited: 10/14/2014 1:14:41 PM by OUcats82

Ohio-The State University

Paul Graham
General User

Member Since: 1/18/2005
Location: The Plains, OH
Post Count: 1,424

Status: Offline

RE: Stacking the Deck

Posted: 10/14/2014 1:31:50 PM

I agree with most of this...except that I'm positing that we are actually not "light years ahead of Knorr." In 2011 I think we were. But the last two or three years we have regressed to being maybe one step above the Knorr teams.

As I demonstrated above...the Knorr-era MAC was much better and they played better OOC competition. The current team is certainly no better than the teams Knorr put on the field...but I'll go as far as to say that last years team also isn't far off.

If the Ohio teams from 2012 and 2013 were uncompetitive with above average MAC schools...how would they have done against the Knorr era MAC when you had Big Ben, Leftwich, Urban Meyer BG teams, a strong NIU....Even Akron was decent with Charlie Frye.

Showing Replies:	1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Jump to Page:	1

View Other 'Ohio Football' Topics

There are 249 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com

248 Guests
1 Registered User:
	Kinggeorge4

There are no other users looking at this page.