- This topic has 166 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 10 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
As good as we were once upon a time? Doubtful
8-9 wins in the modern era? Soon come.
CD: Interesting to see your prognostication for the long term. I don’t agree or disagree. I would like to understand your logic better… preferably in depth.
Would you mind sharing?
I give myself (and others) ’til Monday to get over games like Saturday. đ
DD has standards and unlike some other coaches, he ain’t violating them to win a few games. Immediately suspended players, some starters in critical positions, when the BB incident occurred. I don’t know all his standards but I am sure they are high and will produce a successful program in due time — kinda like coach Cutt over in Durham.
Samuels, as talented as he is, understands he needs to be able to learn to block to play more. That’s a standard. No blocking skills equals limited playing time. Games are won by blocking and tackling. We are limited in both areas. That will change. Our “schemes” will not cover deficiencies in fundamentals. The bees WRs blocked and their backs blocked — oh, how they blocked.
I’m hoping we get to a bowl, any bowl. We need the practice time.
Go Pack!
I know how the system works but 6-6 and going to a bowl is a joke. <snip> I know itâs all bout the $$$$$$$âŚ
Actually, you don’t know. After costs are deducted there is very little if any left for the school in the lower tier bowls. Look into it and you will find it’s about the extra 20 +/- practice days. Only a few of these days are spent on the bowl game. Most are spent developing players.
I will come and officially eat my crow regarding our defense vs GT’s offense. I’d thought our defensive strength in the front could help neutralize GT’s offense, but it was obvious from the first series that wasn’t happening. All those who said it wasn’t going to happen were correct.
I also stated that if the offense couldn’t hold onto the ball, score and keep the defense off the field, it wouldn’t matter. When we were down 28-13 despite running double the plays, it was obvious that wasn’t going to happen.
I think losing bothers DD a lot. I was looking for something else for another thread and found his post game press conference after La Tech last season. If you compare his responses, confidence, posture, facial expressions and his weight, you’ll see losing has taken a big toll on him.
I will come and officially eat my crow regarding our defense vs GTâs offense.
Me too. Maybe we need a “crow” thread. I actually feel Okay eating crow. Rather do that than talk the Pack down and be right about that.
If I could get a dollar a plate for every plate served in th SFN dining room….
I’d buy a couple of kegs… to wash the crow down with…
but then… it would take way too long to get all those crows…So Enjoy This!
… fwiw… I ain’t pointing no fingers at anybody… every one who has posted three or more times has eaten some SFN crow… just saying something about eating crow…
#NCSU-North Carolina's #1 FOOTBALL school!greywolf-Actually, you donât know. After costs are deducted there is very little if any left for the school in the lower tier bowls. Look into it and you will find itâs about the extra 20 +/- practice days. Only a few of these days are spent on the bowl game. Most are spent developing players.
I do know Greywolf. I am talking about TV and the NCAA making the $$$$$ not NC STATE. Don’t assume or read into what is not there.
I do know Greywolf. I am talking about TV and the NCAA making the $$$$$ not NC STATE. Donât assume or read into what is not there.
Here’s what I read and here’s what’s there: “going to a bowl is a joke” Since the conversation was about NC State “going to a bowl,” what did I assume and what id I read into what is not there?
I stand by what I said: the practice time for any tier bowl is valuable to NC state (or any other team FTM.) It would be interesting since you know, how much is “$$$$$” in dollars that the NCAA is making? Or are we supposed to assume that amount? Wait. You said not to assume or read into what is not there, and with “$$$$$” admittedly there is not much there.
Unprofitable bowl games is by design if you ask me. As is the lack of profitability of athletic departments in general. Look up hollywood accounting sometime. Money is being made. Gobs of it. Everybody just make sure it isn’t profit. For reference, star wars return of the Jedi was not profitable. Neither was Forest gump. Or most other blockbuster movies.
I’ll gladly admit when I was wrong, and I was sure wrong about the defensive performance against GT. They could have put the athletic trainers in and still be scoring. Crow served and crow is eaten.
I think people are missing the spirit of doomsday’s post though. Let’s say we beat Wake, lose to UNC and finish 6-6 (2-6). We’ll have played the weakest non-conference schedule in my memory, eeked out two wins in a weak ACC, and generally not been remotely competitive against any team with a pulse. Is this really the type of team that deserves to be “rewarded” with a bowl game?
I’m not just picking on this particular team, but I feel the same thing about ANY 6-6 team. Heck, I feel the same thing about 7-5 teams with losing conference records. Beating up on non-conference, home game, cream puffs and not breaking even in conference just shouldn’t be rewarded. It’s like participation trophies in children’s sports.
Now, if we do actually qualify, we should go if for no other reason than the practice. We need all of it we can get.
Rye,
It’s not about reward. (“Is this really the type of team that deserves to be ârewardedâ with a bowl game?”)Times are changing. This isn’t the era of ABC, NBC & CBS covering the Rose, Sugar, Orange, Cotton, Gator and Peach bowls. Cable and Satellite TV are beasts that demand content. Thus we now have bowls I haven’t even heard of that need filling.
Expanding the schedule from 10 games to 12 and a conference title game was about TV and 150,000 extra ticket sales. We ain’t going back to 10 games so we will have some a few less than attractive OOC games each year — just like the less than attractive bowls.
The bowl proliferation is about TV, not about matching 2 teams with no more than 3 losses each. As long as the teams are evenly matched, who cares? Watch or don’t watch. Or come on your favorite board, hold your nose in the air and let people know your standards are high and you ain’t watching two teams with 6-6 records play.
As for me, I’m riding the horse in the direction it’s going. It’s much easier that way.
As for bowls and TV needing to fill slots – I will watch us in a bowl in TV regardless but if I had no ties to NC State, I would not watch us at 6-6 or 7-5 playing another 6-6 team. Having said that I will not watch about 35 bowls this year.
The cable stations airing these games must realize family members and alumni are the only ones watching and I just cant see how that is profitable for them. Even if several hundred thousand alums are watching, the ratings are dismal.
The benefits to the team though are pretty good. The extra practice time is invaluable. The players get to go to a new city for some fun and sightseeing in a place they may never get to go again. The players get good SWAG even at crappy bowls. All in all it is a positive experience but it sure is not for the money.
The cable stations airing these games must realize family members and alumni are the only ones watching…
First of all, this just isn’t true. When the choices are limited (like for daytime TV), a football game is often the best thing available. Secondly, what are they going to broadcast that would get more viewers?
Youth and talent, a roster is being amassed. The corner is coming, and itâll be a sharp turn.
I have thought this myself, but could never have been so succinct and clear. Thanks.
From the outset, I thought we’d see small improvement year 2, more the same in year 3, and the sharp turn would be year 4, with a substantially better year. But I also assumed that Coach would have to burn more redshirts than he has and would be forced by circumstance to play more senior players rather than youth. From my perspective, it appears that he came in with a not-quite-salt-the-earth mission and, to his credit, is largely sticking to it.
Just curious if you agree with this assessment and, if so, does it portend sharp corner turning ahead of my originally thought time line?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
