So as i sit here watching Ball State destroy CM i began to think about what we are as a team (UVA). while this is incomplete in thought, i thought it might be reasonable to see what our opponents have, and are doing, and does it show any signal of explanation...
as such here is what i see as a first step; records of our opponents:
1. BYU (6-2) ranked #28 in AP; losses to UVA and Utah (4-4)
1. BYU (6-2) ranked #28 in AP; losses to UVA and Utah (4-4)
2. Oregon (8-0); # 3 in the country
3. VMI (1-8); they are ignored for this research and not counted
4. Ball State (9-1) ranked #34 in AP; loss to North Texas (6-3) which had losses to Ohio (6-3), Tulane (6-3) and Georgia (5-3) who had losses to Vandy, Clemson (8-1) (#7)and Mizzou (#8)
5. Pitt (4-4); losses to VT (6-3), Navy (4-4), GT (6-3), FSU (8-0); #2 in the country
6. MD (5-3); losses FSU (8-0);#2 in the country, Wake (4-5), Clemson (8-1); #7 in the country
7. Duke (6-2); losses GT (6-3) and Pitt (4-4)
8. GT (6-3); losses VT (6-3), Miami (7-1); #11 in the country, and BYU (6-2) #28 in AP
9. Clemson (8-1); loss to FSU (8-0); #2 in the country
Yet to Play
10. UNC (3-5); losses to South Carolina (7-2);#12 in the country, GT (6-3), ECU (6-2), VT (6-3), Miami (7-1); #11 in the country
10. UNC (3-5); losses to South Carolina (7-2);#12 in the country, GT (6-3), ECU (6-2), VT (6-3), Miami (7-1); #11 in the country
11. Miami (7-1); loss to FSU (8-0); #2 in the country
12. VT (6-3); losses to Duke (6-2), BC (4-4) and Alabama (8-0); #1 in the country
So what have we learned? Combined record of our direct opponents (minus VMI) = 52-16. That is a 76.5% winning percentage. Also, we will play our first opponent this year with a losing record on Saturday (UNC).
Notes:
BC losses included USC, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Navy lost to #23 Notre Dame and Duke, South Carolina lost to Georgia
Who knows if this means anything, but by record, our quality of opponent is/has been pretty high.
So what have we learned? Combined record of our direct opponents (minus VMI) = 52-16. That is a 76.5% winning percentage. Also, we will play our first opponent this year with a losing record on Saturday (UNC).
Notes:
BC losses included USC, FSU, Clemson, UNC, Navy lost to #23 Notre Dame and Duke, South Carolina lost to Georgia
Who knows if this means anything, but by record, our quality of opponent is/has been pretty high.
It's a good point and a great e-mail. Of course, things have changed a bit in the week and a half since this was written. But take a look.
BYU -- 7-3
Oregon -- 9-1
Pitt -- 5-5
Ball State -- 9-2
Maryland -- 6-4
Duke -- 8-2
Georgia Tech -- 6-4
Clemson -- 9-1
North Carolina -- 5-5
Miami -- 7-3
Virginia Tech -- 7-4
That's an overall record of 78-34, a 70% win percentage. If Pitt can beat one of Syracuse or Miami, and if UNC can beat one of ODU or Duke, then all eleven of these teams will be in bowl games at the end of the season.
I am not presenting this as any sort of excuse for our absolutely horrendous performance on the football field this season... I'm just suggesting that the deck was stacked against us a little bit this season. You might say the ACC is garbage. You might say that, and you might be wrong. These are good teams. And thus, that's a tough row to hoe if you do not have at least an equally good team or some sort of an edge in the coaching / gameplanning / luck arena.
We suck. Our football team is terrible. But 2-8 at this point in the season is not as bad as maybe it seems.
Meanwhile, brace yourselves. I won't give away any information that is provided behind a pay wall, but I'll tell you that I now have it on very good authority that Mike London will be back for the 2014 season. My guess is that the $11.6 million buyout is a boulder too large to roll out of the way. That makes even more sense when you consider the tough sledding the administration experienced in trying to raise the $13 million for the Indoor Practice Facility. Heck, the timing of the IPF is probably creating an atmosphere in which it's impossible to fire Mike London, just based on sheer finances.
Anyway, London is going to be back. And we can kiss Pete Lembo, Mark Hudspeth, Tim DeRuyter, and maybe Dave Clawson goodbye. But it gives Philip Montgomery and Scott Frost another season to mature into viable candidates.
In the meantime... I'm not yet sure how we should approach the 2014 season. Hopefully, maybe, I'll have a post on that soon. (No promises, it's basketball season.)
You must have read what I read about Browns father.
ReplyDelete