USA Today FBS final grades are out
- Thread starter Euro
- Start date
Have no idea how and too old to learn LOL
Since I don't like the results I'll pull a WC on you: It's not real without a link...
Well in honor of your longstanding record of usually positive contributions Euro (and before someone else does it)... Here's your link:https://www.usatoday.com/story/spor...ams-2017-season-including-alabama/1020414001/
Last edited:
Our grade I can understand.
The pu grade smells of knucklehead collusion on an obvious and massive scale!
An A- for a 7-6 season... Puleeeasssse!...!.
I really think USA Today missed their target with this move. Everyone knows engineers can only read schematics and think newspapers are meant only for puppies and birdcages...
I call for (another) Special Counsel to investigate this clear pu takeover of the USA Today Sports section...
First the Indy Star and now this! Where will it end!!!!!
The pu grade smells of knucklehead collusion on an obvious and massive scale!
An A- for a 7-6 season... Puleeeasssse!...!.
I really think USA Today missed their target with this move. Everyone knows engineers can only read schematics and think newspapers are meant only for puppies and birdcages...
I call for (another) Special Counsel to investigate this clear pu takeover of the USA Today Sports section...
First the Indy Star and now this! Where will it end!!!!!
Last edited:
The counterpoint is that they went 7-6. I don’t look at that as a partisan. I flat out don’t see how you can give a team a high grade for a mediocre record even if they are coming from a low place. They deserved an F- the past 4 years, and this year deserve a C+. That to me is fair and a huge improvement, and realistic for the kind of season they had. A two letter grade improvement IS a huge jump, and I believe totally fair. 7-6 will get you a C+, which is a massive jump from where they were.
What grade would you give IU if we went 7-6 with the bucket and a bowl win over Arizona? Would we deserve a C+? If so, our 5-7 no bucket no bowl season should be graded D+. It's only two games more that Hazel won last year which you grade F-.
I hate Purdue, but come on...
Wrong board. The "where the cows come home" board is in W Lafayette.
The year does deserve a D+. As we know, 5-7 is below average. I call them as I see them. If IU went 7-6, it would be a mediocre season. It would be worth a C+. Purdue had a mediocre season. It’s worth a C+.
Compared to other seasons, 7-6 at IU and Purdue are good. I’m not denying that relative to other seasons those aren’t good. By all means I don’t take it lightly that Purdue moved up two letter grades. From where they came from that is huge. But 7-6 appears to be on the high end of Mediocre if we are being objective. How IU finished in 15’ and 16’ is a C- if Purdue’s season was a C+. I give Purdue the + because they won their bowl. To get anywhere near a B, you’d need 8-9 wins. I think that’s fair and objective. Going from really bad to mediocre IS reflected by moving up two letter grades IMHO.
OK, fair point. I agree with you. In a different post, you said 4-8 next year would be realistic. That would be D-, F without a bucket. Do you mean "realistic" to mean "acceptable"?
7-6 is still one game over .500.
Color me unimpressed.
My A grades start at 10 wins.
Visit your ophthalmologist as soon as possible...
Yeah, because I’m looking at other programs. I’ve never coached in all fairness, so a coach who has built a program from scratch may disagree with me, and id defer to anyone who’s buI’ll a program. But my rationale is...
You see a program like Colorado. In 16’ they had the perfect roster for what they wanted to do on offense and defense and went all the way to the pac-12 championship. That’s a program that hadn’t been successful since I was in elementary school, and had some coaching turnover. One could argue that from 2002 until 2016, they were comparable to IU. When they hired the new coach, and transitioned to the pac-12, they were terrible. But you could see that they were consistently focused on building a durable program. It took about 4 years and they suddenly had a viable team. Here’s their record by year.
2011: 3-9, 2012: 1-11, 2013: 4-8, 2014: 2-10,
2015: 4-9, 2016: 10-4.
They essentially built up to 10-4 and are now a viable pac-12 threat in any given year because they built a foundation. They did it with the same guys and just developed them. 10-4 is a B-B+ year when you talk about competing for a conference title. I think that with the losses on the offensive line, and talent that needs to be developed on the defensive line, it could be a 4-5 year plan. Obviously I’d love for IU to win sooner, but I’m not trigger happy to get rid of Allen. I see some positives with him. This stregnth and conditioning coach, his passion, the moves he’s making, recruiting. I see some things that are similar to Colorado. If the record doesn’t reflect the changes immediately, I am okay with that, because you can see that he is building something. We can argue that had Hep lived, 2010 could’ve realistically been the first year that IU was a consistent contender. But had IU went 10-4, people would’ve been able to live with the D- and D+ years in route to 10 win seasons. Basically, when I look at programs that are similar to IU, it may take some time to build a consistent contender, and go from D+ to B+, but I can live with that if the trajectory is going towards B+.
These grades sound about right to me...Gotta remember Purdue was the laughing stock of the ncaa for awhile....
I like your analysis, except you didn't include what happened in 2017. The Buffs went 5-7. What happened to the team they built that went 10-4? I know nothing about the Buffs, so I'd like to read your analysis. Thanks.
Similar threads
