Improvement can occur, meaningful at that, and still lose a game. It's not a bit. The "eye test" should not be connected to the final outcome of a game. Feel free to do so, but I think you are being naïve in doing so.
Who really knows. I was pretty let-down when I heard that comment, and changed my expectations. Those fuckers did manage to pull me back into the hype though, the remainder of the Game Day after that segment, only to be reminded during the game.
It’s much more nuanced than you think, or are implying. You can’t say that if we play any team close then they have either failed or passed the eye test. There is way too much that goes into a game.
You are putting a lot more emphasis on W-L than eye tests or power rankings. (By the way, when...
Good post. Note, however, the argument is over "improved" not "so improved."
Edit: I just now saw your last paragraph (not sure why I didn't before). If UNC passes your "eye test" but still loses, you wouldn't consider that a step further in the right direction? This seems like an inexperienced...
Here's the exchange.
Like I said, perhaps you didn't mean to say that, but that is what you said. Feel free to modify what would demonstrate improvement to you and let me know.