UNC Football Catch-all | Bill Belichick Era underway

[CFordUNC]

Posted this before but I think you can still be a good college team without having a spread/air-raid scheme if you have a strong o-line, good run blocking schemes, and smart QB play with a suffocating defense to go along with it. Michigan and Georgia in recent seasons would be the formula.

I just don’t think UNC can recruit quite well enough for that though. I’m with you that one of the most alarming things about Belichick is that he didn’t try to get a proven college play caller that could mask some of our personnel deficiencies with a good scheme. Whatever we’re trying to do on that side of the ball isn’t working at all.

Totally agree with all of the above. I know that things went south big time under Mack but I really loved Longo's offensive scheme and philosophy those first two to three years under Mack 2.0. Especially in 2020, we had so many ways that we could beat you on offense. Don't account for our QB in the run game? He's going to hurt you. Try to shut down our passing game? Fine, we'll pound you with our two stud running backs. Stack the box to take away our running backs? Fine, our QB is going to throw right over the top of you to our wide receivers who just ran past your entire defense. I know he wasn't without his flaws, but I loved so many of the route trees, concepts, and play calling under Longo. Thought it was a great blend of up-tempo when it needed to be, methodical when it needed to be, but always a threat to score on every possession from anywhere on the field.

 

[Zoo_View]

What about barely losing, in OT, to a ranked UVA team, in which we had bad TO luck?

My question is, who has that ranked UVA team beaten?

It looks like NO ONE in the ACC is good.

 

[1moretimeagain]

Trying to get us actually back on topic: what number of (offensive only) points would be 'acceptable' to average moving forward? I think we can all agree that this offense is quite poor, and it isn't likely to dramatically improve between now and the end of the season. But, scoring 27 against Syracuse was a step in the right direction. Is it unrealistic to hope to score in the 20s for the rest of the year?

Through 8 games we average 16.3 points per game, last 3 games we avg 20.3.

16.3 is good for #127 out of 136 teams. Averaging 20 a game would put us at #107, so still a pretty low bar!

 

[OGtruthhurts]

So, only W-L determines improvement for you? That seems very silly.

Worse play on the field would demonstrate worsening for me.

i never said that

 

[OGtruthhurts]

any high school coach would win big in college with ohio st etc type talent

its a simple game

 

[stankeylegjones]

i never said that

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.

 

[sringwal]

Through 8 games we average 16.3 points per game, last 3 games we avg 20.3.

16.3 is good for #127 out of 136 teams. Averaging 20 a game would put us at #107, so still a pretty low bar!

Agreed. But that is only one side of the ball. Our defense, other than against Clemson, has improved significantly game to game, and is better than we have seen the last few years, albeit against a pretty lousy schedule.

North Carolina Tar Heels

North Carolina Tar Heels team page with results, picks, power rankings, odds and stats.

www.teamrankings.com

 

[OGtruthhurts]

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.

again, i never said that so dont put words in my mouth. you fan however you feel like you need to so will i. i dont put lipstick on pigs. our fb program is a huge fat pig and one of the worst in cfb.

 

[Peppers49]

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.

Anyone with a brain can acknowledge that the team has looked vastly improved over the last 3 games compared to the first 5.

I think it’s also fair to point out that a big reason why you can say that we look so improved is because the bar was set extremely low from the first 5 games. If you told our fans before the season that we’d get to November and our only power conference win of the season to that point would be against a Syracuse team with a lacrosse player at QB, no one would say that would be acceptable.

I respect the eye test and power ratings beyond the W/L column, I’m just not going to give too much credit for losing closely against mediocre opponents at this point. If the team keeps the momentum going and finds a way to go 3-1 the rest of the way and make a bowl game, I would consider that a step in the right direction. If we go 3-9 because we played every remaining team closely but fumbled on the goal line at the end of each game, that’s probably not going to give me much confidence going into next season.

 

[sringwal]

Anyone with a brain can acknowledge that the team has looked vastly improved over the last 3 games compared to the first 5.

I think it’s also fair to point out that a big reason why you can say that we look so improved is because the bar was set extremely low from the first 5 games. If you told our fans before the season that we’d get to November and our only power conference win of the season to that point would be against a Syracuse team with a lacrosse player at QB, no one would say that would be acceptable.

I respect the eye test and power ratings beyond the W/L column, I’m just not going to give too much credit for losing closely against mediocre opponents at this point. If the team keeps the momentum going and finds a way to go 3-1 the rest of the way and make a bowl game, I would consider that a step in the right direction. If we go 3-9 because we played every remaining team closely but fumbled on the goal line at the end of each game, that’s probably not going to give me much confidence going into next season.

I don't think anyone has been happy, or even satisfied, with how this season has gone down.

In my opinion, the discussion now is - is there enough evidence to give Belichick another season? At this point, I'd say yes - largely because Mack left the cupboard barer than when he entered the program in the late 1980s.

I have seen enough evidence to convince me that, should we continue to see growth moving forward, Belichick deserves a second chance, particularly considering that we have 10+ four stars coming in next year.

If (and this is a big "if") we can keep much of our defense in the offseason, and find ourselves an actual quarterback, then I think the potential is there for a 7-8 win season next year, which will be good enough, with the schedule we have. Was I hoping for more? Absolutely. But getting rid of Belichick would likely mean that our ceiling next year is probably 4 wins, unless whoever came in could keep our best players and star recruits AND do well in the portal.

 

[stankeylegjones]

again, i never said that so dont put words in my mouth. you fan however you feel like you need to so will i. i dont put lipstick on pigs. our fb program is a huge fat pig and one of the worst in cfb.

Here's the exchange.

What would demonstrate improvement to you then?

how about beating someone other than a fbs high school team ranked higher than 90th? that would be a good start. since you believe we are improving what result would you consider as a worsening vs stanford who is ranked 115th?

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.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Anyone with a brain can acknowledge that the team has looked vastly improved over the last 3 games compared to the first 5.

I think it’s also fair to point out that a big reason why you can say that we look so improved is because the bar was set extremely low from the first 5 games. If you told our fans before the season that we’d get to November and our only power conference win of the season to that point would be against a Syracuse team with a lacrosse player at QB, no one would say that would be acceptable.

I respect the eye test and power ratings beyond the W/L column, I’m just not going to give too much credit for losing closely against mediocre opponents at this point. If the team keeps the momentum going and finds a way to go 3-1 the rest of the way and make a bowl game, I would consider that a step in the right direction. If we go 3-9 because we played every remaining team closely but fumbled on the goal line at the end of each game, that’s probably not going to give me much confidence going into next season.

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 stance. You'll have confidence going forward if they pass your eye test and win 3 of the remaining games by 1 point each, possibly due to luck, yet you want have much confidence if they play exactly the same way yet lose 3 of the remaining games by 1 point each, possibly due to bad luck? I don't get that.

 

[CFordUNC]

I don't think anyone has been happy, or even satisfied, with how this season has gone down.

In my opinion, the discussion now is - is there enough evidence to give Belichick another season? At this point, I'd say yes - largely because Mack left the cupboard barer than when he entered the program in the late 1980s.

I have seen enough evidence to convince me that, should we continue to see growth moving forward, Belichick deserves a second chance, particularly considering that we have 10+ four stars coming in next year.

If (and this is a big "if") we can keep much of our defense in the offseason, and find ourselves an actual quarterback, then I think the potential is there for a 7-8 win season next year, which will be good enough, with the schedule we have. Was I hoping for more? Absolutely. But getting rid of Belichick would likely mean that our ceiling next year is probably 4 wins, unless whoever came in could keep our best players and star recruits AND do well in the portal.

Thanks a ton for the very reasonable viewpoints. I disagree with a lot of them but appreciate the opportunity to debate them!

I'll push back significantly on the point that Mack left the cupboard bare. I think that is major revisionist history. There are two defensive guys who are starting for nationally-ranked football teams, one of which is the current #1 ranked team in America and the other was the preseason ranked #1 team that is currently in the running for a playoff berth. There is another guy who starts for a team that was preseason ranked #2. Those guys were all here on the roster when the coaching change occurred. And anyway, Belichick brought in 70 new players on his own volition. That means that over 70% of the current roster are comprised of players that are completely his own, a result of his own talent evaluation and his own roster construction. Any complaint about the talent level on this football team resides squarely with Bill Belichick and Michael Lombardi, not with Mack Brown.

Second, the point that we have 10+ four stars coming in next year is, to me, virtually meaningless considering that high school recruiting has never been less important than it currently is. The vast majority of those guys won't be ready to see the field as contributors until their second full year in the program at the absolute soonest, and likely not until their third year- and that is if they are even still here. That's why Lombardi's plan to take a FORTY-PLUS person high school recruiting class is so alarming. Unless we are planning on sending a significant chunk of this current roster to the waiver wire- which would be a damning admission that Lombardi is a terrible talent evaluator and roster constructor- we are going to have little room for bringing in a transfer portal class.

Third, with the advent of the new revenue sharing model in college football, coupled with the new shortened singular portal window, teams like UNC are not going to be able to rely on there being a ton of high-end/instant impact type prospects available in the portal. Most of those guys will be paid to be retained on their current roster. Moving forward it's going to be imperative for teams like us to develop the guys we already have on the roster and utilizing our resources to pay to retain them ourselves.

Fourth, a 7-8 win season in 2026 should not have ever been the expectation when hiring Bill Belichick. The expectation for 7-8 wins should have been *this* year with *this* schedule, IMO. Next year is when we really need to push for 9+ wins, ACC title contention, and possible CFP berth contention. We have a 73-year-old head coach who may be around another year or two, but not likely longer than that. We don't have the luxury of time for a prolonged rebuild of the program, and anyway, that's not at all what we were sold last December when we hired Belichick and Lombardi in the first place.

 

[1moretimeagain]

Thanks a ton for the very reasonable viewpoints. I disagree with a lot of them but appreciate the opportunity to debate them!

I'll push back significantly on the point that Mack left the cupboard bare. I think that is major revisionist history. There are two defensive guys who are starting for nationally-ranked football teams, one of which is the current #1 ranked team in America and the other was the preseason ranked #1 team that is currently in the running for a playoff berth. There is another guy who starts for a team that was preseason ranked #2. And anyway, Belichick brought in 70 new players on his own volition. That means that over 70% of the current roster are comprised of players that are completely his own, a result of his own talent evaluation and his own roster construction. Any complaint about the talent level on this football team resides squarely with Bill Belichick and Michael Lombardi, not with Mack Brown.

Second, the point that we have 10+ four stars coming in next year is, to me, virtually meaningless considering that high school recruiting has never been less important than it currently is. The vast majority of those guys won't be ready to see the field as contributors until their second full year in the program at the absolute soonest, and likely not until their third year- and that is if they are even still here. That's why Lombardi's plan to take a FORTY-PLUS person high school recruiting class is so alarming. Unless we are planning on sending a significant chunk of this current roster to the waiver wire- which would be a damning admission that Lombardi is a terrible talent evaluator and roster constructor- we are going to have little room for bringing in a transfer portal class.

Third, with the advent of the new revenue sharing model in college football, coupled with the new shortened singular portal window, teams like UNC are not going to be able to rely on there being a ton of high-end/instant impact type prospects available in the portal. Most of those guys will be paid to be retained on their current roster. Moving forward it's going to be imperative for teams like us to develop the guys we already have on the roster and utilizing our resources to pay to retain them ourselves.

Fourth, a 7-8 win season in 2026 should not have ever been the expectation when hiring Bill Belichick. The expectation for 7-8 wins should have been *this* year with *this* schedule, IMO. Next year is when we really need to push for 9+ wins, ACC title contention, and possible CFP berth contention. We have a 73-year-old head coach who may be around another year or two, but not likely longer than that. We don't have the luxury of time for a prolonged rebuild of the program, and anyway, that's not at all what we were sold last December when we hired Belichick and Lombardi in the first place.

Who is starting for the #1 ranked team?

 

[CFordUNC]

Who is starting for the #1 ranked team?

Beau Atkinson

 

[Peppers49]

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 stance. You'll have confidence going forward if they pass your eye test and win 3 of the remaining games by 1 point each, possibly due to luck, yet you want have much confidence if they play exactly the same way yet lose 3 of the remaining games by 1 point each, possibly due to bad luck? I don't get that.

It’s not that complicated. Stanford and Wake are not very good teams, and if we are actually improving then we should win both of those games outright. If we’re even in a position to lose either one of those games at the end because of bad luck at the goal line or whatever then we already failed the eye test anyway.

Duke and State are both noticeably better than we are this season, no doubt. Neither of them are world beaters either though. If Belichick actually worth all of the hype and investment then it really shouldn’t be asking too much to find a way to steal at least one of those games.

6-6 against this schedule is bare minimum stuff.

 

[stankeylegjones]

It’s not that complicated. Stanford and Wake are not very good teams, and if we are actually improving then we should win both of those games outright. If we’re even in a position to lose either one of those games at the end because of bad luck at the goal line or whatever then we already failed the eye test anyway.

Duke and State are both noticeably better than we are this season, no doubt. Neither of them are world beaters either though. If Belichick actually worth all of the hype and investment then it really shouldn’t be asking too much to find a way to steal at least one of those games.

6-6 against this schedule is bare minimum stuff.

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 asked during the pregame of the TCU game about our final W-L record, Saban said that if we win 6 games this year then BB should be up for coach of the year. I remind of this to point out that those who are in-the-know would disagree that 6-6 is bare minimum.)

 

[1moretimeagain]

Beau Atkinson

Atkinson isn’t a starter. He only played 14 snaps in the last game and has 1 sack this season.

 

[CFordUNC]

This is not directed at anyone in particular on this thread, but more a general statement about our football fan base at large. I think a lot of Carolina fans want a big name coach but small name expectations. By that, I mean, people want us to hire someone like Bill Belichick who is the most accomplished NFL coach of all time, winner of six Super Bowls as a head coach, architect of some of the best defensive units ever, commander of a $10 million salary- but they want to be able to expect 4-8/5-7 seasons in year 1, 6-6/7-5 seasons in year 2, etc. To me, hiring somebody like Bill Belichick is supposed to dramatically elevate your expectations beyond what they would have been under a more “standard” coaching hire.

 

[CFordUNC]

Atkinson isn’t a starter. He only played 14 snaps in the last game and has 1 sack this season.

Interesting. He started the opening game against Texas. I saw him when they were announcing the starting lineup on ABC. Haven’t kept up with him beyond that other than to know he is a contributor on the best team in America, so he certainly could have or should have been a contributor on our team had he not been low-balled the way that he was by this staff.