ZZLP impact on IC?

[Calheel]

Right, I understand what our historical average is and I understand what the betting markets are saying, but if we go 8-4/7-5 this year, assuming we don’t suffer an extraordinarily unusual amount of injuries, it will mean that we lost somewhere between 2-4 games to teams to which we have no business losing. I find that to be unacceptable now, in year 6. Assuming a loss at Florida State, where could 3-4 more losses come from on this schedule and it be considered “on par”/acceptable. And to me, if 8-4/7-5 against this schedule isn’t acceptable, then going 9-3 should not cause anyone to “dance a jig”. Going 9-3 should be the bare minimum expectation for *this* year’s team against *this* schedule. What our 2014 or 2004 or 1994 teams did against their own schedules should have no bearing on how the 2024 team is assessed against its schedule.

To be clear, I’m not one of those fans who is going to look down on any other Carolina fan who would be excited about going 9-3. Not at all. I do not want to gatekeep fan happiness. But I just personally believe that nine wins should be the bare minimum expectation for what can be considered a successful season this year, because before the season even starts, there are 9 teams on that schedule to whom we have no business losing if we are serious about being a real football program that actually contends for conference championships and things like that.

I find Fedora’s last two years unacceptable.
I find John Bunting’s entire tenure unacceptable.
I find Carl Torbush’s 3-8 season, including a 28-3 shellacking by Furman, unacceptable.
I can live with 9 wins in year 6 of Mack.

Your unacceptable bar is a lot higher than mine.

 

[superrific]

This is definitely true, although I think the Wake, dook and ECU effect is virtually nil.

You did say virtually, so fair. I haven't followed FB recruiting in a long time (nor BB recruiting for a decade), but I recall ECU taking a couple of pretty good recruits from us.

More importantly, the presence of the lesser programs impacts the availability of walk-ons. I don't think this is a big thing any more, but it used to be. Nebraska and Oklahoma would not only give out their full complement of scholarships; they would also take 20 walk-ons who were probably Wake quality recruits but who preferred to stay close to home and fight for a spot. A substantial number of those walk-ons (especially on the line) would eventually earn scholarships and become key contributors. And every now and then, walk-ons become stars. I believe the only alum of NCSU in the Hall of Fame was a walk-on.

The Plains schools were the biggest walk-on hoarders but I'm pretty sure all the big schools had huge numbers of walk-ons.

So if you look across the past 30-50 years, these issues could be a difference between getting almost there and actually getting there. We almost got there a couple of times in my lifetime.

I once looked into this issue a little bit and I concluded that NC is uniquely packed with competing programs -- no other state, outside of the northeast, has so many P5 schools vying for prospects. And thus it is not coincidence that none of the schools in the area have been consistently excellent over time. Clemson is the closest, but they were bad during the 90s and basically were us in terms of results in the 00s. But UVa, NCSU, VaT, UNC, Tenn, SC -- these programs have all had some flashes but have been unable to maintain any consistency as a top program. I don't think that's an accident.

 

[superrific]

I find Fedora’s last two years unacceptable.
I find John Bunting’s entire tenure unacceptable.
I find Carl Torbush’s 3-8 season, including a 28-3 shellacking by Furman, unacceptable.
I can live with 9 wins in year 6 of Mack.

Your unacceptable bar is a lot higher than mine.

Who was the QB for that Furman game? It was like our fourth string RB, wasn't it?

We were pretty good in Bunting's first year. LOL.

 

[Calheel]

The fact that we are an underdog to a team that is picked somewhere between 12th and 14th in the Big 10 is part of the problem. Sure, if we beat them then that's technically a great result for this team. But the problem is that shouldn't be some exceptional result in year six for Mack Brown. The same logic applies to the season record. Since we are expected to go 7-5, then I guess technically that would be a decent season and anything more we should be happy with, but that's not what we were expecting when Mack returned. Add mediocre expectations in year six against a weak schedule to the fact that he completely wasted probably the two best QB's we've ever had by fielding historically awful defenses, ending the season losing to terrible teams and not showing up against our chief rival over and over and it's no wonder people are fed up and not that jazzed up about maybe having another 7 or 8 win season.

I will say if we win 9 games I'll be happy, but I don't think it's some major achievement. In any case, I will be shocked if it does happen and that speaks volumes given our schedule is not very difficult.

How do you think Minnesota fans feel?

They have spent huge money on a highly-coveted coach (at least when he was hired). They built a state of the art stadium in a rapidly growing metro area. They are in a P-2 conference. They have had very recent success with the new coach and looked to be on an upward trajectory.

Then they got the Greek Rifle at QB and their season when to poop faster than you can say Nathan Elliot.

Now you have fans of a historically mediocre North Carolina football program lamenting the fact that they could ever be underdogs to a terrible Minnesota football program (at Minnesota, mind you).

In any event, the good news is that Mack usually over performs in P5/P4 season openers, 2021
Va Tech notwithstanding. So let’s hope for the best next Thursday.

 

[CFordUNC]

I find Fedora’s last two years unacceptable.
I find John Bunting’s entire tenure unacceptable.
I find Carl Torbush’s 3-8 season, including a 28-3 shellacking by Furman, unacceptable.
I can live with 9 wins in year 6 of Mack.

Your unacceptable bar is a lot higher than mine.

Hell, you should have loved John Bunting‘s first year! We went 8-5 despite having a defense loaded with NFL first and second round picks!

It appears that you and I have different standards for the Football program. And that’s fine, no problem whatsoever there. You are totally entitled to whatever standards you have for Carolina football. I do stand behind mine, though. Going 9-3 against this schedule is the bare minimum of what should be acceptable this year; under no circumstance should it warrant “doing a jig” and thanking the Football gods. Going 9-3 this year either means one of two things: it either means that we beat every single team we were supposed to beat but lost to the three teams on our schedule that are as good, or better, than us. OR it means that we beat one or more of the teams on our schedule that are as good, or better, than us and then proceeded to shit the bed against one or more of the teams whom we have no business losing to- which is exactly what we’ve done the last three years. Under either scenario, I don’t think it’s laudable- and, of course, it’s not fireable/unacceptable, either. Hence why I said that I won’t be doing a jig for going 9-3. I’ll do my jig if we win 10 or 11.

 

[Calheel]

Hell, you should have loved John Bunting‘s first year! We went 8-5 despite having a defense loaded with NFL first and second round picks!

It appears that you and I have different standards for the Football program. And that’s fine, no problem whatsoever there. You are totally entitled to whatever standards you have for Carolina football. I do stand behind mine, though. Going 9-3 against this schedule is the bare minimum of what should be acceptable this year; under no circumstance should it warrant “doing a jig” and thanking the Football gods. Going 9-3 this year either means one of two things: it either means that we beat every single team we were supposed to beat but lost to the three teams on our schedule that are as good, or better, than us. OR it means that we beat one or more of the teams on our schedule that are as good, or better, than us and then proceeded to shit the bed against one or more of the teams whom we have no business losing to- which is exactly what we’ve done the last three years. Under either scenario, I don’t think it’s laudable- and, of course, it’s not fireable/unacceptable, either. Hence why I said that I won’t be doing a jig for going 9-3. I’ll do my jig if we win 10 or 11.

I think you are seriously overestimating the talent of this team. We have very significant questions at QB, O line, D line, linebackers and punting. Plus, there are also very significant coaching talent questions. Maybe those questions will all be answered in the affirmative, but the jury is very much still out. And if we have an injury at certain key positions (QB, LB, RB) this season could go south very quickly.

If you are still thinking this team is talented because of over-inflated star rankings of Des Evans, Travis Shaw and Zach Rice, so be it. But the actual talent that is going to line up against some very well coached and solid squads, starting with the first game of the season, is questionable at best. I'd love to be proven wrong and have this team exceed its very well-earned mediocre pre-season projections, but I am not counting on it.

 

[SnoopRob]

You did say virtually, so fair. I haven't followed FB recruiting in a long time (nor BB recruiting for a decade), but I recall ECU taking a couple of pretty good recruits from us.

More importantly, the presence of the lesser programs impacts the availability of walk-ons. I don't think this is a big thing any more, but it used to be. Nebraska and Oklahoma would not only give out their full complement of scholarships; they would also take 20 walk-ons who were probably Wake quality recruits but who preferred to stay close to home and fight for a spot. A substantial number of those walk-ons (especially on the line) would eventually earn scholarships and become key contributors. And every now and then, walk-ons become stars. I believe the only alum of NCSU in the Hall of Fame was a walk-on.

The Plains schools were the biggest walk-on hoarders but I'm pretty sure all the big schools had huge numbers of walk-ons.

So if you look across the past 30-50 years, these issues could be a difference between getting almost there and actually getting there. We almost got there a couple of times in my lifetime.

I once looked into this issue a little bit and I concluded that NC is uniquely packed with competing programs -- no other state, outside of the northeast, has so many P5 schools vying for prospects. And thus it is not coincidence that none of the schools in the area have been consistently excellent over time. Clemson is the closest, but they were bad during the 90s and basically were us in terms of results in the 00s. But UVa, NCSU, VaT, UNC, Tenn, SC -- these programs have all had some flashes but have been unable to maintain any consistency as a top program. I don't think that's an accident.

I think the first 2 paragraphs are very much a key consideration of our recruiting.

Another very similar issue with dook/Wake/ECU are players who would have otherwise been content coming to Carolina as a likely backup with some potential to start Jr/Sr year(s) but instead go to dook/Wake/ECU for the much greater likelihood of starting and likely much more quickly. It doesn't necessarily affect our starting lineup, but it certainly affects our depth in a sport where attrition is a known issue. Much like this discussion of walk-ons, those "missing" scholarship players could have been the difference due to lack of depth at certain positions.

 

[CFordUNC]

I think you are seriously overestimating the talent of this team. We have very significant questions at QB, O line, D line, linebackers and punting. Plus, there are also very significant coaching talent questions. Maybe those questions will all be answered in the affirmative, but the jury is very much still out. And if we have an injury at certain key positions (QB, LB, RB) this season could go south very quickly.

If you are still thinking this team is talented because of over-inflated star rankings of Des Evans, Travis Shaw and Zach Rice, so be it. But the actual talent that is going to line up against some very well coached and solid squads, starting with the first game of the season, is questionable at best. I'd love to be proven wrong and have this team exceed its very well-earned mediocre pre-season projections, but I am not counting on it.

So whose fault is it that we have such significant questions at every one of those positions in year six? We are using well below the number of scholarships which we are allotted. If we don’t have enough talent and depth in year 6, that seems to fall squarely upon the head coach, does it not?

I don’t think I’m overestimating the talent of this team at all, actually. Do you really think that Charlotte, Central, James Madison, Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College would not trade rosters with us right this moment before you even finished the question of asking them? I’m not asking that in a snarky way, to be clear, I’m genuinely curious. I personally think every single one of those teams would trade rosters with us at the drop of a hat. Every one of them. That’s 9 teams on our schedule. Which of those teams could we lose to and you would say, hey that’s a totally acceptable loss for a football program that has the facilities, the financial resources, and the talent to be a perennial top 25 program? Again, I’m not asking with any snark or sarcasm, I’m genuinely curious.

Let’s leave out Charlotte, Central, and James Madison. Those are teams we should not even be questioning whether we are going to beat by three touchdowns or more. That leaves six ACC games in that group of 9 I mentioned above- Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College. Duke lost their entire coaching staff and pretty much their entire team. Pittsburgh returns nobody good from a team that went 3-9. Georgia Tech is not even two seasons removed from being one of the worst P4 teams in all of college football. Virginia is arguably the worst P4 team in all of college football. Wake Forest went 4-8 last year and lost most of their good players. Boston College is breaking in a whole new coaching staff. I just cannot get there on the notion that in year six of our coaching staff, with a roster loaded with high three star and four star, and a few five star players, that we should not expect to win every single one of those games.

Again, if we have different standards or expectations for the Football program at UNC, that’s totally fine. I respect your view 100%. I just don’t agree with it. I do not agree that 9-3 with either the easiest or second easiest schedule that UNC has had in the last thirty years, is laudable. I think it should be the bare minimum expectation. It’s not like we are playing some of schedules that John Bunting played with, where 9-3 would have been worthy of storming Franklin Street.

 

[Calheel]

So whose fault is it that we have such significant questions at every one of those positions in year six? We are using well below the number of scholarships which we are allotted. If we don’t have enough talent and depth in year 6, that seems to fall squarely upon the head coach, does it not?

I don’t think I’m overestimating the talent of this team at all, actually. Do you really think that Charlotte, Central, James Madison, Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College would not trade rosters with us right this moment before you even finished the question of asking them? I’m not asking that in a snarky way, to be clear, I’m genuinely curious. I personally think every single one of those teams would trade rosters with us at the drop of a hat. Every one of them. That’s 9 teams on our schedule. Which of those teams could we lose to and you would say, hey that’s a totally acceptable loss for a football program that has the facilities, the financial resources, and the talent to be a perennial top 25 program? Again, I’m not asking with any snark or sarcasm, I’m genuinely curious.

Let’s leave out Charlotte, Central, and James Madison. Those are teams we should not even be questioning whether we are going to beat by three touchdowns or more. That leaves six ACC games in that group of 9 I mentioned above- Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College. Duke lost their entire coaching staff and pretty much their entire team. Pittsburgh returns nobody good from a team that went 3-9. Georgia Tech is not even two seasons removed from being one of the worst P4 teams in all of college football. Virginia is arguably the worst P4 team in all of college football. Wake Forest went 4-8 last year and lost most of their good players. Boston College is breaking in a whole new coaching staff. I just cannot get there on the notion that in year six of our coaching staff, with a roster loaded with high three star and four star, and a few five star players, that we should not expect to win every single one of those games.

Again, if we have different standards or expectations for the Football program at UNC, that’s totally fine. I respect your view 100%. I just don’t agree with it. I do not agree that 9-3 with either the easiest or second easiest schedule that UNC has had in the last thirty years, is laudable. I think it should be the bare minimum expectation. It’s not like we are playing some of schedules that John Bunting played with, where 9-3 would have been worthy of storming Franklin Street.

You are raising two separate issues; what is likely to happen and what should fans reasonably expect in year 6 of a coaching regime at UNC?

I'm not weighing in on the second issue. I'm only considering the first issue right now.

We lost at home to UVA last year, with the best QB we've ever had. Do you think we are a clear-cut favorite to win at Charlottesville -- a place we have less wins than fingers since 1981?

We have struggled with Duke mightily with two of the best QBs we've ever had. And Duke actually has a real home field edge these days, especially for night games (which they always seem to get for us). Who knows how the Elko-less Devils will play this year, but there is absolutely zero evidence in Mack 2.0 that we can chalk up Duke as an easy W.

Boston College has a new coaching staff (Bill O'Brien) and a late season game in Boston is no piece of cake. That is going to be a tough, tough game.

Ga Tech? We almost always lose to those guys since Mack 1.0 ended. Seriously. Count how many times we have beaten Ga Tech since 1997. It is not pretty. Ga Tech appears to be a well coached team (unlike how they performed under our current defensive coordinator).

Wake? Every single game with those guys has gone down to the wire. Clawson may be the best coach in the ACC and he always has those guys motivated to play us more than just about any game on their schedule (certainly their fans are more motivated to play us than anyone else).

James Madison was top 25 almost all of last year. They lost their coach but no one knows if he took the magic with him. They have been a G5 powerhouse for the last two years. They also beat UVA at UVA last year -- something we were incapable of doing (although they did lose a close one to App State).

Point being, there are plenty of solid teams on our schedule this year (not to mention @FSU, State and @Minn) that could give us problems. There is a very good reason why we are only predicted to win 7/8 games. If we can pull out all the close games this year and win at least 9, it will be a big deal.

 

[Peppers49]

So whose fault is it that we have such significant questions at every one of those positions in year six? We are using well below the number of scholarships which we are allotted. If we don’t have enough talent and depth in year 6, that seems to fall squarely upon the head coach, does it not?

I don’t think I’m overestimating the talent of this team at all, actually. Do you really think that Charlotte, Central, James Madison, Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College would not trade rosters with us right this moment before you even finished the question of asking them? I’m not asking that in a snarky way, to be clear, I’m genuinely curious. I personally think every single one of those teams would trade rosters with us at the drop of a hat. Every one of them. That’s 9 teams on our schedule. Which of those teams could we lose to and you would say, hey that’s a totally acceptable loss for a football program that has the facilities, the financial resources, and the talent to be a perennial top 25 program? Again, I’m not asking with any snark or sarcasm, I’m genuinely curious.

Let’s leave out Charlotte, Central, and James Madison. Those are teams we should not even be questioning whether we are going to beat by three touchdowns or more. That leaves six ACC games in that group of 9 I mentioned above- Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, and Boston College. Duke lost their entire coaching staff and pretty much their entire team. Pittsburgh returns nobody good from a team that went 3-9. Georgia Tech is not even two seasons removed from being one of the worst P4 teams in all of college football. Virginia is arguably the worst P4 team in all of college football. Wake Forest went 4-8 last year and lost most of their good players. Boston College is breaking in a whole new coaching staff. I just cannot get there on the notion that in year six of our coaching staff, with a roster loaded with high three star and four star, and a few five star players, that we should not expect to win every single one of those games.

Again, if we have different standards or expectations for the Football program at UNC, that’s totally fine. I respect your view 100%. I just don’t agree with it. I do not agree that 9-3 with either the easiest or second easiest schedule that UNC has had in the last thirty years, is laudable. I think it should be the bare minimum expectation. It’s not like we are playing some of schedules that John Bunting played with, where 9-3 would have been worthy of storming Franklin Street.

Thank you for breaking it down granularly like that. I think a lot of people don’t fully grasp how bad the rosters in the bottom half of the ACC really are.

Put it this way: based on talent discrepancy alone, UNC should be able to sleepwalk to 9 automatic wins (those 6 ACC teams you listed + the 3 non-con cupcakes). Losing to even one of those teams would be a very ugly loss, but if we allow for one slip up, then the least the team could to make up for it is finally win a game against a team on our level (I.e. State), or, god forbid, step up and beat a team that’s better than us for once like FSU.

My problem with UNC under Mack in a nutshell is that the team finds a way each season to a) get upset at least once by a massive underdog (usually multiple times), and also b) never actually beat good teams. I’d honestly be okay with one or the other, but the fact that we get both of those things every season is just demoralizing.

 

[HandsonFire]

I think I have been back to IC once since I created the account here.

I’ll go there scroll for a couple of seconds and then I say to myself Wait how the hell did I get here. And then I rolll out.

 

[eternalheel]

This thread becoming ttp
....

 

[CFordUNC]

You are raising two separate issues; what is likely to happen and what should fans reasonably expect in year 6 of a coaching regime at UNC?

I'm not weighing in on the second issue. I'm only considering the first issue right now.

We lost at home to UVA last year, with the best QB we've ever had. Do you think we are a clear-cut favorite to win at Charlottesville -- a place we have less wins than fingers since 1981?

We have struggled with Duke mightily with two of the best QBs we've ever had. And Duke actually has a real home field edge these days, especially for night games (which they always seem to get for us). Who knows how the Elko-less Devils will play this year, but there is absolutely zero evidence in Mack 2.0 that we can chalk up Duke as an easy W.

Boston College has a new coaching staff (Bill O'Brien) and a late season game in Boston is no piece of cake. That is going to be a tough, tough game.

Ga Tech? We almost always lose to those guys since Mack 1.0 ended. Seriously. Count how many times we have beaten Ga Tech since 1997. It is not pretty. Ga Tech appears to be a well coached team (unlike how they performed under our current defensive coordinator).

Wake? Every single game with those guys has gone down to the wire. Clawson may be the best coach in the ACC and he always has those guys motivated to play us more than just about any game on their schedule (certainly their fans are more motivated to play us than anyone else).

James Madison was top 25 almost all of last year. They lost their coach but no one knows if he took the magic with him. They have been a G5 powerhouse for the last two years. They also beat UVA at UVA last year -- something we were incapable of doing (although they did lose a close one to App State).

Point being, there are plenty of solid teams on our schedule this year (not to mention @FSU, State and @Minn) that could give us problems. There is a very good reason why we are only predicted to win 7/8 games. If we can pull out all the close games this year and win at least 9, it will be a big deal.

I hear you and think you make valid points, but the point that I’m trying to make is that, IMO, we have a huge problem if in year 6-with a roster that is the envy of, at a bare minimum, 75% of our schedule- we are “likely” to go 7-5/8-4. You are kind of proving my point by talking about how we lost to Virginia last year, and how we always lose to Georgia Tech, and how we always barely beat Wake Forest, and how James Madison – by virtue of having beaten Virginia last year who beat us – should be expected to give us a tough game, etc. Just because our program lays down and plays down to the competition multiple times per year every year, does not mean that we should not be able to look at our 2024 schedule, with the roster that we have and with the rosters that the other teams on our schedule have, and say: “we are significantly more talented than James Madison, Central, Charlotte, Duke, Pittsburgh, Wake Forest, Georgia Tech, and Virginia, and we should win all of those games, and if we don’t win all of those games, we have underachieved.” I’m sure you’ll disagree, and that’s totally fine. That’s why these discussions are fun. But with all due respect, I think you are making some of those teams sound wayyyyy better than they are. And I’m sure you think I am probably making them sound way worse than they are.

I’m really not trying sound like I am impossible to please when it comes to being a UNC football fan. I just believe that this program is capable of a lot more than most of our fan base, and seemingly administration, and heck, seemingly our head coach (“eight wins is pretty good around here”) believe. And if we have fans who think that 9-3 against this schedule is some sort of enormous achievement, we are going to continue to get “eight wins is pretty good around here.”

TL;DR = I think that 9-3 is a “meets expectations” season for us, but not a great season, at all, in context of who we have on the schedule. 9-3 is a great season compared to the rest of our entire football history, but I do not believe it is a great season compared against the 2024 schedule.

 

[CFordUNC]

This thread becoming ttp
....

Yeah, but with people who have basic command of English language composition!

 

[wmheel1287]

Yeah, but with people who have basic command of English language composition!

You speak for yourself!

 

[Ddseddse]

Absolutely no way should anyone “dance a jig and thank the football gods” if we get 9 wins this year. Nine wins should be the bare minimum expectation for what would be considered a success this season. Bare minimum. There is exactly one team on the schedule with a more talented roster than ours (Florida State). There are nine teams on the schedule where, in year six of this coaching staff and with a roster comprised of three consecutive Top 15 recruiting classes, that we should roll out of bed and have little to no concerns about beating (Charlotte, NC Central, James Madison, Duke, Pittsburgh, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Wake Forest, Boston College). There are two other games that are veritable toss-ups, but where we have better players (Minnesota and NC State).

Anything less than 9-3 with this schedule is not a success. It doesn’t matter what our football program has done historically or that we have been mediocre for pretty much our entire history. What matters is the particular composition of this UNC team’s roster compared to that of the 12 teams on our schedule. I say all of this as someone who has a Music City Bowl ring, an Independence Bowl ring, and a Coastal Division champs ring (and a hoodie!) from that year where we went 8-4 (5-3) and finished in a three-way tie for first place in the division but were ineligible to compete in the championship game. Believe me, I know firsthand that we celebrate mediocrity like we’ve accomplished something. “8 wins is pretty good around here” and all that. But anything less than nine wins with this schedule and this roster is not a success. The fact that many of our fans, and likely our administration, hold the belief that a 9-win season in year 6 against this schedule, is a success is big reason why our football program is probably doomed to mediocrity in perpetuity. You get what you tolerate, and what we tolerate is a football program that, despite having fantastic facilities, despite being the flagship university of one of the best states for high school football talent in the country, and despite historically recruiting better than 75%+ of our schedules year over year, we print shirts and rings for things like 8-4 and 9-5 seasons.

I say all of this as someone who deeply loves Carolina football and has been a “Carolina football first” fan my entire life. But I’m tired of the excuses and the tolerance for being mediocre. I’m tired of consistently not showing up against our biggest rival in the biggest game of the season. I’m tired of losing multiple games each year as 14, 17, or even 24.5 point (!) favorites. Carolina football can be better than that by a country mile- but not until or unless fans and administrators start demanding it.

First of all, I've always been a Tar Heel football first fan myself. Great to meet another long suffering masochist.

Secondly, I think you get everything right but the finer points of probability. If you say that "teams we should roll out of be and beat" have on average a 25% chance of beating us on any given Saturday, and give the Minnesota and NC State a 60% chance each (we are a dog to Minn and will be a worse dog to State), and FSU an 80% chance of beating us, then that totals out to an expected 4.25 losses for the year putting us at 7.75 expected wins.

I'm not saying 8 wins is anything to crow about. I hate it too. I'm just saying when you lay out the expected win percentages for each game, despite our ridiculously weak schedule., the predictions get a little on the improbable side when you try to build out 9+ expected win scenarios.

Can we out perform our expected wins? Of course we can! But as long time Tar Heel football first fans, we both know that this is going to have to be a Charlie Brown finally hits the sweet spot of the football and sends it sailing moment. I'll celebrate it if/when it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

[rodoheel]

I think you are seriously overestimating the talent of this team. We have very significant questions at QB, O line, D line, linebackers and punting. Plus, there are also very significant coaching talent questions. Maybe those questions will all be answered in the affirmative, but the jury is very much still out. And if we have an injury at certain key positions (QB, LB, RB) this season could go south very quickly.

If you are still thinking this team is talented because of over-inflated star rankings of Des Evans, Travis Shaw and Zach Rice, so be it. But the actual talent that is going to line up against some very well coached and solid squads, starting with the first game of the season, is questionable at best. I'd love to be proven wrong and have this team exceed its very well-earned mediocre pre-season projections, but I am not counting on it.

I think you guys are sort of talking past each other here. I think both of you are saying something I agree with:

--Given the actual talent that is on this year's team, 9-3 even against a fairly weak schedule would be a very good result
--Given that we're in Year 6 of our HOF coach's tenure, which featured at one point three straight top 15 recruiting classes, we shouldn't be in a place where we have such mediocre talent that 9-3 against a bad schedule would be considered a very good result

Mack came into his second tenure talking about elevating the UNC program to the next level. He has failed to do that in the last few seasons despite being ahead of schedule the first couple years, landing the aforementioned top-15 recruiting classes, having elite talents at QB, and facing manageable schedules in a weakening ACC. So I think it's appropriate to be disappointed that we're sitting here in Year 6 debating whether 7, 8, or 9 wins is a reasonable goal. But I certainly agree with you that the overall talent level on this year's team doesn't inspire any reasonable belief that we're going to turn the corner now.

IMO we're now in the last stage of the familiar cycle of UNC football coach tenures, where the initial optimism has faded and we're resigned to mediocrity unless and until we decide to start over again with a new coach. Personally I think Mack had a great opportunity (which he himself helped set up) and then blew it, primarily by completely mismanaging the defensive side of the ball. I think the window for him to take us to the next level has now pretty much shut. But I would love for him to prove me wrong.

 

[Icky Mettle]

I bought this book because I thought it was about the past few seasons of UNC football:

 

[NCK9]

One problem is that there is too much competition for recruiting in our state. If you look at the teams with the best programs over time, they tend to be ones with only one big instate school. OSU competes with . . . no other major program in Ohio. Penn State competes with . . . nobody in PA. GA competes with Tech, but Tech is comparable to Wake. LSU competes with nobody instate. Tennessee . . . etc.

We have a lot of competition. Not just from NCSU, but also Wake and Duke (not always factors; Duke maybe rarely a factor in NC recruiting). And Clemson is just over the border. Parts of our state are closer to Knoxville than Chapel Hill. We've also got two P5 programs to our north.

Obviously Florida has supported three major teams in the past, but Florida is a huge state and there's nobody to its south. Michigan has supported two teams, though MSU has been inconsistently good. Michigan's big advantage was dominance from the very beginning, sustained through the years. Also a 100K+ stadium. And nobody to its north. And Indiana doesn't really do football, nor does Illinois. Texas and CA are so big they aren't comparable.

So there's only one really successful program located in a non-huge state that faces regular instate competition for recruiting, and that's Alabama. Too bad we never had a Bear Bryant. And Bama has nobody to its south and the overall density of P5 schools in the area is much lower. We have four ACC schools in NC alone, plus ECU who every now and then picks off a recruit.

One way to differentiate from that competition is to present the opportunity to play SEC (or Big 10) football. There are tons of guys who have left the state to go play in those leagues (eg: Todd Gurley, Zamir White)

 

[Zoo_View]

One way to differentiate from that competition is to present the opportunity to play SEC (or Big 10) football. There are tons of guys who have left the state to go play in those leagues (eg: Todd Gurley, Zamir White)

How many Top 25 players in the state left to play for a Vanderbilt or Kentucky or Mississippi State or Indiana or Purdue or Illinois? That’s showing the appeal of the SEC/Big 10.

Going to Georgia or Bama or OSU or Michigan is about going to Georgia/Bama/OSU/Michigan.