Facts.
The first and goal this is unbearable. We’ve gotta be the worst team in the nation in the last 2 years on first and goal
1 Like
All these numbers are against the spread. Which, yes, wins and losses are what matter most but ATS can be a good indicator of how you are performing compared to single game expectations, and I understand people may value these numbers differently.
As a favorite: 15-20 (42.9%), 23rd worst in the country. But better than Ball St, EMU, Akron, and BG.
As an underdog: 37-22-1 (62.7%), 13th best win % in the country in that time behind teams like Utah, Ohio State, Clemson, Alabama & Georgia.
After a bye: 7-5-1 (58.3%)
At home: 21-20-1 (feels worse than that, doesn’t it?)
Away: 26-23
Conference games: 36-24-1
1 Like
Feels worse than that? We have the second longest home winning streak in the country. You take away the rebuilding years and we have an amazing home record and an even better record against the spread.
2 Likes
So in simplistic terms, we can proclaim a mediocre G5 to be a success.
1 Like
That said we were never a favorite in rebuilding years and the “favorite” number ATS are bad, right?
These numbers support what most see or feel, Chuck has a done a great job getting us out of dregs…but when it’s on the line we are too often not up to the task of finishing teams out or beating teams we should.
4 Likes
Thank you! Numbers seem to support the feeling that we don’t put away inferior opponents very often. Or as much as Vegas thinks we should.
1 Like
Apparently I am the only one that doesn’t grasp the relevance of these stats. So doing better than Vegas expects you to do is a real measurement of success? Honest question.
I don’t gamble on sports but I looked at NFL records against the spread and by that metric the Falcons are dominating the league at 4-0 but the standings say that they are 2-2. Am I to believe that they are overachieving?
*None of this has anything to do with my opinion of CM as a coach
3 Likes
I mean, yes, we’re a successful team in a mediocre G5 conference. It just isn’t 2003 any more in terms of the overall college football landscape, let alone the 70s.
4 Likes
Is slightly above average “successful?”
I’m happy we are out of the cellar with Chuck, but we need and expect better with this program.
The clock is ticking and it may need a new battery.
6 Likes
Jive - I guess in my mind, there have been more letdowns at home that stick out to me, whether they be outright losses or games where I thought we would have been more comfortably ahead (Akron 2019 sticks out to). We have been good at home, I was just sharing my perception, which obviously isn’t backed up by the numbers.
BTB30 - I think beating the spread is a good indicator of how well you’re performing compared to expectations. Wins and losses are the ultimate judge of success, no doubt about that, but I do personally think that how you do compared to the spread is indicative of performance vs expectations. Not everyone agrees or holds the same value to it but that’s my opinion. (Yes, I think the Falcons are overachieving. Could be 3-1 or even 4-0 right now)
Do not tell me this about the 70s. I have a hot tub that’s well calibrated with a glass bowl ready for ample keys, and I’ve got the Eagles playing in the background. If you ruin this peaceful, easy feeling for me, I’ll go Bachman -Turner Overdrive on you.
1 Like
This team is very young. The last two recruiting classes were very strong. There are young playmakers on the team now. We are probably 7-5 without Brett. I think Martin is building this from ground up and we are almost there. Next 2-5 years will be special.
6 Likes
Seems as if Vegas doesn’t expect much from us.
If my wife would let me, I’d frame this in our house. Instead, she insists upon having Nagel prints.
2 Likes
Aside from the spread, what I find more disturbing is how badly the MAC has slipped as a Conference
relative to other G5 Conferences. Granted the MAC has had its few moments of aspirational achievement but not as many as it should have. When it comes to end-of-year bowl matchups, it also appears to me the the MAC usually gets the most bowls with among the lowest payouts, another sign of Conference bottom-feeding.
If it weren’t for ESPN we’d never see more than one or two MAC teams in a bowl game.
1 Like
I don’t want to sound like a broken record, but this is why it is absolutely imperative the MAC ADs and Steinbrecher go into this media/TV negotiation and come out with a win. We must keep up with other G5 conference budgets and media money is the best way to do it.
If ESPN wants us on Tuesdays/Wednesdays they need to pay top dollar. Otherwise we can go back to playing on Saturdays on other networks or ESPN+
4 Likes
I’m not sure we’re in a seller’s market here. I think CUSA would be aggressive in trying to put its teams in our MACtion slots in November.