(01-12-2017 10:11 AM)doss2 Wrote:  We deserved an F.

Kansas deserves an F. They have had 3 winning years in the last 20.

That's exactly why they DON'T deserve an F... their expectations are low enough that going 2-10 isn't too surprising. Our expectations are much, much higher. We underachieved far worse than they did last season. I take this F as a compliment.

As speculated elsewhere in this grading system, they were measuring expectations.

Kansas, in winning 2 games...including 1 in Conference...actually exceeded expectations by a little. I'd give Kansas a C+.

But when I read the story--the UC got an "F"--my response was "And in other news, water is wet!"

If you go back on this forum and look at the pre-season expectations, you find people like me...the most pessimistic expectations, in other words...were around .500 (6-6/6-7 with a bowl). I remember one person calling for a 4-8, which would be a "C" for "met expectation" I suppose. But the majority of fans on this board were looking for between 8 and 10 wins going into the season.

Tuberville had it right, in one respect... There ARE teams who 4-8 would be a downright good score. If Kansas had gone 4-8, they'd be popping champagne--and rightly so. But UC isn't one of those programs (Thank God!). For his lame excuse about UC having a "culture of losing," we frankly don't and 4-8 is unacceptable.

The other factor that always has to be measured in is injuries. So, if you're in a situation like UC was in 2008, where we went through 5 different starting QB's, you might look at a 4-8 season and give it a mulligan. But again, while we did have injuries, that doesn't account for the dismal performance of this team.

"And in other news, water is wet!"

(01-12-2017 10:28 AM)crex043 Wrote:  Arguably, Alabama deserves lower than an "A+". With the talent and money that is behind that program, they should win the championship every year. Every year.

Don't disagree they should be in the hunt, but a little harsh to say they should win every year. Schools like Texas, Ohio State, LSU and Oklahoma have an abundance of resources and revenue as well--- more than a lot of other programs that are considered elite. Texas is probably someone who should receive a lot of criticism here--- they've won one national title since 1970 but make about $30M a year more than Alabama.

(01-12-2017 10:39 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 10:28 AM)crex043 Wrote:  Arguably, Alabama deserves lower than an "A+". With the talent and money that is behind that program, they should win the championship every year. Every year.

Don't disagree they should be in the hunt, but a little harsh to say they should win every year. Schools like Texas, Ohio State, LSU and Oklahoma have an abundance of resources and revenue as well--- more than a lot of other programs that are considered elite. Texas is probably someone who should receive a lot of criticism here--- they've won one national title since 1970 but make about $30M a year more than Alabama.

I'll certainly admit to being a bit jaded following UC's snub during the Big 12 fiasco. But I blame Texas for that to a great extent and don't mind seeing the Longhorns failing in football (and basketball season to date) while wallowing in more cash than any school in the country. Any reasonable person, knowing the Texas resources, might ask how can they "not" be winning more? Especially in a football conference that appears to be fifth among five recently.

Maybe the Bearcats get to exact some revenge in March Madness by knocking them out of the tournament...again.

Hey SI..buy low and sell high...a great value in seeing a program on the UPTICK!!!

A zero point zero grade point average. Man! Four years of coaching down the drain!

Kansas beat Texas and Rhode Island. That is two states! They deserve a B!