We all know that DM has developed the reputation of having teams with two rule-of-thumb characteristics. 1) They don't lose ball games to underdogs and 2) They don't win games in which they are underdogs. I am sure this has been discussed before but I would appreciate folks humoring me and tell me the reasons why his teams are like this or if you believe it is just a misconception. Prior to the end of last season I would generally point to the fact that most of the games we played against the good teams were generally against really, really good teams. But is there something in the way he coaches, recruits, his gameplans, etc. that lends itself to this perception? What is it?
Tell me why?......
- Thread starter thekimmer
- Start date
It shows me that he's a damn good coach, and maximizes what he has. Ole Miss 2012 is really the only game he lost that he should have won, and I guess that cancels out Ole Miss 2009, where we probably should have lost.
People talk about Northwestern like we should have beaten them, but it's not realistic. Those guys had a HUGE chip on their shoulders, and we were playing in a familiar bowl game. They were 9-3 and had solidly beaten an 8-4 Vanderbilt team. They lost to an 8-4 Penn State team on the road, an 8-5 Michigan team on the road, and a 10-4 Nebraska team. That game was a toss-up at best, so that probably cancels out the Florida (8-5) or Louisiana Tech (8-5) games that we squeaked out.
People talk about Northwestern like we should have beaten them, but it's not realistic. Those guys had a HUGE chip on their shoulders, and we were playing in a familiar bowl game. They were 9-3 and had solidly beaten an 8-4 Vanderbilt team. They lost to an 8-4 Penn State team on the road, an 8-5 Michigan team on the road, and a 10-4 Nebraska team. That game was a toss-up at best, so that probably cancels out the Florida (8-5) or Louisiana Tech (8-5) games that we squeaked out.
Pretty sure we were underdogs against Georgia and Florida in 2010. Those were not typical GA and FL teams, but at the time we beat them, they were ranked.
We were a 5 or 6 point favorite at Auburn in 2012. I'd say @ Auburn 2011 and Gator Bowl Part Duex are the only games we've lost where I felt disappointed in the outcome. It would be easy to add Egg Bowl 2012 in there, but I can't say I was shocked given how the two teams had played going into that game.
I think you touched on it. Most teams that beat us are really good teams (Top 10). To get those "big wins", the best thing you can do is play teams ranked 10 - 25. They are ranked high enough to generate some buzz, but low enough where we have a non-neglible chance of winning.
Really we haven't played alot of teams in that range the past couple of years. And that's why part of me likes the Okie State game.
Really we haven't played alot of teams in that range the past couple of years. And that's why part of me likes the Okie State game.
Logic dictates that it's the opposite. See my previous post on Northwestern. I thought we played OK at Auburn in 2011, their defense just beat us up, have to give them credit. We were lucky to make a game of it. Final records tell the tale there. In no way, shape or form should we have lost the Egg Bowl. Poor defensive plan and poor offensive execution.
In the back of your head, sure, you know Ole Miss was going to be up for that game and we likely wouldn't be. But on paper, that game was more winnable than the other two you listed.
In the back of your head, sure, you know Ole Miss was going to be up for that game and we likely wouldn't be. But on paper, that game was more winnable than the other two you listed.