What should we expect once the system is in place?

[Mike_e]

Ok, but do you think you can consistently recruit classes that are in the top half (actually the top 2-3 classes) of the SEC, EVERY YEAR?

That has to happen for your program to move up the food chain in the SEC, and contend for Championships every year. Can't be hit and miss, and your classes will have to be mostly 4-5 star types.

You did it in the SWC, but how can you do it in the SEC?

The key to having icing on the cake will be whether or not we are able to have a real, viable redshirt program.  One where we can take a flier or two every season -you know the kind, the ones that have monster talent but haven't played football but for a year or two, or are the prototypical talent for a position in college that were used elsewhere on their HS team.

Length, hight, balance, quickness and explosion and a $100 brain.  These are the kids we have to have not the ones who are already polished and ready to start.  Sure plug and play would be nice but that's unlikely to happen often enough for us to make a living that way so taking a chunk of marble and sculpting our own is the only real path to playoff relevance.

A team doesn't need 11 all stars on either side of the ball to win at a high level.  On offense it needs around four or five depending on scheme.  Add to that competent players at the other positions and you can stay with just about anybody and if your coach is good and your endgame is viable you can win against practically anybody.

I say practically anybody because running up against one of those Generational players added to a good team otherwise tends to just wear you out.

Well the only thing you can do to change it is be better than a .500 team in SEC play, year in and year out. In a much tougher SEC.

That means a serious upgrade in performance over what has happened over the past 22 years.

I simply do not see a practical way to make that happen.

Neither did Stanford, maybe you should go tell them they can't do what they've been doing.

[Seminole Indian]

The key to having icing on the cake will be whether or not we are able to have a real, viable redshirt program.  One where we can take a flier or two every season -you know the kind, the ones that have monster talent but haven't played football but for a year or two, or are the prototypical talent for a position in college that were used elsewhere on their HS team.

Length, hight, balance, quickness and explosion and a $100 brain.  These are the kids we have to have not the ones who are already polished and ready to start.  Sure plug and play would be nice but that's unlikely to happen often enough for us to make a living that way so taking a chunk of marble and sculpting our own is the only real path to playoff relevance.

A team doesn't need 11 all stars on either side of the ball to win at a high level.  On offense it needs around four or five depending on scheme.  Add to that competent players at the other positions and you can stay with just about anybody and if your coach is good and your endgame is viable you can win against practically anybody.

I say practically anybody because running up against one of those Generational players added to a good team otherwise tends to just wear you out.


Neither did Stanford, maybe you should go tell them they can't do what they've been doing.

Teams not loaded with 4-5 star athletes in the other P5's don't have to face another SEC team in a Championship game. That tends to be a show stopper for any SEC Cinderella.

Guess two such teams could make it to the Championship game but not likely. Most likely one of the two will have a roster full of 4-5 star types, and  reality sets in for Cinderella .

[lefty08]

Well in  the opinion of everyone that follows the SEC,to compete for a championship every year in the SEC, you must be able to recruit classes that are mostly 4-5 star types every year to even have a chance.

Not that a program that does not recruit these caliber players every year cannot have high level success from time to time but they will not consistently.

In the SEC winning  is about recruiting and then coaching great talent, more talent than anywhere else in college football.

You have to be outstanding in every area to be average in the SEC , and that is a fact.

Nobody in the SEC competes for championships every year, its just that simple

[Seminole Indian]

Nobody in the SEC competes for championships every year, its just that simple

I think you will find that the winner of the SEC Championship will be a team with a roster full of 4-5 star types, and that narrows it down to the teams who win the recruiting battles every year. Pretty much been the same group year in and year out.

[Mike_e]

Teams not loaded with 4-5 star athletes in the other P5's don't have to face another SEC team in a Championship game. That tends to be a show stopper for any SEC Cinderella. Guess two such teams could make it to the Championship game but not likely. Most likely one of two will have a roster full of 4-5 star types, and that is as far as it goes and reality sets in.

What seems to be missing here is an understanding that a 4 or a 5 star kid right out of highschool quite often is a kid with great talent/size and one who matured early.

If you get kids with the talent/size and allow him to catch up maturity wise then you do in effect have a 4/5 star player.

[lefty08]

I think you will find that the winner of the SEC Championship will be a team with a roster full of 4-5 star types, and that narrows it down to the teams who win the recruiting battles every year. Pretty much been the same group year in and year out.

thats simply not true, unless you of course are referring to the conference as the group

[ChitownHawg]

He was just "baiting the hook", like he always does.

And of course I was paying no attention and swam right up for a bite! 

[Seminole Indian]

What seems to be missing here is an understanding that a 4 or a 5 star kid right out of highschool quite often is a kid with great talent/size and one who matured early.

If you get kids with the talent/size and allow him to catch up maturity wise then you do in effect have a 4/5 star player.

Texas is the perfect example of what can go wrong with a school that stocks up on early commits, even 4-5 star ones.

An Alabama class will be about 25% 3 star types, because they are better than some of the players who were given 4-5 stars as Sophomore's.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I think you will find that the winner of the SEC Championship will be a team with a roster full of 4-5 star types, and that narrows it down to the teams who win the recruiting battles every year. Pretty much been the same group year in and year out.

Not exactly true, though that would seem to be the prevailing logic. It goes beyond recruiting rankings to where these kids end up when they leave their schools, whether they were unrated, 2's, 3's, 4's or 5's when they were signed.

I logged results by position for each of 20 schools based on seasons from 1997-2013 and the NFL Draft from 1998-2014 and what I found was that teams who had 52% of their draftees from the defensive side of the ball and 48% from the offensive side of the ball tended to average a 10-3 season.

Conversely, teams who averaged the exact opposite over that period of time (52% on the offensive side to 48% on the defensive side) averaged 8-5 seasons over that period of time.

I would think that 18 years is long enough to indicate some kind of an accurate and reliable trend.

It isn't what the kids are coming out of High School or Junior College, but how they end up after having been in these programs as valued by the NFL and the potential that they see in them.

Additionally, the old saying that "defense wins championships and offense puts butts in the bleachers", on average, might seem to ring true. Though I would contend that any team that averages 10 wins per season, whether more dominant offensively or defensively, is going to put a LOT of butts in the bleachers nonetheless. It all comes down to who is winning and less about how they are winning.

Point is, it is less about how recruiting rankings evaluate players and the signings of teams and more about what these teams do with the talent that they sign and being stronger defensively seems to be the way to go based on these results, though there is a narrow margin of error involved.

[Inhogswetrust]

As I have begun to dig a little deeper into drafted players by position since 1998 for some of these teams it has become apparent that though recruiting rankings are somewhat relevant, perhaps a more important factor is who you retain from those classes and which players by position develop to being good enough to merit a draft pick in the NFL.

Point being, you can win the recruiting battle and still not win as many games as someone else due to coaching, scheme and the overall development of players. You would think that with Auburn's highly ranked recruiting classes that they would have produced a lot of NFL draft picks on defense, but that isn't the case at all.

By position on defense since "98" compared to Arkansas here is how that works out.

DE: Arkansas-7, Auburn-9
DT: Arkansas-3, Auburn-5
LB: Arkansas-3, Auburn-5
DB: Arkansas-7, Auburn-7

Over all those years since the 1998 draft class, that isn't much difference for a team that has had as highly ranked recruiting classes on average, as they have had.

Exactly. Ali is arguably the best and perhaps most talented boxer of all time. However the one time he didn't train as hard or than his opponent as seriously as he should have he got beat. Talent can only carry you so far. At some point you still have to put in some work. Talented players that work hard get a chance to become superstars. Talented players that work less get to become underachievers.

[Wowgohogs]

I was not "baiting the hook"!! 

Also - can we clarify something?    What exactly is The System that we are building? 

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I was not "baiting the hook"!! 

Also - can we clarify something?    What exactly is The System that we are building? 

Read more.

[scootriteby]

I expect 9-10 wins per season. If South Carolina(who entered the league same time we did) can accomplish that feat, so should we.

It will take CBB 3 straight years of 10 wins per season to get his average here at Arkansas to 8 wins per season because of last year's disaster.

[ChitownHawg]

I expect 9-10 wins per season. If South Carolina(who entered the league same time we did) can accomplish that feat, so should we.

It will take CBB 3 straight years of 10 wins per season to get his average here at Arkansas to 8 wins per season because of last year's disaster.

Or you could throw out last year and expect most years to be 8 wins. Also we are in the West, so a bit stronger than the East.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

I expect 9-10 wins per season. If South Carolina(who entered the league same time we did) can accomplish that feat, so should we.

It will take CBB 3 straight years of 10 wins per season to get his average here at Arkansas to 8 wins per season because of last year's disaster.

I am less concerned about monitoring his win average per season than seeing steady progress year after year. And should he make it to 10 wins or more in a season, which I think he is capable of, no one is going to be worried about his average number of wins per year since he has been here, only about what we are doing at the time.

[Magic_Hogg]

Gang - I think we need to recognize something:

Due to the past 2 horrible seasons, every other program is expected to beat Arkansas. 

What does that mean?   They sure as heck are not going to come in unprepared.  Ole Miss and MSU see the opportunity to switch cellar dweller status with us while programs likas a e AU are wanting to pencil us in as a permanent W.

[ChitownHawg]

Expect a 4-4 SEC record and hopefully a 3-1 OOC record for a 7-5 overall. That will put us into the Music City or Liberty or Independence almost every year. Unless you have athletes as good as LSU, Bama, AU,  UGA, UF or aTm, not likely to win too many more than that.

But those teams have always out recruited us, yet we have managed to have success against them. Why the confident pessimism now?

[Magic_Hogg]

B'c things have changed, Chitown.   See my post above - these programs are smelling blood in the water.  The watchword for the SEC West next year is Beat-Arkansas.   Because then it will be 3 years in a row - it just changes stuff.

You go from the Sugar Bowl to winning 2 SEC games in 3 years.  You ain't going to come out of that tailspin without much more progress than anything we've seen. 

[dj shanon "Notshavin" smeya]

I am less concerned about monitoring his win average per season than seeing steady progress year after year.

Agree 100%

My biggest concern is not having a balanced offense, then BB firing/letting Chaney go, and here we go again installing a whole new system.

[Mike_e]

B'c things have changed, Chitown.   See my post above - these programs are smelling blood in the water.  The watchword for the SEC West next year is Beat-Arkansas.   Because then it will be 3 years in a row - it just changes stuff.

You go from the Sugar Bowl to winning 2 SEC games in 3 years.  You ain't going to come out of that tailspin without much more progress than anything we've seen.

And here's the hope.

These same guys come to the game thinking that they've got this and then have to deal with a bloody nose right out of the gate.  By the time they get over being indignant they'll be behind 14~21 points and it's downhill from there for us.

Guys here are always talking about out bammaing bamma well this is what bamma has always done.  They hit you in the nose and squeeze you other places and by the time you get your head in the game it's pretty much over.  It's hard to think straight with a broken nose. 

Yes bamma has great athletes but so do a lot of other teams.  What those others are guilty of is juking and jiving while bama is street fighting.

Aside from the occasional 109 yard field goal return it usually works.

[lefty08]

B'c things have changed, Chitown.   See my post above - these programs are smelling blood in the water.  The watchword for the SEC West next year is Beat-Arkansas.   Because then it will be 3 years in a row - it just changes stuff.

You go from the Sugar Bowl to winning 2 SEC games in 3 years.  You ain't going to come out of that tailspin without much more progress than anything we've seen.

I guess we have all forgotten Auburn didnt win a conference game 2 years ago. And before anyone says it, yes it does matter. Arkansas stacks up very comparable to Auburn for the last 10 or so years. 2 bad seasons doesnt mean we cant bounce back. There were some major reasons why what happened happened. What we would be concerned about is if we had no reason for the Bad years, and clearly we do.

[Magic_Hogg]

You mean after winning a NC and pulling in a top 10 recruiting class w/in 2 years of that bad season?  And then bringing back The Architect of that NC as HC?

[PorkRinds]

Agree 100%

My biggest concern is not having a balanced offense, then BB firing/letting Chaney go, and here we go again installing a whole new system.

Yep. And the scary part is if we don't have a balanced offense, it likely won't be Chaneys fault.

[bigbadhog]

The key to having icing on the cake will be whether or not we are able to have a real, viable redshirt program.  One where we can take a flier or two every season -you know the kind, the ones that have monster talent but haven't played football but for a year or two, or are the prototypical talent for a position in college that were used elsewhere on their HS team.

Length, hight, balance, quickness and explosion and a $100 brain.  These are the kids we have to have not the ones who are already polished and ready to start.  Sure plug and play would be nice but that's unlikely to happen often enough for us to make a living that way so taking a chunk of marble and sculpting our own is the only real path to playoff relevance.

A team doesn't need 11 all stars on either side of the ball to win at a high level.  On offense it needs around four or five depending on scheme.  Add to that competent players at the other positions and you can stay with just about anybody and if your coach is good and your endgame is viable you can win against practically anybody.

I say practically anybody because running up against one of those Generational players added to a good team otherwise tends to just wear you out.


Neither did Stanford, maybe you should go tell them they can't do what they've been doing.

They couldn't in the SEC

[Mike_e]

After being hardened in an SEC fire for a while, I'm not so sure.

[5th Flo]

I guess we have all forgotten Auburn didnt win a conference game 2 years ago. And before anyone says it, yes it does matter. Arkansas stacks up very comparable to Auburn for the last 10 or so years. 2 bad seasons doesnt mean we cant bounce back. There were some major reasons why what happened happened. What we would be concerned about is if we had no reason for the Bad years, and clearly we do.

I really don't see how you can say that. Has Arkansas had success against Auburn over the past 10 years? Yes. But in terms of level of success, I don't think so and I think the 3 SEC championships and 2 undefeated seasons point to that.

Also, I don't think the reason for Arkansas's bad seasons were the same as AU's. Bielema is going through a far larger revamp than Malzahn had to do. Despite Chizik's questionable coaching and player development, he was still a damn good recruiter....

[lefty08]

I really don't see how you can say that. Has Arkansas had success against Auburn over the past 10 years? Yes. But in terms of level of success, I don't think so and I think the 3 SEC championships and 2 undefeated seasons point to that.

Also, I don't think the reason for Arkansas's bad seasons were the same as AU's. Bielema is going through a far larger revamp than Malzahn had to do. Despite Chizik's questionable coaching and player development, he was still a damn good recruiter....

I said that in response to all the negativity going on. There are many people in HV that seem to think we are doomed for a 6 win ceiling. I just dont believe thats the case. I may have missed something, but i dont think AU has had 2 undefeated seasons in the last 10 years. Arkansas always seems to have success against AU, thats what i was saying. And youre right, Arkansas's issues now arent the same. They are much worse. Thats exactly what i was saying. My exact point was that if those last 2 seasons happen with a stable coaching staff (Like what happened at AU) i would say there was major cause for concern. The fact that AU was able to bounce back quickly should give our fanbase more optimism than negativity

[hawgdawg63]

lol......AU made a major turn around for one reason...Coaching. The Hogs made a major turn around in 2010 & 2011 for one reason...Coaching. There is a blueprint for winning in the SEC if your not Bama, LSU (And most wont be)....Coaching style!! A&M, Ole Miss, AU got the memo!! JL picked what he wanted and ignored the blueprint. CBB came here because he got PAID!! Just look at him on the sidelines during a game and you see PAID!! 5 years wont make a difference. 7-5 at best even 5 years from now.

[HiggiePiggy]

I said that in response to all the negativity going on. There are many people in HV that seem to think we are doomed for a 6 win ceiling. I just dont believe thats the case. I may have missed something, but i dont think AU has had 2 undefeated seasons in the last 10 years. Arkansas always seems to have success against AU, thats what i was saying. And youre right, Arkansas's issues now arent the same. They are much worse. Thats exactly what i was saying. My exact point was that if those last 2 seasons happen with a stable coaching staff (Like what happened at AU) i would say there was major cause for concern. The fact that AU was able to bounce back quickly should give our fanbase more optimism than negativity

2004 they went undefeated and 2010 they went undefeated.

Also we are close to 50/50 against auburn overall.  A little lower than that but close.  10-12-1 is the overall record against auburn.

[scootriteby]

I expect 9-10 wins per season. If South Carolina(who entered the league same time we did) can accomplish that feat, so should we.

It will take CBB 3 straight years of 10 wins per season to get his average here at Arkansas to 8 wins per season because of last year's disaster.

Too many people seemed to be focusing on my last comment(which by the way, there is no argument with that fact).  Let me re-iterate: I expect 9-10 wins per season on average. Some one already posted that HDN average 8 wins per season and I would expect more than that from CBB. Is it wrong to have high expectations of our team or should I just be content with 6-8 wins per year and a minor "who cares" bowl? Have we truly sunk so low as a fanbase that we are okay with those kind of results? I surely hope not!

[Seminole Indian]

Not exactly true, though that would seem to be the prevailing logic. It goes beyond recruiting rankings to where these kids end up when they leave their schools, whether they were unrated, 2's, 3's, 4's or 5's when they were signed.

I logged results by position for each of 20 schools based on seasons from 1997-2013 and the NFL Draft from 1998-2014 and what I found was that teams who had 52% of their draftees from the defensive side of the ball and 48% from the offensive side of the ball tended to average a 10-3 season.

Conversely, teams who averaged the exact opposite over that period of time (52% on the offensive side to 48% on the defensive side) averaged 8-5 seasons over that period of time.

I would think that 18 years is long enough to indicate some kind of an accurate and reliable trend.

It isn't what the kids are coming out of High School or Junior College, but how they end up after having been in these programs as valued by the NFL and the potential that they see in them.

Additionally, the old saying that "defense wins championships and offense puts butts in the bleachers", on average, might seem to ring true. Though I would contend that any team that averages 10 wins per season, whether more dominant offensively or defensively, is going to put a LOT of butts in the bleachers nonetheless. It all comes down to who is winning and less about how they are winning.

Point is, it is less about how recruiting rankings evaluate players and the signings of teams and more about what these teams do with the talent that they sign and being stronger defensively seems to be the way to go based on these results, though there is a narrow margin of error involved.

I wish you had focused on  Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, LSU or Georgia.

Why? Since Ole Miss in 63 and Kentucky managing a tie in 76 the SEC Champion has been one of these teams: Alabama, Auburn, Florida, Tennessee, LSU or Georgia.

That is more than 50 years of data saying parity when it comes to Championships in SEC football is a myth.

In the SEC you can say with high confidence ( and with certainty since 76) that the SEC Champion will be one of those schools, and it is no coincidence that these schools are ALWAYS at the top in recruiting.

We know after 22 years Arkansas and South Carolina, although quality programs that have came close, have not been able to break into that group, and it remains to be seen if A&M(who I think will join that group, based on the quality of their recruits) or Missouri (who I expect to be like Arkansas and South Carolina) can join them.

[Inhogswetrust]

I expect 9-10 wins per season. If South Carolina(who entered the league same time we did) can accomplish that feat, so should we.

It will take CBB 3 straight years of 10 wins per season to get his average here at Arkansas to 8 wins per season because of last year's disaster.

Not a coincidence they got the right coach for them. Hopefully we have as well. Maybe we have and maybe not, but it took SS a few years there and we should give BB the same consideration.

[Seminole Indian]

Not a coincidence they got the right coach for them. Hopefully we have as well. Maybe we have and maybe not, but it took SS a few years there and we should give BB the same consideration.

That is absolutely the truth. Arkansas  must improve the quality of athletes over what they have now. 

Only one of the last 5 recruiting classes have been ranked in the top 10 in the SEC. Fixing the glaring talent problem is job #1, and will take time, and of course better athletes.

[Großer Kriegschwein]

That is absolutely the truth. Arkansas  must improve the quality of athletes over what they have now. 

Only one of the last 5 recruiting classes have been ranked in the top 10 in the SEC. Fixing the glaring talent problem is job #1, and will take time, and of course better athletes.

This.. 

It will consist of keeping all our in-state talent, sniping 4 & 5* athletes from nearby states, developing talent thru RS a robust redshirt program, providing consistency to althletes in regard to coaching.

All this = typical 9 win seasons with the occasional run at 10-11 wins per year.

Will put us in a position to compete with Alabama & LSU in the West. (I don't worry about aTm just yet. We'll see how they fare after Johnny D-Bag is long gone, we have historically owned them and Charlie is gonna roll up Texas recruiting).

Competing is what I care about. Wins will come if you compete.

[Jeff "hogfanintx" Anderson]

With a lot of hard work and dedication old Bret might just get this team to average .500 ball each season. 

[Seminole Indian]

With a lot of hard work and dedication old Bret might just get this team to average .500 ball each season.

If you are talking SEC, 22 years of data says yes it will take a lot of work, and to improve over that you must up your game over what you have show over last 22 years.

If you are talking overall record, no, you should expect more and expect more now.

Arkansas still recruits better than all but about 20%-25% of all FBS programs year in and year out, so winning and going to a bowl game should be a given, and should happen now. That it has not been the case the last two years is just a fluke.

[Mike_e]

I still don't get this obsession with having a top ten recruiting class.

I concede that it might be me but looking at real world examples the difference between a class rated at #10 and one rated at #20 or even #25 is pretty slight.

OK, so a top ten has OL that run a 4.9 40 and a top twenty OL run a 5.0 40.  A top ten WR might run a 4.35 and a top twenty gets there at 4.4.  A top ten LB weighs in at 240 and tackles your head whereas a top twenty only weighs 230 but still tackles your head.

Real world?  No OL is going to run 40 yards in a game.  As long as a WR can actually catch a ball a staff and a QB can work out how to get it to him no matter if he's at the 39 YL or the 40.  A tackle for a two yard loss is still a tackle for a two yard loss and it doesn't matter if it makes you go "Oooh" or if the player just goes down.

On paper a top ten class does look better but (no don't wince but here it comes) football is played on a field.  Real ground, real flesh and blood, real desire and real mistakes made by young men just coming into adulthood.

Yes the usual suspects usually get the highest rated classes but they also have been able to afford the highest rated coaches.  Who wouldn't want to learn from the best if you are serious about your craft?

Yes a top ten class will give you the tools to win.  And though a top twenty/twentyfive class won't look as shiny it will give you a chance to win as well.

So, maybe it is me but looking up from that paper and looking at real players there's not enough difference to worry about.

[5th Flo]

I still don't get this obsession with having a top ten recruiting class.

I concede that it might be me but looking at real world examples the difference between a class rated at #10 and one rated at #20 or even #25 is pretty slight.

OK, so a top ten has OL that run a 4.9 40 and a top twenty OL run a 5.0 40.  A top ten WR might run a 4.35 and a top twenty gets there at 4.4.  A top ten LB weighs in at 240 and tackles your head whereas a top twenty only weighs 230 but still tackles your head.

Real world?  No OL is going to run 40 yards in a game.  As long as a WR can actually catch a ball a staff and a QB can work out how to get it to him no matter if he's at the 39 YL or the 40.  A tackle for a two yard loss is still a tackle for a two yard loss and it doesn't matter if it makes you go "Oooh" or if the player just goes down.

On paper a top ten class does look better but (no don't wince but here it comes) football is played on a field.  Real ground, real flesh and blood, real desire and real mistakes made by young men just coming into adulthood.

Yes the usual suspects usually get the highest rated classes but they also have been able to afford the highest rated coaches.  Who wouldn't want to learn from the best if you are serious about your craft?

Yes a top ten class will give you the tools to win.  And though a top twenty/twentyfive class won't look as shiny it will give you a chance to win as well.

So, maybe it is me but looking up from that paper and looking at real players there's not enough difference to worry about.

You should read this...

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2014/2/18/5312840/college-football-recruiting-teams-championships

Now its not something that should be strictly adhered to but more often than not, a school that turns out top 10 classes or a high percentage of blue chip recruits on a consistent basis has a good chance of making it to championship games.

There are schools that put an emphasis on player development but it's very hard to get away with that in the SEC West IMO especially with other teams like Bama, LSU, Auburn, and A&M recruiting at the level they are. I guess we shall see...

[Mike_e]

You should read this...

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football-recruiting/2014/2/18/5312840/college-football-recruiting-teams-championships

Now its not something that should be strictly adhered to but more often than not, a school that turns out top 10 classes or a high percentage of blue chip recruits on a consistent basis has a good chance of making it to championship games.

There are schools that put an emphasis on player development but it's very hard to get away with that in the SEC West IMO especially with other teams like Bama, LSU, Auburn, and A&M recruiting at the level they are. I guess we shall see...

I have read that and it clearly states -right up front- that Based On Talent Ratios yada yada yada.  The article is about picking the likeliest suspect for a championship from a certain perspective.

Clearly if having the best talent was all that mattered then ut would finish in the top five every year.  Clearly they haven't.

It is human nature to resolve down problems to their most basic elements if for no other reason that to save time that you could otherwise use to keep from being eaten.

You can resolve down the game of football but not to a single factor.  Actually I think that getting it down to three is about as low as you can go.

Planning, preparation and performance.  Of those three only the third has talent involved.

[hogsanity]

So we are looking at what the program has been, historically since about 1950. 

[5th Flo]

I have read that and it clearly states -right up front- that Based On Talent Ratios yada yada yada.  The article is about picking the likeliest suspect for a championship from a certain perspective.

Clearly if having the best talent was all that mattered then ut would finish in the top five every year.  Clearly they haven't.

It is human nature to resolve down problems to their most basic elements if for no other reason that to save time that you could otherwise use to keep from being eaten.

You can resolve down the game of football but not to a single factor.  Actually I think that getting it down to three is about as low as you can go.

Planning, preparation and performance.  Of those three only the third has talent involved.

Well then I guess you have to ask yourself if Bielema's teams are necessarily going to be more prepared or perform better than other teams in the conference once the season begins. That's hard to gauge considering the quality of coaching talent in the conference.

[ChitownHawg]

Interesting thread. When does Bielema's noncompete expire?

Well it wasn't last year as it was in full force.

[BigE_23]

So based on that, I think that in the worst possible years where everything that can go wrong will go wrong, we're looking at a 5 win season.
In a below average-average year, we're looking at a 6-7 win regular season.
In an average year, we're looking at an 8 win regular season.
In an average-above average year, we're looking at a 9-10 win regular season.
And all the stars align and we get lucky, we're looking at an 11-12 win regular season.

Doesn't this paragraph pretty much include about anyone in our league with the exception of Bama, LSU, and Georgia?

8-9 Losses for our program is an anomaly and won't happen again for a long, long time, and hopefully never. It was a result of Petrino's bad recruiting, bad losses due to transfers and/or suspensions, and a year of Smiley.

However, 5 win seasons have happened to us on rare occasion.
6-7 wins are what rebuilding years typically look like for us (2014 will look like that)
8-9 win seasons have been our tradition
10-12 win seasons happen every 5-10 years when the stars align.

This pattern resembles every "mid-tier" program in America...the stars aligning happened for Mizzou last year just like in 2007 and for us in 2006 and again in 2011.

The question is, will our fans embrace this identity, which remains to be seen.

Personally, I am content to be a program that sees consistent top 20 teams every year, get to go to new year's day bowl games, and every once in a while makes a run for a title. I don't expect us to become an Alabama, Texas, or any similar program...it's just not realistic.

[Jeff "hogfanintx" Anderson]

If you are talking SEC, 22 years of data says yes it will take a lot of work, and to improve over that you must up your game over what you have show over last 22 years.

If you are talking overall record, no, you should expect more and expect more now.

Arkansas still recruits better than all but about 20%-25% of all FBS programs year in and year out, so winning and going to a bowl game should be a given, and should happen now. That it has not been the case the last two years is just a fluke.

I'm talking SEC

[code red]

Disagree....we are not in a position to say we should win etc.  We need to worry about ourselves.  We can't predict this anymore than we can predict a earthquake.  Recruiting recruiting recruiting.

[ChitownHawg]

Disagree....we are not in a position to say we should win etc.  We need to worry about ourselves. We can't predict this anymore than we can predict a earthquake.  Recruiting recruiting recruiting.

Well that's no fun. 

[Hogwild]

However, 5 win seasons have happened to us on rare occasion.
6-7 wins are what rebuilding years typically look like for us (2014 will look like that)
8-9 win seasons have been our tradition
10-12 win seasons happen every 5-10 years when the stars align.

This pattern resembles every "mid-tier" program in America...the stars aligning happened for Mizzou last year just like in 2007 and for us in 2006 and again in 2011.

The question is, will our fans embrace this identity, which remains to be seen.

In the 22 years we have been in the SEC- (bowl wins included in total)

6 seasons 9+ win=  '98,'02,'03,'06,'10, &'11

4 seasons of 8 wins=  '95,'96,'07,&'09

3 seasons of 6 or 7 wins= '93, '00,'01

9 losing records= '92,'94,'06,'97,'04,'05,'08,'12'13

Overall 145-120-2 (75-48 with Nutt & 70-72 without Nutt)
Average season 6.5 wins & 5.5 losses

[Seminole Indian]

In the 22 years we have been in the SEC- (bowl wins included in total)

6 seasons 9+ win=  '98,'02,'03,'06,'10, &'11

4 seasons of 8 wins=  '95,'96,'07,&'09

3 seasons of 6 or 7 wins= '93, '00,'01

9 losing records= '92,'94,'06,'97,'04,'05,'08,'12'13

Overall 145-120-2 (75-48 with Nutt & 70-72 without Nutt)
Average season 6.5 wins & 5.5 losses

Very rare when any  fans base sees their team the way others do. They are not suppose to that is why they are called 'fans'.

http://collegespun.com/national/the-10-most-delusional-fan-bases-in-college-sports/8

[ChitownHawg]

Expect a 4-4 SEC record and hopefully a 3-1 OOC record for a 7-5 overall. That will put us into the Music City or Liberty or Independence almost every year. Unless you have athletes as good as LSU, Bama, AU,  UGA, UF or aTm, not likely to win too many more than that








Define success for me. aTm is the only one of those schools I mentioned we have a winning record against and that is mainly from SWC days. We have held our own with Auburn, but its pretty lopsided with those others. I have not been impressed with Bielema at this juncture, but do expect him to build a decent defense and offense. He isn't going to outcoach those other school's coaches, so if he has lesser talent, we will continue to lose to them.

Arkansas Razorbacks

Arkansas vs. Alabama (8-15) .348
Arkansas vs. Auburn  (10-11-1) .476
Arkansas vs. Florida (1-8) .111*
Arkansas vs. Georgia (4-9) .308
Arkansas vs. Kentucky (3-4) .429
Arkansas vs. LSU (20-36-2) .357
Arkansas vs. Mississippi State (15-7-1) .682
Arkansas vs. Ole Miss (32-26-1) .552
Arkansas vs. South Carolina (13-8) .619
Arkansas vs. Tennessee (4-13) .235
Arkansas vs. Vanderbilt (7-2) .778#
Arkansas vs. Texas A&M (41-25-3) .621
Arkansas vs. Missouri (2-3) .400

Success means you have beaten them and fairly consistently. You may not have  the winning edge, but you win enough of those game that you have a chance. In the last 10 years Bama is the only team we enter a game without a shot at winning.

So you will takes a pessimistic, the world is ending view, and I will take a more optimistic view. Shall we project who will enjoy life more? 

[hoghiker]

It's amazing to me the number of people ready to concede the next 3 or 4 years of Hog football because they don't like the coach. I don't know that we're going to get better with BB but I've got some hope we will. I don't know that we will and the BB downers don't know we won't. I'll just wait and see and so will everyone else. Ain't any other option.