Goals/Standards Semantics Urination Tournament

[WaitingforKickoff]

I don't know what you guys have such a difficult time grasping in lv's statement.

In the grand scheme of things, the priorities for him and me (among others) are:

1) Beat scUM.
2) Win the Big Ten Championship.
3) The rest is icing.

Year in and year out, I feel that our primary achievement goals are 1 and 2. If we happen to go to the NC; then great. If not; then we'll go to a Bowl game and hopefully have a great outing. It's just a difference of perspectives, but by no means, does it mean that our opinion is worse than yours.

Several things wrong with this logically. One, if the rest is truly just icing on the cake, then don't cry about losing to MSU in '98, don't regret about losing to Florida in the NC game and don't sweat about the loss to Illinois at home. And surely no one is looking back on the loss to Stanford in '70 or the loss to SC in '79 that would have given OSU another couple of titles, right?

Secondly, saying that you'd be happy with beating Michigan and winning the Big10 and everything else is icing on the cake is like saying you'd be happy with ten million dollars but being wealthy is just icing on the cake.

And lastly, it's just the wrong thing to say about a championship program. Players are expected to coming in here and win hardware and the fanbase expects the program to do well and win championships.

 

[BrutusBobcat]

Not to pile on lv, but most fans cared very little that we shared the B10 title in 2002. Winning outright last year was secondary compared to going to the title game.

Priorities around here really seem to go like this:

1. Beat Michigan, otherwise nothing good happens
2. Win (or tie for) the Big Ten title, otherwise nothing good happens
3. Get to a BCS bowl
4. Correction, BCS title game
5. Win game

I won't argue that beating Michigan and winning the B10 aren't important goals -- they are. Stopping there is incomplete, however. They are stepping stones to getting into the truly big matchups, whether that's a BCS bowl or the title game itself. No historically great Ohio State team is crowned as such without a Rose Bowl win, and in BCS era, that higher goal is now the title game.

The "it's just icing" approach is what earned us a beatdown last year. Winning the national title has to be a goal, not just for the team, but for the fans. Look at the crazed atmosphere around the 2002 team and fanbase (and in Tempe), versus almost a ho-hum feeling last year. You can't sit around after beating Michigan saying, "I am full, thank you. It's all just icing from here anyway." You'd better eat the rest of that cake, or some other fool is going to get it!

 

[Bleed S & G]

Rev. Henry Kane?

I wanted to use the picture of JT's 'O-face' holding the crystal up in the air.. couldn't find the damn thing

 

[Buckeyeskickbuttocks]

Of course, if you win the Big Ten and you beat Michigan, then the chances are pretty good that you'll be in the title hunt regardless of any individual fan's personal priority or evaluation of satisfaction for a season.

I agree that there's nothing quite like winning the NC. But, last year taught me that it's still quite an accomplishment to even have the chance. Of course I'd have prefered OSU won. But, the season wasn't a failure just because of the NC Game, so far as I'm concerned.

I think a lot of you are taking LV and Muffler's remarks well beyond the intention of them.

And... of course, there is a large section of OSU fans who remember when the Bowl games were REWARDS and not "playoffs" The NC used to not really be particularly important. Nice, sure... but it was much unlike today's context.

In any case, the fact is the NC is one of the Team's goals every year. The FANS priority is important vis a vis the team ONLY when the TEAM fails to have that goal in the first instance.

 

[Deety]

Right-click, save as. :)

 

[lvbuckeye]

look. you guys are taking what i said the wrong way. of course the goal of every Ohio State team, shit, of EVERY team is to go undefeated. unfortunately, that's not realistic, especially in this day and age. if undefeated is your expectation, then you might as well join the rest of the negative nancies and chicken littles over on the scout board, because you're never going to be satisfied. either that, or you're only going to be satisfied on an average of once every 16 years or so (of you count all 7 MNCs) or once every 23 or 24 years (if you only count the AP/Coaches' MNCs.)

why was there a 34 year gap between our last two MNCs? well, quite honestly, because there was not one season in those 34 years in which we won all our games. winning all your games is quite hard to do, in case you haven't noticed. and even if you do go undefeated, you're not guaranteed the MNC. just ask Auburn '04 or Boise State '06... don't give me that crap about Sparty '98. i was THERE. it sucked on a horrible, epic level. and don't say that 4th and 14 against the Canes doesn't matter either, i was there as well, and that was joyous on a stupendously wonderful, epic level. and both for the same reason. because it's hard as shit to go undefeated. yeah, it's the ultimate goal, but it ain't realistic. if you want undefeated every year, you're much better off playing NCAA '08 dynasties on the JV level.

so the REALISTIC goals of Ohio State, you know the ones that they can control and don't depend on pollsters and computers and what other teams do or don't do to achieve, are to win the Big Ten, beat TSUN, and win the bowl game.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

look. you guys are taking what i said the wrong way. of course the goal of every Ohio State team, shit, of EVERY team is to go undefeated. unfortunately, that's not realistic, especially in this day and age. if undefeated is your expectation, then you might as well join the rest of the negative nancies and chicken littles over on the scout board, because you're never going to be satisfied.

Hate to say it lvbuckeye, but you are flat out wrong. What do you mean it's not realistic to beat every team? LOL If that's so unrealistic, who are we giving the national title to every year? Sure, you have down years like the 1999 squad, and no one is realistically expecting them to win every single game. But standards are standards. At Ohio State, we have very high standards. Whether we live up to them is another matter, but the moment you start messing with the standards that's when Ohio State football will lose a slice of its greatness.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Hard and realistic are not conflicting matters. It's flat out wrong to categorize everything hard as unrealistic. If that's the way that every scientist or every innovator in this world thinks, we'd still be living in the stone ages. And come on, winning a title, how unrealistic is that? I mean how big is it a pool to choose from? OSU, Oklahoma, Texas, SC, Miami....no more than 15 teams on any given year. What's so unrealistic about winning it when you only got 14 other teams with "realistic" shots at it?

 

[lvbuckeye]

Hate to say it lvbuckeye, but you are flat out wrong. What do you mean it's not realistic to beat every team? LOL If that's so unrealistic, who are we giving the national title to every year? Sure, you have down years like the 1999 squad, and no one is realistically expecting them to win every single game. But standards are standards. At Ohio State, we have very high standards. Whether we live up to them is another matter, but the moment you start messing with the standards that's when Ohio State football will lose a slice of its greatness.

read the rest of my post, smart guy. i addressed that. we've met our standards exactly ONCE in the last 38 years.

look at it this way:

over the last seven years of his tenure, Lloyd Carr went 3-11 in the last two games of the year. they love that guy up there.

over the last seven years of his tenure, John Cooper went 4-10 in the last two games of the year. we think he's a bum. you don't think i'm aware of our high standards?

 

[lvbuckeye]

Hard and realistic are not conflicting matters. It's flat out wrong to categorize everything hard as unrealistic. If that's the way that every scientist or every innovator in this world thinks, we'd still be living in the stone ages. And come on, winning a title, how unrealistic is that? I mean how big is it a pool to choose from? OSU, Oklahoma, Texas, SC, Miami....no more than 15 teams on any given year. What's so unrealistic about winning it when you only got 14 other teams with "realistic" shots at it?

let's see, because there are only two undefeated teams right now, and no one thinks they have a "realistic" shot of making it. hmm...?

 

[AKAK]

Hard and realistic are not conflicting matters. It's flat out wrong to categorize everything hard as unrealistic. If that's the way that every scientist or every innovator in this world thinks, we'd still be living in the stone ages. And come on, winning a title, how unrealistic is that? I mean how big is it a pool to choose from? OSU, Oklahoma, Texas, SC, Miami....no more than 15 teams on any given year. What's so unrealistic about winning it when you only got 14 other teams with "realistic" shots at it?

Boy.... change that 1 in 15 to one in 16, and you an lv are saying exactly the same thing.

Its really a question of expectation... and... anyone who was "excpecting" us to run the table going into this year needs to have their head examined.

But... if you did, then you ought to get on the "Fire Tressel" bandwagon... because he failed... if that's the expectation.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

read the rest of my post, smart guy. i addressed that. we've met our standards exactly ONCE in the last 38 years.

look at it this way:

over the last seven years of his tenure, Lloyd Carr went 3-11 in the last two games of the year. they love that guy up there.

over the last seven years of his tenure, John Cooper went 4-10 in the last two games of the year. we think he's a bum. you don't think i'm aware of our high standards?

Take it easy man. All I wanted was for you to acknowledge our standard. Beating Michigan and winning the B10 titles and the rest are icing on the cake are for pieces of shits like MSU and Purdue. At The Ohio State University, and that is with a capital T there, our standards are higher.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

let's see, because there are only two undefeated teams right now, and no one thinks they have a "realistic" shot of making it. hmm...?

And we all know how are hard it is for Ohio State to get up in the rankings when we are going undefeated...

 

[muffler dragon]

Of course, if you win the Big Ten and you beat Michigan, then the chances are pretty good that you'll be in the title hunt regardless of any individual fan's personal priority or evaluation of satisfaction for a season.

I agree that there's nothing quite like winning the NC. But, last year taught me that it's still quite an accomplishment to even have the chance. Of course I'd have prefered OSU won. But, the season wasn't a failure just because of the NC Game, so far as I'm concerned.

I think a lot of you are taking LV and Muffler's remarks well beyond the intention of them.

And... of course, there is a large section of OSU fans who remember when the Bowl games were REWARDS and not "playoffs" The NC used to not really be particularly important. Nice, sure... but it was much unlike today's context.

In any case, the fact is the NC is one of the Team's goals every year. The FANS priority is important vis a vis the team ONLY when the TEAM fails to have that goal in the first instance.

look. you guys are taking what i said the wrong way. of course the goal of every Ohio State team, shit, of EVERY team is to go undefeated. unfortunately, that's not realistic, especially in this day and age. if undefeated is your expectation, then you might as well join the rest of the negative nancies and chicken littles over on the scout board, because you're never going to be satisfied. either that, or you're only going to be satisfied on an average of once every 16 years or so (of you count all 7 MNCs) or once every 23 or 24 years (if you only count the AP/Coaches' MNCs.)

why was there a 34 year gap between our last two MNCs? well, quite honestly, because there was not one season in those 34 years in which we won all our games. winning all your games is quite hard to do, in case you haven't noticed. and even if you do go undefeated, you're not guaranteed the MNC. just ask Auburn '04 or Boise State '06... don't give me that crap about Sparty '98. i was THERE. it sucked on a horrible, epic level. and don't say that 4th and 14 against the Canes doesn't matter either, i was there as well, and that was joyous on a stupendously wonderful, epic level. and both for the same reason. because it's hard as shit to go undefeated. yeah, it's the ultimate goal, but it ain't realistic. if you want undefeated every year, you're much better off playing NCAA '08 dynasties on the JV level.

so the REALISTIC goals of Ohio State, you know the ones that they can control and don't depend on pollsters and computers and what other teams do or don't do to achieve, are to win the Big Ten, beat TSUN, and win the bowl game.

Couldn't agree more with the posts and especially the emboldened. I didn't figure these points would be that difficult to grasp, but I've been mistaken before.

To each their own.

 

[muffler dragon]

Beating Michigan and winning the B10 titles and the rest are icing on the cake are for pieces of shits like MSU and Purdue.

What a load.

How many times have MSU, Purdue and the other Big Ten pieces of shit (according to your opinion) done just exactly what we hope for?

At The Ohio State University, and that is with a capital T there, our standards are higher.

I guess making it a capital makes all the difference, huh?