Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

It hasn't been a winning strategy short term either. In his 7 first seasons he has only 1 winning season against FBS competition (barely) and has never had a winning season in conference, always finishing in the bottom half. He has had the worst offense and lowest scoring team for any P5 coach over the last 8 years. Great if people enjoyed watching the football futility of the Chezit Bowl.

Yes moving to the ACC will be good for achieving the barely winning seasons that eluded Wilcox, with only 8 conference games we can add another winnable game. Our strength of schedule is the easiest in over 100 years and will be easier next year. We went from the #29 toughest schedule to the #121 schedule. With no improvement in the team year over year we will win a couple more games and go to minor bowls regularly despite having a team in the #50 range with many here applauding the "turnaround" and supporting an extension, which Knowlton is undoubtedly itching to give.

The shame is that with a good coach (or even Wilcox with a good OC) this season and next set up for double digit wins, a possible conference championship and CFP berth. It is a wasted opportunity, that the Wilcox defenders will not even see.

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

concordtom said:

---

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

---

That's because Wilcox is a total loser. He just does not know how to win.

concordtom said:

---

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

---

Stick with the things that helped you build your 25 point lead and build an even bigger lead. Try to blow them out. Instead Wilcox turns turtle and tries to protect his lead against one of the most prolific offenses in the country. Just stupid. You would think he would have learned this by now but he just keeps doing it over and over again.

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

---

Stick with the things that helped you build your 25 point lead and build an even bigger lead. Try to blow them out. Instead Wilcox turns turtle and tries to protect his lead against one of the most prolific offenses in the country. Just stupid. You would think he would have learned this by now but he just keeps doing it over and over again.

---

The bigger thing was the shift in defense. Yes, the defense was tired. But they had swagger. You could see it happen when they forced the field goal in the first half. They owned the moment and were dominating.

Then we went to a prevent soft zone. We lost our swagger and we gave a Heisman candidate qb a lifeline. Prevent offense sucks but the prevent defense was worse.

And it should have been a teachable moment in a win. If the refs aren't going to call that targeting what makes you think there was any chance they were going to let Miami lose this game? Why should I believe that we have a fair shot in any game going forward?

This was inexcusable. Just like the phantom offsides vs Notre Dame. There is no plausible explanation but corruption.

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

---

Stick with the things that helped you build your 25 point lead and build an even bigger lead. Try to blow them out. Instead Wilcox turns turtle and tries to protect his lead against one of the most prolific offenses in the country. Just stupid. You would think he would have learned this by now but he just keeps doing it over and over again.

---

Yeah, I mean, another pick 6 would have been nice.

... It was pretty early in the 3rd when I thought we were in trouble. Our lead seemed a bit like fools gold at that point.

MrGPAC said:

---

calumnus said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Oakbear said:

---

Vs playing to win

I think jw plays not to lose and long term not a winning strategy

Good Thing we moved down to a weaker conference, might go bowling despite his predilection

---

we tried to run out the clock.
we lost.

---

Stick with the things that helped you build your 25 point lead and build an even bigger lead. Try to blow them out. Instead Wilcox turns turtle and tries to protect his lead against one of the most prolific offenses in the country. Just stupid. You would think he would have learned this by now but he just keeps doing it over and over again.

---

The bigger thing was the shift in defense. Yes, the defense was tired. But they had swagger. You could see it happen when they forced the field goal in the first half. They owned the moment and were dominating.

Then we went to a prevent soft zone. We lost our swagger and we gave a Heisman candidate qb a lifeline. Prevent offense sucks but the prevent defense was worse.

And it should have been a teachable moment in a win. If the refs aren't going to call that targeting what makes you think there was any chance they were going to let Miami lose this game? Why should I believe that we have a fair shot in any game going forward?

This was inexcusable. Just like the phantom offsides vs Notre Dame. There is no plausible explanation but corruption.

---

We went from being the aggressor on both sides of the ball to being passive and risk adverse on both sides of the ball.

Nobody has really commented yet.

Playing the second QB… was that smart?
What did it accomplish?

Signaled to EVERYONE that we were done with this game and going into 4-Corners in the pre-shot clock era.

Wilcox thought bubble: "boy, it sure would be good for team camaraderie if we empty the bench tonight."

Until we are mathematically guaranteed a victory I assume we will blow it because we almost always do.

Miami is clearly a better team. You cannot beat them by playing not to lose. Us playing not to lose was exactly what Miami wanted us to do.