To me that says you should be a little patient with a head coach and not fire him after only two years. Then again that is just me.

It means average, or of moderate to inferior quality. So, comparing our record to that of other FBS, or even BCS teams, 6-6 would be mediocre. 8-4 would be above average. 10-2 would be great. 12-0 would be perfect.

But the point of my post, ESP, is that the Cignetti era was MUCH worse than anything Stew has produced or has indicated that he might produce. Heck, Cignetti never even had a winning record. That’s mediocrity, or worse.

And while I’m at it, I don’t know how you can lump Bowden and Cignetti together. Bowden had one losing season, and finished with 8, 7, 8, 6, and 9 wins in his other years. That’s about on par with the Nehlen years.

And who ever said that I strive for 8-4? Look at my posts. I never said anything close to “8-4 is a good season.” It’s above average, and I would have a hard time firing a coach who was 8-4 every year, but no, I wouldn’t strive for it. Granted, I don’t strive for anything related to WVU football. To strive for something would mean that what I do affects the outcome. So no, I don’t strive. But I think the team should, and does, strive for 12-0 every year. Is that realistic? Of course not. Not even for the very best programs. So I set my hopes realistically.

That being said, who are you to say that 8-4 is the “BEST” we will have? If we win our last 2 games, which—-even you would have to admit—-is possible, we would finish at 9-3, certainly BETTER than the “BEST” you predicted. And in my opinion, based on what I’ve seen of our recruiting, our talent is only going to improve. But you’re entitled to your own opinion. I just happen to disagree with it.

Is as good as your prediction of us getting rolled in the car care bowl.

do you want to be Boston College, or do you want to be Alabama? I’d take Alabama.

I would like to get back to your 5-5 in the SEC comment at a latter date. That literally blew my mind.

I understand where you’re coming from, because the oddsmakers are excellent at what they do and have a thorough knowledge of the game and the teams involved. But, what do you mean when you say it’s right or wrong? The point of setting a line is for the casino to make money, not to predict the outcome of the game. It’s also based, at least in part, on public perception of the teams involved. For example, if the betting world mistakenly thinks that Pitt isn’t really that good and doesn’t deserve to be ranked #9, then the line will artificially be skewed in favor of WVU, even though it may not reflect reality. Also, how do you account for games like USC losing to 41-point dogs Stanford and WVU losing at home to 28-point dogs Pitt, both at home, in 2007? Were those lines “right” or “wrong”?

I don’t pretend to be a gambling expert, but that is my understanding of how things work. So are you going to just sit there and call me out, or are you going to correct me? I genuinely want to know what you mean by saying a line is “right” or “wrong.”