Coaching changes

[Cusefan78]

So in general I really would like to know why coaches believe that ripping the bandaid off and changing schemes over night is better then gradually changing the scheme over a year or two. Take grob for example. Took an option based team and tried to turn them into west coast spread over night. Never worked and we get a tenure that destroyed su football. Then we have marone types that walk in and gradually change the offense and we managed a few wins till his players came in. Now we have babers and ward pulling a grob and changing the defense into something that is the exact opposite of what we had. Is ripping the bandaid off and getting a defense that couldn't stop a high school team worth it just to change the system. To me I would think the smart move is to use what we have and slowly change it to give the team a chance to win. Personally I think last years defense with the current offense would have won the game yesterday. I really have a hard time seeing why the overnight change is the way to go. These coaches have to be smart people, one would think they could devise a set of plays that are close to what we ran the prior year to gain the advantage of using the players that compromise 90 %of the roster.

 

[HoustonCuse]

Either way it is a big change. By ripping the bandaid you will get to your desired final results faster but with a possibly rockier transition. With gradual, you will get to your end result in a slower way but have a possibly slightly smoother transition. I think the end state is the important thing and so getting there faster is generally better. In reality, winning 4 or 5 games instead of 3 or 4 isn't a substantial difference in any real way. It's not like the quick change here is costing us a bowl or anything. But it could lead to the team being credible enough next year or the year after to make a bowl instead of still mediocre but not horrible in 2 years.

Secondly, I would think there is just not enough practice time to try to teach two schemes, which is what you have to do to slowly transition. It would be time consuming and potentially confusing for the players. Especially as new players come in and are intermixed with veteran players from the old scheme.

Thirdly, there is buy-in. Change management is all about buy-in and football coaches are probably the buy-in focused of all managers on the planet. It would be pretty wishy washy to ask the players to completely buy in to a new scheme and then hedge bets all over the place with legacy schemes.

 

[Ish88888]

Totally agree. I would rather give up yards and go down pressuring the qb and getting a few sacks. Playing bump and run on the outside, bc the results couldn't be any worse.

 

[Millhouse]

So in general I really would like to know why coaches believe that ripping the bandaid off and changing schemes over night is better then gradually changing the scheme over a year or two. Take grob for example. Took an option based team and tried to turn them into west coast spread over night. Never worked and we get a tenure that destroyed su football. Then we have marone types that walk in and gradually change the offense and we managed a few wins till his players came in. Now we have babers and ward pulling a grob and changing the defense into something that is the exact opposite of what we had. Is ripping the bandaid off and getting a defense that couldn't stop a high school team worth it just to change the system. To me I would think the smart move is to use what we have and slowly change it to give the team a chance to win. Personally I think last years defense with the current offense would have won the game yesterday. I really have a hard time seeing why the overnight change is the way to go. These coaches have to be smart people, one would think they could devise a set of plays that are close to what we ran the prior year to gain the advantage of using the players that compromise 90 %of the roster.

Gerg ripped off the bandaid and wrapped up the wound in used toilet paper.

 

[djorange1989]

ah the inevitable paranoid comparison to Gerg after 3 games. Gotta love it.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

You're sentimental for last year's defense? The group that time and time and time again failed to get stops in the pinches? Last year's defense cost us several games. There's no indication the group would have improved, so why not rip off the band aid?

 

[Marroniac]

I don't think people realize how good both Louisville and USF are on offense.

 

[nzm136]

So in general I really would like to know why coaches believe that ripping the bandaid off and changing schemes over night is better then gradually changing the scheme over a year or two. Take grob for example. Took an option based team and tried to turn them into west coast spread over night. Never worked and we get a tenure that destroyed su football. Then we have marone types that walk in and gradually change the offense and we managed a few wins till his players came in. Now we have babers and ward pulling a grob and changing the defense into something that is the exact opposite of what we had. Is ripping the bandaid off and getting a defense that couldn't stop a high school team worth it just to change the system. To me I would think the smart move is to use what we have and slowly change it to give the team a chance to win. Personally I think last years defense with the current offense would have won the game yesterday. I really have a hard time seeing why the overnight change is the way to go. These coaches have to be smart people, one would think they could devise a set of plays that are close to what we ran the prior year to gain the advantage of using the players that compromise 90 %of the roster.

Barbers was hired with the expectation that he would run Baylor's offense, and running the Baylor offense with SS' defense would be disastrous because the Baylor offense is fast. It's quickness keeps the defense on the field, tiring them out. SS' defense was attacking, which is energy/intensive.

Keeping an energy-intensive defense on the field for a long time is the recipe for disaster on defense.

So, Dino could 1) not implement they Baylor offense (what he was hired to do), 2) get destroyed on defense for a prolonged period of time, or 3) get destroyed on defense for a short period of time.

 

[supp]

So in general I really would like to know why coaches believe that ripping the bandaid off and changing schemes over night is better then gradually changing the scheme over a year or two. Take grob for example. Took an option based team and tried to turn them into west coast spread over night. Never worked and we get a tenure that destroyed su football. Then we have marone types that walk in and gradually change the offense and we managed a few wins till his players came in. Now we have babers and ward pulling a grob and changing the defense into something that is the exact opposite of what we had. Is ripping the bandaid off and getting a defense that couldn't stop a high school team worth it just to change the system. To me I would think the smart move is to use what we have and slowly change it to give the team a chance to win. Personally I think last years defense with the current offense would have won the game yesterday. I really have a hard time seeing why the overnight change is the way to go. These coaches have to be smart people, one would think they could devise a set of plays that are close to what we ran the prior year to gain the advantage of using the players that compromise 90 %of the roster.

Maybe I'm an idiot but I don't think we're that far away. We're averaging 500 yards on offense against at least two pretty good to excellent defenses. Most of that yardage, ironically enough, has come earlier in the game rather than at garbage time. On defense, we look confused but we're now 3 starters down and playing freshmen extensively on the edge, at one corner spot, and at linebacker. Things will tighten up over the course of the year, especially as we face less dynamic offenses with less dynamic trigger men. On offense, it's just a matter of time before we turn yards into points. Things still are looking up to me.

 

[nzm136]

Maybe I'm an idiot but I don't think we're that far away. We're averaging 500 yards on offense against at least two pretty good to excellent defenses. Most of that yardage, ironically enough, has come earlier in the game rather than at garbage time. On defense, we look confused but we're now 3 starters down and playing freshmen extensively on the edge, at one corner spot, and at linebacker. Things will tighten up over the course of the year, especially as we face less dynamic offenses with less dynamic trigger men. On offense, it's just a matter of time before we turn yards into points. Things still are looking up to me.

I think that you're using the wrong metric on offense. Yards and even TD's are meaningless unless you adjust for how many opportunities your offense gave the other team. We run a system that is very high tempo, so we have more chances to gets yards and TDs, but it also gives the other side more chances.

Without adjusting for SOS or garbage points, our offense is actually worse this year than last year. However, it's far too early in the year and in DB's tenure to say anything very definitive. I honestly don't think that it's fair to even begin judging him with any seriousness until halfway through next year. Even then, barring an unmitigated and obvious train-wreck (even worse than GRob level - if that even exists), I wouldn't even think about canning coordinators until the end of year 2, and a HC until towards the end of year 3 - and that's at the earliest.

 

[bevosu]

Last year we ranked 98 (total defense) out of 127 teams.

Not sure where we are so far this year?

Total Defense | FBS Football Statistics - NCAA.com

 

[supp]

I think that you're using the wrong metric on offense. Yards and even TD's are meaningless unless you adjust for how many opportunities your offense gave the other team. We run a system that is very high tempo, so we have more chances to gets yards and TDs, but it also gives the other side more chances.

Without adjusting for SOS or garbage points, our offense is actually worse this year than last year. However, it's far too early in the year and in DB's tenure to say anything very definitive. I honestly don't think that it's fair to even begin judging him with any seriousness until halfway through next year. Even then, barring an unmitigated and obvious train-wreck (even worse than GRob level - if that even exists), I wouldn't even think about canning coordinators until the end of year 2, and a HC until towards the end of year 3 - and that's at the earliest.

Sure but last year's scoring totals were also by any measure anomalous when compared with yards per game. As others have shown, yards per game historically have been a better measure of scoring average than any other metric. If this offense becomes even 10-20% more efficient, while keeping the same tempo, the scoring average increases and likely forces the opponent to play at a similar pace on offense, which can play into our hands if that's not the design of their offense. There aren't many teams left on our schedule equipped to play fast and throw alot.

 

[SURules]

Last year we ranked 98 (total defense) out of 127 teams.

Not sure where we are so far this year?

Total Defense | FBS Football Statistics - NCAA.com

Here you go: Syracuse Orange

 

[bevosu]

Here you go: Syracuse Orange

Thanks...scary.

 

[TheCusian]

Sure but last year's scoring totals were also by any measure anomalous when compared with yards per game. As others have shown, yards per game historically have been a better measure of scoring average than any other metric. If this offense becomes even 10-20% more efficient, while keeping the same tempo, the scoring average increases and likely forces the opponent to play at a similar pace on offense, which can play into our hands if that's not the design of their offense. There aren't many teams left on our schedule equipped to play fast and throw alot.

This. We are in the top of a lot of categories, just not points. It's not if we start scoring, it's when.

We just played one good offensive team and another that might be the best O in all of CFB. Teams that struggle on O are not going to carve us up like the last two teams did.

 

[djorange1989]

Thanks...scary.

Hey our red zone defensive percentage is pretty good. Oh wait, that's because we give up 50 yard TDs all the time so opponents don't get in the red zone much. Sorry :0

 

[upperdeck]

you can check the metrics and say we gain more yards because of chances, except most of our yards have come early not late so those possessions happen either way, if we were gaining yards late then saying tempo was causing our stats to change

 

[nzm136]

Sure but last year's scoring totals were also by any measure anomalous when compared with yards per game. As others have shown, yards per game historically have been a better measure of scoring average than any other metric. If this offense becomes even 10-20% more efficient, while keeping the same tempo, the scoring average increases and likely forces the opponent to play at a similar pace on offense, which can play into our hands if that's not the design of their offense. There aren't many teams left on our schedule equipped to play fast and throw alot.

1) You just made a common error. Yards aren't as good as a proxy for points as you're making it sound. That disconnect is the entire basis for "bend but don't break" defensive philosophies.

To illustrate the problem using correlations, there is probably a stronger correlation between scoring a high number of points (however you define that) and being in the B12 vs having a high number of yards (however you define that)

But don't get me wrong, I'd rather have more yards than fewer, but it isn't the make all, be all metric.

2) Us moving fast doesn't force the other team to move fast. They could easily use a slow "3 yards and a cloud of dust" philosophy and wear our D down. Us moving fast only means that the other side will have the ball more - either because we scored quickly or turned it over quickly.

 

[PAcuse]

"Hey coach we want to hire you at Syracuse, BUT we need you to slowly bring in your amazing system." Yeah it's going to hurt, but it's worth it in the end. HIS system takes around 16 games to get going 100%, so your suggestion is to slowly bring them up to speed and what 30 games in we are running his system? Seem terrible, thank you Dino for FINALLY bringing a system to the Dome that we've needed for a long, long, long, long, long time.

 

[SWC75]

Gerg ripped off the bandaid and wrapped up the wound in used toilet paper.

Actually, he replaced it with this:

 

[OttoinGrotto]

"Hey coach we want to hire you at Syracuse, BUT we need you to slowly bring in your amazing system." Yeah it's going to hurt, but it's worth it in the end. HIS system takes around 16 games to get going 100%, so your suggestion is to slowly bring them up to speed and what 30 games in we are running his system? Seem terrible, thank you Dino for FINALLY bringing a system to the Dome that we've needed for a long, long, long, long, long time.

Agreed, the problem with fitting scheme to the talent is that we had mediocre at best talent.

So let's run the scheme we want the best we can, and put our chips on that making a difference in our recruiting.

 

[CuseOnly]

I think that you're using the wrong metric on offense. Yards and even TD's are meaningless unless you adjust for how many opportunities your offense gave the other team. We run a system that is very high tempo, so we have more chances to gets yards and TDs, but it also gives the other side more chances.

Without adjusting for SOS or garbage points, our offense is actually worse this year than last year. However, it's far too early in the year and in DB's tenure to say anything very definitive. I honestly don't think that it's fair to even begin judging him with any seriousness until halfway through next year. Even then, barring an unmitigated and obvious train-wreck (even worse than GRob level - if that even exists), I wouldn't even think about canning coordinators until the end of year 2, and a HC until towards the end of year 3 - and that's at the earliest.

It's not the offense's job to stop the opposing offense, regardless of how many possessions they get.

That's the defenses job. So far they are swiss cheese defensively.

 

[timkay99]

So in general I really would like to know why coaches believe that ripping the bandaid off and changing schemes over night is better then gradually changing the scheme over a year or two. Take grob for example. Took an option based team and tried to turn them into west coast spread over night. Never worked and we get a tenure that destroyed su football. Then we have marone types that walk in and gradually change the offense and we managed a few wins till his players came in. Now we have babers and ward pulling a grob and changing the defense into something that is the exact opposite of what we had. Is ripping the bandaid off and getting a defense that couldn't stop a high school team worth it just to change the system. To me I would think the smart move is to use what we have and slowly change it to give the team a chance to win. Personally I think last years defense with the current offense would have won the game yesterday. I really have a hard time seeing why the overnight change is the way to go. These coaches have to be smart people, one would think they could devise a set of plays that are close to what we ran the prior year to gain the advantage of using the players that compromise 90 %of the roster.

Because you would be asking a coach to teach a system he has never taught (if you are comparing Shafer to Ward defensively). So, instead of taking the time to teach their system, learn players, etc. you would want them to study Shafer's defense, learn how to call it, learn how to play it and so on. Tampa 2 is not what is decimating this defense. Its not like we play Tampa 2 everytime, when we blitz, we don't get there. This just is not a good defense right now no matter the scheme.

Last year's defense was not very good and this year's defense is not very good. Playing 2 dynamic offenses doesn't help either.

 

[Cusefan78]

im under the assumption a bowl wasn't out of the question this year. Running the defense we are right now with the current players it most likely is out of the question. If there is a chance at a bowl you do what you can to get it and take the extra practices. I don't really care about playing in the crap o bowl we probably would play. It's the added practice that will pay off down the road. We brought Dino in to play his offense in a controlled environment not for a defensive scheme. Running any scheme takes advantage of what we have for a season doesn't slow down babers progression. Not making a bowl and losing out on more practice time does. I'm fully on the babers train I'm just asking why not or what if

 

[Deuga]

I think the most critical issue is we’ve had 2 full recruiting classes in the last 4 years. I don’t count SS first year class and I don’t count Baber’s first class as a full class because neither had a full year to recruit for it. The defensive style isn’t the primary issue, it’s depth.

USF scored 45 points on us both last year and this year. 7 of this years’ points was off special teams, not the D. Last year’s D was in it’s 3rd year. This year’s D was in it’s 3rd game. We’ve already showed improvement and we did in only 3 games what we failed to do in 3 years. Great? No. Better? Yes, slightly. Is this a fair comparison? Not really. It's only game 3. Grab a beer from the frig and relax, we've got a long way to go.