McDonald is the best hope for Syracuse football | Syracusefan.com

McDonald is the best hope for Syracuse football

OttoinGrotto

2023-24 Iggy Award Most 3 Pointers Made
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
63,303
Like
185,942
Before I get in to why McDonald is the right basket to put our eggs in (huevos rancheros!) let's get some fair criticisms out in the open:

- It's odd how little we give the ball to Jerome Smith
- It doesn't make sense that we run next to zero play action
- While it seems as though a QB roll out could be a nice play for us, we just don't really do that
- There have been times when the play calling, at best, makes no sense
- There have also been times where it's extremely difficult to tell exactly what we're trying to do on offense
- While our receiving crew is limited, it's strange that we don't attempt to do a whole lot going down field
- Wither pass catching tight ends?
- At times, our players on offense have looked confused and disorganized

I think we can all agree that the stuff above smells like rotten eggs (eggs benedict!).

All that said, George "Cool Kid" McDonald is exactly what the program needs to take the next step forward. Consider:

People have always said we need up and coming coaches because we're not a program with the name or resources to bring in big names. Well, isn't McDonald an up and comer? Sure, he's developing as an OC, but he brings one sure fire skill to the table - the man can recruit. This is purely my opinion, but I think it's easier for a coach to improve as a coach than it is for them to improve as a recruiter. Some guys have that ability and others don't. McDonald has it. As much as we'd love to get an up and coming OC that has offenses that set the world on fire, those guys are usually getting jobs as OCs that already recruit better than we do. McDonald is a fundamentally different animal than what we're used to around thing. Not only is that a good thing, it's the shot in the arm we need.

There isn't any reason to believe that McDonald won't improve as an offensive coordinator. Back when Marrone brought on Hackett, the biggest things that Hackett had going for him were 1) his last name and 2) Marrone liked him. It took him a few years to figure things out, but once he did, we had the kind of offense that's a reality these days in college football. McDonald at the time of his hiring had going for him 1) a recruiting track record and 2) Shafer liked him. If anything, McDonald is arguably a much better bet to pay off than Hackett was, because we still enjoy the recruiting dividend McDonald brings while he fights through his growing pains. With Hackett the recruiting impact wasn't as obvious.

The improvement McDonald will exhibit as offensive coordinator isn't single pronged though. It's two pronged (deviled eggs!). The first prong will be seen via his growth as a coach. The second prong will occur because he immediately identified the talent deficiencies we are facing at QB and WR*. It's not a coincidence that we're bringing in some exciting talent at those positions - he knows he needs them in order to do what he wants to do. When you consider the young talent at RB, the line, some of the guys at TE... we're not that far away if you can throw in more dynamic players at QB and WR. I think the offense will get better.

That's not to say that this season is a lost year developmentally. One of the great frustrations of the Marrone era was that we played such an ugly brand of football on offense (scrambled eggs!). Slow, grinding, run-oriented attacks have predominantly been passed by in college football today. Some say that Marrone made that choice to fit the players he had. I think that's valid. I also think there was a tradeoff to that choice - ugly offense begat ugly offense, until they decided to speed things up and trust Nassib, Lemon and Sales.

I believe McDonald is intentionally NOT molding the offense to today's players in some cases. There is a vision in place - he wants to play no huddle spread with an emphasis on 3 wide sets. The rushing scheme will be relatively straight forward. The passing game will ask more of its players than it does now, but we're getting the seeds planted. It is a gamble. We might be sacrificing some production short term. That said, with our limitations at QB I think the ceiling is pretty low either way. Going with the low ceiling of your choice that lays the foundation for the future is the right call.

It's clear that McDonald can't do the things he really wants to do with the roster we have right now. He's a former wideout - he wants the ball in the air. That should excite us, because again, WE ARE THE ONLY BCS PROGRAM THAT COMPETES IN A WEATHER CONTROLLED FACILITY (hard-boiled eggs!). Of all the programs in college football built to base their offense on passing, we're an obvious choice. I think McDonald's getting us there. That's a good thing.

Lastly, we don't have another choice. We need him to work out. We're not going to get a coach that recruits better - how confident are you that the next OC would actually have a more productive offense? We haven't exactly blown anyone's doors off with OC hires since, what? Kevin Rogers? Give him time, give him his own players, and let's see what we have.

In Cool Kid I trust.
 
There's a lot of good info in there, OiG. I agree with quite a bit of your logic--especially the part about implementing the system versus modifying it for the personnel on hand.

Our last head coach did the latter; this HC / OC seem to be doing the former. And I agree: it has sacrificed some short term payoff in the interest of bigger dividends down the road. I'm not suggesting that one approach is right and the other is wrong [definitely shades of gray about which is "better"], but I do expect that it will pay off as we get more dynamic talent on offense, since the foundation will already be in place.

Regardless, thought provoking post.
 
Thank you. Saved me the time to write that myself.
ICKWT
 
Eggzactly. And may I add. If McD is so difficult for you guys to figure out, imagine how much he confounds the opposition.
 
The above post was brought to you by the...

2untvZjmveiZzNJFg_wo_MHvkit3rxqV88wjAFW52CigID3iJ6CRlg8na2_Sbdm9OdBw4u4=s87
 
To me, a coach's ability to fit his strategy to his personnel is a positive thing. There's no need to have a lousy offense now so we can have a good one later. I'd love to see Hunt in there with Smith as a running fullback and Morris/McFarlane as an old-fashioned halfback. You've still got two wide-outs and a tight end and can throw to the backs. With the defense not knowing who is going to get the ball on a running play and three very good option, we'd march right down the field. And when we did pass, things would be wide open.

Then next year, if Hunt has either learned to be a good passer or is supplanted by someone who is, we can try something else.
 
mcdonald should get better as he has no place to go but up both in his own skills as an oc and next years talent. QB OL and WR all look to be much better. If Hunt he will have a year under his belt to learn and improve. If a newbie he will have beaten out an incumbant. Wr cant ever be any worse so it must improve. TE as well as i like both of our frosh TEs. Ol will be improved as we have four back and experiance is everything. McDonald will improve as well as he will have a better understanding of his players, competition, and will grow as all coaches do. The future is brighter for the O side of the ball.
 
To me, a coach's ability to fit his strategy to his personnel is a positive thing. There's no need to have a lousy offense now so we can have a good one later. I'd love to see Hunt in there with Smith as a running fullback and Morris/McFarlane as an old-fashioned halfback. You've still got two wide-outs and a tight end and can throw to the backs. With the defense not knowing who is going to get the ball on a running play and three very good option, we'd march right down the field. And when we did pass, things would be wide open.

Then next year, if Hunt has either learned to be a good passer or is supplanted by someone who is, we can try something else.

Yep. You can run the same types of plays, just the formation looks different. Jet sweeps become quick pitches, the back gets the ball in the flat or in a wheel rather than the slot receiver.
 
Here's my opinion on the plays...GM is showing the recruits this is what we are going to do. Yes, giving the ball to Smith 30+ times may be the thing to do but that isn't selling recruits and it does look like the HS wr's have noticed. Maybe a step backwards but this also may be those huge steps forward that SU needs after.
 
I agree with a lot of this. There has been frustrating performances, but he is far far away from his job being in jeopardy. People need to stop with that already. There have been a few personnel moves that made me think we are playing a lot for the future as well. The offense not being tailored to this rosters skill set I'm sure has been a well thought out decision. You can tell by the type of kids we are recruiting offensively that this offense will look a lot better with more speed on the outside. Even the running backs we are recruiting are almost all exclusively all purpose backs. I have a feeling he has far more up his sleeve, but we're just too handcuffed this season.
 
Here's my opinion on the plays...GM is showing the recruits this is what we are going to do. Yes, giving the ball to Smith 30+ times may be the thing to do but that isn't selling recruits and it does look like the HS wr's have noticed. Maybe a step backwards but this also may be those huge steps forward that SU needs after.
This is the best explanation I've heard so far. I would lean to adapting to personnel because hopefully we'll have a different QB and WR's next year. But I understand this reasoning. It also gives recruits hope that they might be betetr than the incumbents. It doesn't explain some of the play calling though as I'm not real sure how excited recruits get about teams that only score 16 points against a defense that gave up 55 to Duke and 34 to UNC and 24 to Old Dominion. This was the 2nd fewest points Pitt allowed all year.
 
Here's my opinion on the plays...GM is showing the recruits this is what we are going to do. Yes, giving the ball to Smith 30+ times may be the thing to do but that isn't selling recruits and it does look like the HS wr's have noticed. Maybe a step backwards but this also may be those huge steps forward that SU needs after.
we're showing recruits that we're going to throw screens and never score but hey we'll do it as fast as we can

if he's such a great recruiter, he can convince kids that he'll throw more when they get here. until then, give the ball to your best player
 
we're showing recruits that we're going to throw screens and never score but hey we'll do it as fast as we can

if he's such a great recruiter, he can convince kids that he'll throw more when they get here. until then, give the ball to your best player

I take it you have never tried to recruit for a Dome that has a small crowd, snow and you actually have to go to school/classes. Millhouse, I get what you're saying...I really do. But, you have to sell this and I think GM is doing what he thinks is working and not only that, he's the one talking to the recruits, you and I are not.
 
I take it you have never tried to recruit for a Dome that has a small crowd, snow and you actually have to go to school/classes. Millhouse, I get what you're saying...I really do. But, you have to sell this and I think GM is doing what he thinks is working and not only that, he's the one talking to the recruits, you and I are not.
why did they bench allen then?

he was the guy they wanted to play. if results don't matter and it's only showing what they want to do, why did they put in a more limited guy

they tried to white knuckle to a bowl and it's up in the air

the whole theory that we could be better but we have to show recruits what we want to do is crazy. if this offense is what they want to do, they need to go right now. this offense sucks in every way. but hey WR recruits see that we run a lot with a few more guys than BC does, let the recruiting bonanza begin
 
Here's my opinion on the plays...GM is showing the recruits this is what we are going to do. Yes, giving the ball to Smith 30+ times may be the thing to do but that isn't selling recruits and it does look like the HS wr's have noticed. Maybe a step backwards but this also may be those huge steps forward that SU needs after.

Maybe, but that raises a question about a coach's role.

Is he here to win games or pitch high school kids? Are these two things necessarily mutually exclusive this year?

Good post by Otto, though I'm firm in my desire for the short-term benefit: he should have adapted his style to fit a bunch of kids who have won game at this level. He's the young and unaccomplished one, not the other way around. No reason this couldn't have been a 7-5 or 8-4 team, even with the mediocre quarterback and receivers. The main thing that kept Syracuse from beating Pittsburgh and Penn State was, in my opinion, McDonald's strange play-calling and personnel decisions. Sure, he'll improve. But this season was a wasted opportunity.
 
why did they bench allen then?

he was the guy they wanted to play. if results don't matter and it's only showing what they want to do, why did they put in a more limited guy

they tried to white knuckle to a bowl and it's up in the air

the whole theory that we could be better but we have to show recruits what we want to do is crazy. if this offense is what they want to do, they need to go right now. this offense sucks in every way. but hey WR recruits see that we run a lot with a few more guys than BC does, let the recruiting bonanza begin

I don't know Millhouse...I really don't. Allen took them out of games with his constant picks, SU just doesn't have the talent to make up for those turnovers.
 
I developed a cholesterol spike while reading the OP.

But I agree with the thoughts.

Coach McDonald will bring a lot of talent to the Dome.

And that will make the difference in what we see offensively.
 
Maybe, but that raises a question about a coach's role.

Is he here to win games or pitch high school kids? Are these two things necessarily mutually exclusive this year?

Good post by Otto, though I'm firm in my desire for the short-term benefit: he should have adapted his style to fit a bunch of kids who have won game at this level. He's the young and unaccomplished one, not the other way around. No reason this couldn't have been a 7-5 or 8-4 team, even with the mediocre quarterback and receivers. The main thing that kept Syracuse from beating Pittsburgh and Penn State was, in my opinion, McDonald's strange play-calling and personnel decisions. Sure, he'll improve. But this season was a wasted opportunity.

Both. It's a tough job and these things are never all or nothing. You find a way to balance stuff and do what you know best or what you believe you're doing what is best for the whole program overall now and the future.
 
Both. It's a tough job and these things are never all or nothing. You find a way to balance stuff and do what you know best or what you believe you're doing what is best for the whole program overall now and the future.

This is true.
 
Both. It's a tough job and these things are never all or nothing. You find a way to balance stuff and do what you know best or what you believe you're doing what is best for the whole program overall now and the future.
Great, so give smith the ball all day if it's not all about showing recruits that we're not going to give the ball to smith all day

There's no way they were thinking at all "let's show recruits" saturday with bowl eligibility in sight. McDonald is just not very good at his job on saturday yet.
 
Great, so give smith the ball all day if it's not all about showing recruits that we're not going to give the ball to smith all day

There's no way they were thinking at all "let's show recruits" saturday with bowl eligibility in sight. McDonald is just not very good at his job on saturday yet.

I agree with you regarding the bowls...that is obviously very important. I'm still up in the air about GM and his overall job calling the plays but I don't know what he knows...I'm not there for each practice. Coaches see something we don't every 2 or so hours a day. I just can't fathom that if these guys gave the ball to Jerome 30+ times and thought they could win and didn't do it. I personally don't think SU would win doing that but that's just my opinion.
 
It occurs to me I never commented on the asterisk I put in my post. Here's the thought:

*So on those QB and WR limitations... why wasn't this a bigger concern of the previous staff? I mean, they showed ZERO urgency bringing in wide receivers. I remember when Cornelius was supposedly the only receiver we were going to bring in during his class - we brought in Parker Lewis Can't Lose too, but still.

I mean, it's not like Shafer wasn't looking across the field at the O depth chart and standing in awe of the underclassmen WR talent. I'm irritated to think that the program was caught by surprise. I get it, they wanted to build around the run and stuff, which is fine and dandy but for all of the numbers at the WR position, that cupboard is pretty bare. Same story with the QBs. I honestly think McDonald got here, looked at what we was going to work with, and felt like he was punched in the stomach.
 
It occurs to me I never commented on the asterisk I put in my post. Here's the thought:

*So on those QB and WR limitations... why wasn't this a bigger concern of the previous staff? I mean, they showed ZERO urgency bringing in wide receivers. I remember when Cornelius was supposedly the only receiver we were going to bring in during his class - we brought in Parker Lewis Can't Lose too, but still.

I mean, it's not like Shafer wasn't looking across the field at the O depth chart and standing in awe of the underclassmen WR talent. I'm irritated to think that the program was caught by surprise. I get it, they wanted to build around the run and stuff, which is fine and dandy but for all of the numbers at the WR position, that cupboard is pretty bare. Same story with the QBs. I honestly think McDonald got here, looked at what we was going to work with, and felt like he was punched in the stomach.
who says they were caught by surprise?

you're irritated to think something you have no reason to think

i'm irritated to think that dunkin donuts workers use munchkins as butt plugs before selling them to me. i have no reason to think this but think it i do and it's so irritating
 
Thank you. Saved me the time to write that myself.
ICKWT
It took me forever to figure out what ICKWT meant, because I have limited intelligence, but yes, ICKWT.

Also, my sidebar now has an ad for huevos rancheros, which delights me to no end.
 
who says they were caught by surprise?

you're irritated to think something you have no reason to think

i'm irritated to think that dunkin donuts workers use munchkins as butt plugs before selling them to me. i have no reason to think this but think it i do and it's so irritating
Somebody's got a case of the Mondays.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,310
Messages
4,884,081
Members
5,991
Latest member
Fowler

Online statistics

Members online
21
Guests online
1,084
Total visitors
1,105


...
Top Bottom