PS Writers Picks

[Alsacs]

I just went back and read your post again (#75). Now, if that is you just being nice to Lester, then just go ahead and be honest and stop being nice because none of this makes any sense.

I said "Unless you have faith in Lester being a genius OC" please tell me where I am calling the guy a genius. I never said he was a genius I was being nice and allowing for the miracle chance our O is really really good.

 

[TheCusian]

Please explain to me how that #7 defense did against Washington and Kansas State?

About as good as you vs. Fjoinkay today

 

[K Otto XLIV]

Just trying to personally avoid confusion around your writing on these two issues yesterday and today. I'm not trying to prove anything about anybody. You can make sweeping assertions all day long if you want to, and I enjoy that. But I just want to make sure I understand where you are coming from when they seem to contradict each other.

There is a difference in saying Lester did a good job given the situation vs saying that the O is good. The O would still be mediocre. If someone wants to say that Shafer did a good job in 2010 with the talent given that would be a fair statement. Saying that the 2010 D was good compared to other teams is statistically false.

 

[Fjoinkay]

I said "Unless you have faith in Lester being a genius OC" please tell me where I am calling the guy a genius. I never said he was a genius I was being nice and allowing for the miracle chance our O is really really good.

My interpretation: you said Lester would need to be a genius OC in order for SU to be a top 60 offense this season. I apologize if my interpretation is inaccurate, but I think its a fair interpretation of what you wrote.

I disagree that he needs to be a genius for this offense to be top 60. I'm also not sure that top 60 is necessary to go 6-6. I see more variation in the possibilities I guess, and I can see how SU goes 7-5 without being top 60 on offense. I am excited about this offense, and I won't be shocked if they have a very good season on offense.

 

[Fjoinkay]

There is a difference in saying Lester did a good job given the situation vs saying that the O is good. The O would still be mediocre. If someone wants to say that Shafer did a good job in 2010 with the talent given that would be a fair statement. Saying that the 2010 D was good compared to other teams is statistically false.

The 2010 D was good no matter how you slice it.

 

[Alsacs]

My interpretation: you said Lester would need to be a genius OC in order for SU to be a top 60 offense this season. I apologize if my interpretation is inaccurate, but I think its a fair interpretation of what you wrote.

I disagree that he needs to be a genius for this offense to be top 60. I'm also not sure that top 60 is necessary to go 6-6. I see more variation in the possibilities I guess, and I can see how SU goes 7-5 without being top 60 on offense. I am excited about this offense, and I won't be shocked if they have a very good season on offense.

Thank you for understanding that first sentence is NOT what I was saying at all. To the second paragraph I do think he needs to be really good for us to have a top 60 offense. We need to score 12 PPG more that is a lot.

 

[Alsacs]

The 2010 D was good no matter how you slice it.

Of course to the 2010 D was good it just wasn't a top 10 D in the country. If we faced good offense during the season the numbers go down.
In 2013 we didn't allow a 100 yd runner does that mean our rush D was elite? I would say no because Georgia Tech ran the ball like crazy on us and had like 4 RBs rack up 60-90 yards each and then we played FSU they kicked our butt so much that none of their guys played enough to get 100 rush yards. However the stats say we never allowed a 100 yard rusher that whole year. Stats can be manipulated. The 2012 offense was better than its stat ranking.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Thank you for understanding that first sentence is NOT what I was saying at all. To the second paragraph I do think he needs to be really good for us to have a top 60 offense. We need to score 12 PPG more that is a lot.

I respectfully have to say that my interpretation is that you wrote what you wrote: that SU needed to have a top 60 offense in order to go 6-6, and that you don't believe that will happen, because if it did happen, Lester would need to be a genius OC. You predicted 5-7 because you think SU's offense this season won't be good.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

When I said .commer I was referring to those 4 assclowns who only right stuff that will give them the hits their advertisers want. They are writing there stories to fit their anti agendas towards Syracuse sports in general.

These guys probably sit around all day eating their stale donuts figuring how they can rile up the natives to generate their clicks and people here will always do what they want us to do...copy and paste their junk reporting.

I have said this in the past,players parents say we have the worst local reporters who cover home teams in pro or college.I am sure their more than a few who are SU. graduates who don't want to be thought of as homers...

Tell us how you really feel.

 

[Alsacs]

I respectfully have to say that my interpretation is that you wrote what you wrote: that SU needed to have a top 60 offense in order to go 6-6, and that you don't believe that will happen, because if it did happen, Lester would need to be a genius OC. You predicted 5-7 because you think SU's offense this season won't be good.

Okay well this wrong and this you taking my words the way you want too. I am not going to tell you how to think but that is not what I said in context to my point. I will avoid using any word like genius in the future. I don't think Lester is a genius after we saw him calling plays in the 2nd half last year.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Of course to the 2010 D was good it just wasn't a top 10 D in the country. If we faced good offense during the season the numbers go down.
In 2013 we didn't allow a 100 yd runner does that mean our rush D was elite? I would say no because Georgia Tech ran the ball like crazy on us and had like 4 RBs rack up 60-90 yards each and then we played FSU they kicked our butt so much that none of their guys played enough to get 100 rush yards. However the stats say we never allowed a 100 yard rusher that whole year. Stats can be manipulated. The 2012 offense was better than its stat ranking.

You make interesting points here, but in my opinion, its all slippery slope. This just gets to the nature of every college football stat whether it is used across a conference or across the nation. If you want to break it down this way with the Cuse, please do it with every stat. You might as well go ahead and re-rank all of the national stats based on each team's sched, when they played the opponents, who the opponents' opponents were, etc...

 

[Fjoinkay]

Okay well this wrong and this you taking my words the way you want too. I am not going to tell you how to think but that is not what I said in context to my point. I will avoid using any word like genius in the future. I don't think Lester is a genius after we saw him calling plays in the 2nd half last year.

Good, write what you believe. I have no problem with the word genius. Please use any word you want to use.

 

[TheCusian]

Of course to the 2010 D was good it just wasn't a top 10 D in the country. If we faced good offense during the season the numbers go down.
In 2013 we didn't allow a 100 yd runner does that mean our rush D was elite? I would say no because Georgia Tech ran the ball like crazy on us and had like 4 RBs rack up 60-90 yards each and then we played FSU they kicked our butt so much that none of their guys played enough to get 100 rush yards. However the stats say we never allowed a 100 yard rusher that whole year. Stats can be manipulated. The 2012 offense was better than its stat ranking.

No, not elite. But good. Despite random games where we didn't play well - we shut down a Heisman finalist (who got hurt). I'm all for digging down deep into stats - but sometimes you're just peeling apart layers of an onion.

How good was the D in 2010, circle one: Blah / Meh / Uh / Okay / Semi-Decent / Decent / Kinda' Good / Good / Better than Good / Great / Not Elite, But Right There / Elite / Top 5 in Cuse History

Point is - it's fun to argue over this stuff - but eventually we're splitting hairs. There are a lot of routes to a winning season. I'd take any of them.

 

[Scooch]

Since I love the board, I'll let you know ahead of time that Damien Rhodes predicts 7-5 on the show (with the extreme temptation to pick 8-4) while Danny Conley says 5-7.

Oh boy, here comes the Positivity Brigade to tar-and-feather that no-goodnik purveyor of negativity, Dan Conley.

 

[TheCusian]

Oh boy, here comes the Positivity Brigade to tar-and-feather that no-goodnik purveyor of negativity, Dan Conley.

<strawman alert><strawman alert>

Lots of people think 5-7 is in the range. If had said 0-13 without explanation? Yeah.

 

[K Otto XLIV]

The 2010 D was good no matter how you slice it.

The in conference stats and individual games say otherwise. PPG we were 5th in conference. We didn't lead the Big East in a single D category. The only one where we came in 2nd was YPP. All the other stats were between 3rd and 5th, except TFL where we were tied for last. As to the games:

Good job vs Akron, Maine, USF, WV, Cincy
Poor job vs Washington, Pitt, K St
Disappointing job vs Colgate, Louisville, Rutgers, UConn, BC

Given the stats and the individual games IMO it was a decent D but not a good one. If someone feels otherwise that is fine.

 

[Fjoinkay]

The in conference stats and individual games say otherwise. PPG we were 5th in conference. We didn't lead the Big East in a single D category. The only one where we came in 2nd was YPP. All the other stats were between 3rd and 5th, except TFL where we were tied for last. As to the games:

Good job vs Akron, Maine, USF, WV, Cincy
Poor job vs Washington, Pitt, K St
Disappointing job vs Colgate, Louisville, Rutgers, UConn, BC

Given the stats and the individual games IMO it was a decent D but not a good one. If someone feels otherwise that is fine.

I respectfully disagree. The 2010 D was good.

 

[tep624]

I think 6 wins is a realistic possibility. Anything more than that is a stretch, a stretch I'd be very happy about but a stretch nonetheless. We're healthier heading out of camp and deeper at O line than we were a year ago. We've got guys on the 2 deep to a man that can all contribute. That alone could have turned a couple of L's into W's last season. We've got some young players that really look good. On the other hand, we're very young and we have a new offense, so we're going to have growing pains regardless. I envision a season similar to 2013, up and down, and then gelling at the end (hopefully).

 

[tep624]

I respectfully disagree. The 2010 D was good.

Stats don't tell how long the D was on the field due to the Offense not being able to do anything. I remember that happening quite a bit in 2010, specifically the UCONN and BC games, where we couldn't do a thing on offense. We also didn't have the type of depth where you could rotate guys in and out and keep at the same level of talent/experience on the field.

 

[K Otto XLIV]

Stats don't tell how long the D was on the field due to the Offense not being able to do anything. I remember that happening quite a bit in 2010, specifically the UCONN and BC games, where we couldn't do a thing on offense. We also didn't have the type of depth where you could rotate guys in and out and keep at the same level of talent/experience on the field.

Actually it was the other way around. TOP in Big East play SU was 4th. Those last 4 games the D limped home. It had nothing left in the tank. They couldn't get off the field as each of those teams ran the ball down our throat. Depth was certainly an issue.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Stats don't tell how long the D was on the field due to the Offense not being able to do anything. I remember that happening quite a bit in 2010, specifically the UCONN and BC games, where we couldn't do a thing on offense. We also didn't have the type of depth where you could rotate guys in and out and keep at the same level of talent/experience on the field.

Yep, I agree. That was discussed yesterday, so that's why I'm being so concise today.

The 2010 D was #7 nationally. Now, I always question national stats and find them of little value. But here, guys who quote national stats every day and use them as the basis for all sorts of conclusions, suddenly dig deep to scrutinize the 2010 D and deconstruct the #7 rated SU defense. Gotta love it! I don't need stats for the 2010 D because I watched it, and it was good. I hope the 2015 iteration plays like 2010!

 

[Fjoinkay]

Actually it was the other way around. TOP in Big East play SU was 4th. Those last 4 games the D limped home. It had nothing left in the tank. They couldn't get off the field as each of those teams ran the ball down our throat. Depth was certainly an issue.

That D was good.

 

[Scooch]

<strawman alert><strawman alert>

Lots of people think 5-7 is in the range. If had said 0-13 without explanation? Yeah.

Are you calling retro44 a strawman?

I'm pretty sure he'll fight you over that.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Good, write what you believe. I have no problem with the word genius. Please use any word you want to use.

i brought the word genius into this thread because basically he will have to be some kind of genius to get the results the unsilent minority are 'hoping' for.

after that, you guys have all gone a little bit nuts.

 

[Fjoinkay]

i brought the word genius into this thread because basically he will have to be some kind of genius to get the results the unsilent minority are 'hoping' for.

after that, you guys have all gone a little bit nuts.

I'm sorry, but this is all Greek to me. I'm hoping SU goes bowling, and if they win 7 games out of 12 I won't be shocked.