12 yrs of ypg compared to this year's median offense

[Millhouse]

400 is the middle of the pack this year. 380 was middle of the pack at the end of last year

when can we hope to be average? we didn't hire marrone just to improve toughness, right?

 

[qdawgg]

not that our offense is going to be much better by the end of the year but it's pretty silly to compare any offense over the first 4 games in college football.

 

[Millhouse]

not that our offense is going to be much better by the end of the year but it's pretty silly to compare any offense over the first 4 games in college football.

that's what everyone told me last year. too bad the offense got even worse

 

[IthacaBarrel]

These stats are just so depressing but when you run the same guys out there with the same system for 2-3 years, what results does one expect.. That is insanity. I know I know I get it, it's all about the reps. Overall, I really like Marrone but he needs to recruit better and he also needs to find an offensive system that works against average college defenses, it can't be that hard, it really can't... As I have said, I wish he would just take over as the OC, put it all on him, no gray area, no OC Jr, like Hackett just take it over and sink or swim with it, MAKE THE CALLS DOUG.

The one thing I accept 100% is Nassib is 10 times better than any of our qb's right now. That I believe to be fact

 

[Scooch]

Look at 2001, and then look at the 3 years of Marrone (ignore the 4 years of GumpRob, they never happened, OK, just like Rocky V, they NEVER HAPPENED!)...

We were able to thrive in '01 with minimal offensive production because we had a defense that not only was good at stopping opponents, but was a turnover creating machine. I think Freeney had double-digit forced fumbles that year, along with double-digit sacks. THAT was the kind of team where you can play conservative on O (hand to Mugro, tell RJ not to turn the ball over, later, rinse, repeat) and let the D give you short fields.

In other words, I don't know what Marrone sees as the future of our offense (kinda weird that we're in year 3 and I have to say that) but it can't be some dink-and-dunk, 19 PPG crap.

 

[qdawgg]

At this point I have no idea what the offense is supposed to look like. Luckily are opponents don't either but it really doesn't matter. Kind of depressing.

 

[Millhouse]

in Marrone's 23 games against AQ schools, we have 4 of them where we've gained more than 375 yards.

375 isn't much at all and we do it a sixth of the time!

if you averaged 375 yards of offense against AQ (which would probably require 3 times as many 375+ yard games) that puts you at a mere 47th

we've only surpassed 325 yards 8 times in those 23 games.

our median offensive output is 295 yards per game

avg is 311

 

[omniorange]

Look at 2001, and then look at the 3 years of Marrone (ignore the 4 years of GumpRob, they never happened, OK, just like Rocky V, they NEVER HAPPENED!)...

We were able to thrive in '01 with minimal offensive production because we had a defense that not only was good at stopping opponents, but was a turnover creating machine. I think Freeney had double-digit forced fumbles that year, along with double-digit sacks. THAT was the kind of team where you can play conservative on O (hand to Mugro, tell RJ not to turn the ball over, later, rinse, repeat) and let the D give you short fields.

In other words, I don't know what Marrone sees as the future of our offense (kinda weird that we're in year 3 and I have to say that) but it can't be some dink-and-dunk, 19 PPG crap.

I thought we were suppose to be heading toward a New Orleans Saints style offense. At least that was what we were led to believe. Now there's an offense that would fill the Dome.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Scooch]

I thought we were suppose to be heading toward a New Orleans Saints style offense. At least that was what we were led to believe. Now there's an offense that would fill the Dome.

Cheers,
Neil

So we're hoping to recruit a 27 year old Drew Brees? Awesome.

 

[Millhouse]

I thought we were suppose to be heading toward a New Orleans Saints style offense. At least that was what we were led to believe. Now there's an offense that would fill the Dome.

Cheers,
Neil

no one can tell us what the saints offense actually is. it's hard enough to define the west coast offense in original form, which payton then tweaked. they actually do throw the kitchen sink at people. a zillion formations and a zillion packages (be still chip's heart). which is great when you have all the time in the world to practice and great talent everywhere.

meatheads here think everything is important but playcalling but that's a big part of payton's success too

 

[omniorange]

So we're hoping to recruit a 27 year old Drew Brees? Awesome.

I'll settle for any QB and any offensive system that can put 28-35 points on the board consistently.

Cheers,
Neil

 

[Chip]

not that our offense is going to be much better by the end of the year but it's pretty silly to compare any offense over the first 4 games in college football.

Actually that's the best time, your #'s should be inflated from playing the cupcake portion. Granted we had USC mixed in there (who gave up 7,000 yards to Arizona State for whatever that's worth), and Rutgers (who gave up over 400 yards to the 2 FBS opponents on their schedule yet suddenly they're awesome and to be feared). But still... Toledo and Rhode Island should be inflating us, Tulane even further (will it? doubtful), and then the conference schedule brings us back to earth.

 

[qdawgg]

Actually that's the best time, your #'s should be inflated from playing the cupcake portion. Granted we had USC mixed in there (who gave up 7,000 yards to Arizona State for whatever that's worth), and Rutgers (who gave up over 400 yards to the 2 FBS opponents on their schedule yet suddenly they're awesome and to be feared). But still... Toledo and Rhode Island should be inflating us, Tulane even further (will it? doubtful), and then the conference schedule brings us back to earth.

I get that but we obviously have a lack of talent at some important spots, so when we play Toledo and RI we're playing to win comfortably. When the top 25 teams play schools like that it's like a practice game against the walk-ons. The question is, do those numbers decrease as the season progresses as a result of a tougher overall schedule. If it does, I'm assuming it does but I could be completely wrong, then judging the first 4 games of a season only shows you so much.

 

[Scooch]

I get that but we obviously have a lack of talent at some important spots, so when we play Toledo and RI we're playing to win comfortably. When the top 25 teams play schools like that it's like a practice game against the walk-ons. The question is, do those numbers decrease as the season progresses as a result of a tougher overall schedule. If it does, I'm assuming it does but I could be completely wrong, then judging the first 4 games of a season only shows you so much.

This is a very convoluted way of saying that our offense sucks moose balls. "Playing to win comfortably" against URI?

 

[billsin01]

Yeah, I was going to post the same thing about the 375 yards. Is it it too early to have a referendum on Marrone and/or Hackett as the offensive leaders of this team.

I think the thing that is the most interesting here is how the defense has been the exact opposite (generally) for the three years. Shaffer came in and immediately turned the defense around and, while they haven't been pretty this year, Saturday marked the fifth straight game where they've either played well enough to win and/or hang in the game (USC, URI , RU) or at least made some big plays late to help get the W (Wake, Toledo).

Now the scoring offense/total offense numbers aren't great, but for a defense that lost a lot of key players and has absorbed injuries to some of it's best players, they have been pretty solid.

Meanwhile, we are on Year 3 of whatever the hell system we're running and even with toledo and URI ideally inflating our totals (not fellating, right?) we still have no idea what this staff actually wants to do. The only things we're sure of, in fact, are that this isn't anywhere close to what the finished product should look like, we are likely at least slightly deficient in terms of talent, we are sure we don't have a concrete direction AND arguable the worst unit on the group (offensive line) is supposedly our coaches' specialty. And, oh yeah, many NFL coaches have struggled to put together great offenses in college. That makes me nervous too.

 

[Dick_in_MI]

400 is the middle of the pack this year. 380 was middle of the pack at the end of last year

when can we hope to be average? we didn't hire marrone just to improve toughness, right?

Pretty sobering stats. One thing that stands out is that our yards per game plummeted when P left. Of course, we stopped giving up giant What scores as well...

Clearly, Marrone's offensive output is a big step up from GRob's but he hasn't brought us back to what we were able to do offensively in P's doldrum years. That was a bit of a surprise when I saw this graph.

 

[kingtidge]

We need better depth... and recruiting...

I think it's evident that we lack some real playmakers and quality depth at any number of positions.

Last year's offense was a conservative band-aid shell of its intended self due to all the injuries by mid season... we only got a full taste of the full offensive scheme in the bowl game.

This year, while depth is slightly improved in some areas, we got hit with an even worse rash of injuries to key players fairly quickly into this season.

And it's clear that Marrone and Hackett have serious reservations about certain schemes and portions of the playbook in our current state.

We'll continue to see mediocre numbers until we:

1. Get a few big playmakers.
2. Have adequate depth at most positions (depth that is capable of coming in and execute effectively in the schemes.)
3 Have players that can actually allow us to execute rudimentary offensive schemes (like QB sneak & short yardage packages.)

Long story short, we need better players and more of them to get those numbers up consistently.

And while I agree, it's good to see the numbers move up and stabilize at a higher level from the atrocious GROB era, we aren't where we need to be yet and getting players in and in a stable, consistent system for 3-4 years takes exactly that.

 

[billsin01]

We need better depth... and recruiting...

I think it's evident that we lack some real playmakers and quality depth at any number of positions.

Last year's offense was a conservative band-aid shell of its intended self due to all the injuries by mid season... we only got a full taste of the full offensive scheme in the bowl game.

I can see what you're saying but I have two counterpoints:

1) I really don't think you can simply take a bowl game and say "That's what our offense is when healthy!" Bowl games tend to be wide open affairs and are just this side of hoops all-star games in terms of actually giving you an accurate portrait of any part of your team (the defense, for example, which got shredded in that game has generally been this program's strength the last 2+ years).

2) I get what you're saying about recruiting because subbing Sanu for Chew alone probably adds a few points and 20 or so yards (minimum) to our offensive output. But that said, I think one HUGE thing missing is any sort of identity. What the do we actually want to do? Do we do anything well? I think at some point they have to decide what they want to do and start implementing it. Otherwise you're stuck in perpetual treading mode. I really think identity is one of the most underrated aspects of football. Knowing what you want to do and what you can do and truly believing in it, as corny as it sounds, is important. It's why some guys who may be total monkeys in every day life (schiano, RichRod, brian kelly) actually make for good football coaches in some weird way. (Note: I'm not saying schiano is a great football coach but he's become a D1 head coach despite, by all appearances, being a slimy turd.)

 

[SoBristol]

I don't think the issue on offense is depth or injuries. Marrone is playing his top 5 OL -- hasn't look to depth, hasn't tried to mix up any of the slots. This group was put in place in early Spring, hasn't changed. The guys who are banged up (Hickey, for example, or Allport) would be sitting the bench even if healthy.
We have depth at WR (missing Sales, of course, but we have numbers) -- the front line guys (Chew, Lemon, Graham) are pretty good, but there is no real number one in the mold of Mike Williams. We have 3 TEs (good depth) but you'd like to see another playmaker at that spot. Bailey has been good (apart from fumbles) and certainly doing his share with two 100 yd games.
Overall, you have Sales out, and Gulley out -- that's it.
The real issue is recruiting. Marrone is relying on GROB's recruits (Nassib, Bailey, Provo, Lemon & Chew) because he hasn't brought in any skill guys good enough to have impact as frosh or sophs. He has gone the JUCO route to add toughness, but not for skill guys. Until this changes (bringing in some serious talent at skill positions), the offense is going to struggle. Whether West Coast or New Orleans or whatever, you need some skill guys who can make people miss or run through people or get open on WR routes.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

2) I get what you're saying about recruiting because subbing Sanu for Chew alone probably adds a few points and 20 or so yards (minimum) to our offensive output. But that said, I think one HUGE thing missing is any sort of identity. What the do we actually want to do? Do we do anything well? I think at some point they have to decide what they want to do and start implementing it. Otherwise you're stuck in perpetual treading mode. I really think identity is one of the most underrated aspects of football. Knowing what you want to do and what you can do and truly believing in it, as corny as it sounds, is important. It's why some guys who may be total monkeys in every day life (schiano, RichRod, brian kelly) actually make for good football coaches in some weird way. (Note: I'm not saying schiano is a great football coach but he's become a D1 head coach despite, by all appearances, being a slimy turd.)

I thought we were developing that when Nassib is throwing 39 passes. Now I guess that's not who we are.

 

[Scooch]

The real issue is recruiting. Marrone is relying on GROB's recruits (Nassib, Bailey, Provo, Lemon & Chew) because he hasn't brought in any skill guys good enough to have impact as frosh or sophs. He has gone the JUCO route to add toughness, but not for skill guys. Until this changes (bringing in some serious talent at skill positions), the offense is going to struggle. Whether West Coast or New Orleans or whatever, you need some skill guys who can make people miss or run through people or get open on WR routes.

I'm not a recruiting guy by any means, but this is what concerns me. 3 years in (2 full to be fair to Marrone) and yet we don't have one RB or WR who's contributing in any significant way. And those are the two positions where someone can most make an immediate impact if they have the raw talent.

Discouraging, to say the least.

 

[qdawgg]

I'm not a recruiting guy by any means, but this is what concerns me. 3 years in (2 full to be fair to Marrone) and yet we don't have one RB or WR who's contributing in any significant way. And those are the two positions where someone can most make an immediate impact if they have the raw talent.

Discouraging, to say the least.

My math might be wrong but I think after next year this should be a little more clear. A lot of the offensive guys that Marrone has brought in it was obvious that they were nowhere near the size necessary to play right out of the gate. Typically you would say, ok well after the first season we should be able to see something from some of these guys. I think for the guys that were recruited, both physically and understanding of the game we might not know what they bring to the table until after their redshirt freshman year - so essentially starting their 3rd year in the program. That would put us at seeing who these guys are and if they bring anything to the table next year - if my math is right. I'm not counting the 1st year of recruiting only b/c there was limited time to recruit but the year after I believe we brought in 25 or so. So, based on what I wrote those guys should be seeing the field next year only because of how much development they needed.

 

[billsin01]

I'm not a recruiting guy by any means, but this is what concerns me. 3 years in (2 full to be fair to Marrone) and yet we don't have one RB or WR who's contributing in any significant way. And those are the two positions where someone can most make an immediate impact if they have the raw talent.

Discouraging, to say the least.

It's not a great sign, but I'm of the belief that very few true freshmen really make a huge impact on a team with any legit vets (i.e. it's going to be tough for anyone to unseat proven players like provo, nassib, bailey, carter). So if you look at it that way (and I know that's not foolproof), we're really only talking about one full class and that was a pretty defense-heavy group with some players that appear to be promising to some degree (gulley, wales, kinder) and others who've dealt with their share of injuries (Gulley, Smith, Miller).

I think recruiting could be better but I'm not quite as down on it as most, I guess.

 

[kingtidge]

I don't think the issue on offense is depth or injuries. Marrone is playing his top 5 OL -- hasn't look to depth, hasn't tried to mix up any of the slots. This group was put in place in early Spring, hasn't changed. The guys who are banged up (Hickey, for example, or Allport) would be sitting the bench even if healthy.
We have depth at WR (missing Sales, of course, but we have numbers) -- the front line guys (Chew, Lemon, Graham) are pretty good, but there is no real number one in the mold of Mike Williams. We have 3 TEs (good depth) but you'd like to see another playmaker at that spot. Bailey has been good (apart from fumbles) and certainly doing his share with two 100 yd games.
Overall, you have Sales out, and Gulley out -- that's it.
The real issue is recruiting. Marrone is relying on GROB's recruits (Nassib, Bailey, Provo, Lemon & Chew) because he hasn't brought in any skill guys good enough to have impact as frosh or sophs. He has gone the JUCO route to add toughness, but not for skill guys. Until this changes (bringing in some serious talent at skill positions), the offense is going to struggle. Whether West Coast or New Orleans or whatever, you need some skill guys who can make people miss or run through people or get open on WR routes.

Good points... your right that injuries have had much less an impact on the O than the D this year.

And we really need some playmakers on O to make the O more dynamic - A Williams or Page would make our run game that much more effective by by forcing double teams and keeping the box stack at bay and open the game up for other solid options like Lemon, Chew and Provo.

The last three being very good, complimentary players who can make plays at times, but none of which are physical freak playmakers.

I too, am concerned that we have yet to see those types of recruits landed as yet by Marrone... I think we are all hoping that we'll get a 3-star diamond in the rough that is such an explosive player and simply under the radar or puts it all together quickly after a freshman season etc. - that happens... but you can't really count on that. Cater and Spruill both fit that bill on D... Dyshawn Davis may be another in the making as well.

Hopefully we can find such players on O because you don't come out of the hole we were in and start landing bunches of 4 or 5 star players, that's for sure.

 

[Chip]

I'm not a recruiting guy by any means, but this is what concerns me. 3 years in (2 full to be fair to Marrone) and yet we don't have one RB or WR who's contributing in any significant way. And those are the two positions where someone can most make an immediate impact if they have the raw talent.

Discouraging, to say the least.

We clearly have the program at least back to where we were pre GRob, sucked that we had to drop as far as we did, but probably telling that it didn't take Marrone long to get back to neutral. So if nothing else, we're not BCS laughingstock material, we're just kinda there. No one really notices for a good or bad reason.

Having said that, our defense clearly has it's identity, it's up and running, we're able to plug in new guys and get them up to speed. Sure, there were bumps early, and that game against WVU will probably be very sobering. But we all can see what we have and get excited that these guys can make some plays (seriously, how good will our LB corps be next year and the year after?).

Maybe we need to do that more on offense? By the looks of it, we're working the guys in, but we're doing it slowly. Maybe they need more run. The senior RB can't hold the football, the senior (jr. eligibility) QB just threw it to the other team 3 times. The senior WR dropped a big 3rd down pass. Hopefully some of those are anomolies (unfortunately not in Bailey's case), but if we think Saturday is more of a trend than a blip, there wouldn't seem to be much point in playing it safe.

I know that's not going to happen, and I understand why it shouldn't happen, but I do look forward to seeing a lot more of West, Foster, Kobena, etc. Wish Gulley too, but oh well. Maybe even give Kinder some run. Give him a series each game, TOB style.