2013 Schedule

[cusestudent]

Im not against a tough schedule but Clemson, FSU, PSU, Miami, and Va Tech plus NW in the same year is ludicrous.

Are you really crying over a "tough schedule"? Sure it's going to be more difficult than the Big East, but that's what you get if you want to play football with the big boys. My lord, that schedule is weaker than what PAC 12, B1G, and SEC teams see EVERY year

 

[JeremyCuse]

Are you really crying over a "tough schedule"? Sure it's going to be more difficult than the Big East, but that's what you get if you want to play football with the big boys. My lord, that schedule is weaker than what PAC 12, B1G, and SEC teams see EVERY year

Give me a break no one is crying about a tough schedule, christ. The reality is Syracuse is a rebuilding Big East team it needs wins and bowl appearances to get back on the national level and back to the 90's when it could compete with that type of schedule. Right now a schedule of Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech with a Penn State and a NW in the OOC portion in the same year would be a disaster. We cant beat Uconn, Pitt or Lville and you think because we upgrade the schedule to "the big boys" suddenly were going to win? No one is saying we should schedule like Rutgers but if we know going into the season the conference schedule is loaded we should schedule our out of conference games accordingly. Marrone needs wins, recruits dont give two shits if our OCC is #1 in the nation if we are under .500 again. Id rather play a tough but manageable schedule and celebrate with a bowl appearance and a top 30 recruiting class then celebrate in some early december thread here on the board where people are patting themselves on the back because we played the toughest schedule overlooking the fact were sitting home again and having to overcome a huge amount of negative recruiting.

 

[cusestudent]

Give me a break no one is crying about a tough schedule, christ. The reality is Syracuse is a rebuilding Big East team it needs wins and bowl appearances to get back on the national level and back to the 90's when it could compete with that type of schedule. Right now a schedule of Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech with a Penn State and a NW in the OOC portion in the same year would be a disaster. We cant beat Uconn, Pitt or Lville and you think because we upgrade the schedule to "the big boys" suddenly were going to win? No one is saying we should schedule like Rutgers but if we know going into the season the conference schedule is loaded we should schedule our out of conference games accordingly. Marrone needs wins, recruits dont give two shits if our OCC is #1 in the nation if we are under .500 again. Id rather play a tough but manageable schedule and celebrate with a bowl appearance and a top 30 recruiting class then celebrate in some early december thread here on the board where people are patting themselves on the back because we played the toughest schedule overlooking the fact were sitting home again and having to overcome a huge amount of negative recruiting.

So in other words schedule like Rutgers

 

[Frozen]

So in other words schedule like Rutgers

I think there's a happy medium between playing a Rutgers schedule and playing an NFC East schedule.

 

[rrlbees]

So in other words schedule like Rutgers

It would be 10x rutgers. All Jeremy and others said issue getting all the good ACC teams in the same year would be tough. I don't think the ACC would do that anyways. We wont get FSU, Miami, VaTech and Clemson all in the same year.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Crusty]

Yes

 

[cusestudent]

It would be 10x rutgers. All Jeremy and others said issue getting all the good ACC teams in the same year would be tough. I don't think the ACC would do that anyways. We wont get FSU, Miami, VaTech and Clemson all in the same year.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

My point is that even with all the big boys on the schedule it is not like we are playing in the SEC here. I agree that there is a happy medium, but Northwestern is a team that is being deemed too tough in the OOC with the ACC schedule. If we can't beat Northwestern going forward then we have some issues.2

 

[Crusty]

Give me a break no one is crying about a tough schedule, christ. The reality is Syracuse is a rebuilding Big East team it needs wins and bowl appearances to get back on the national level and back to the 90's when it could compete with that type of schedule. Right now a schedule of Clemson, FSU, Miami, Va Tech with a Penn State and a NW in the OOC portion in the same year would be a disaster. We cant beat Uconn, Pitt or Lville and you think because we upgrade the schedule to "the big boys" suddenly were going to win? No one is saying we should schedule like Rutgers but if we know going into the season the conference schedule is loaded we should schedule our out of conference games accordingly. Marrone needs wins, recruits dont give two shits if our OCC is #1 in the nation if we are under .500 again. Id rather play a tough but manageable schedule and celebrate with a bowl appearance and a top 30 recruiting class then celebrate in some early december thread here on the board where people are patting themselves on the back because we played the toughest schedule overlooking the fact were sitting home again and having to overcome a huge amount of negative recruiting.

Respectfully, I think you are very wrong about this. We will get better by playing a higher caliber of competition - we won't by waiting until tomorrow for, if we do, tomorrow will never come. I think our 2012 schedule is just what the doctor ordered and I welcome whatever the ACC puts on our doorstep. As far as recruiting is concerned the ACC is already paying dividends for us and many of the kids have mentioned the ACC as a factor. There really are no teams in the ACC to fear - this is the life we choose! Besides, I think we will be competitive by 2013, if not this year. I understand your concerns but I think the positives far outweigh the negatives.

 

[All4SU]

Five games against Atlantic, and two against Coastal seems excessive.

 

[All4SU]

My guess is they will group the crossover games as follows:

A) VT & Duke
B) Miami & UVA
C) GT & UNC

Just guessing. But there is no way they would group VT and Miami together.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Respectfully, I think you are very wrong about this. We will get better by playing a higher caliber of competition - we won't by waiting until tomorrow for, if we do, tomorrow will never come. I think our 2012 schedule is just what the doctor ordered and I welcome whatever the ACC puts on our doorstep. As far as recruiting is concerned the ACC is already paying dividends for us and many of the kids have mentioned the ACC as a factor. There really are no teams in the ACC to fear - this is the life we choose! Besides, I think we will be competitive by 2013, if not this year. I understand your concerns but I think the positives far outweigh the negatives.

How has that worked for Duke? Vandy? Oregon State? Indiana? No ones talking about fearing anybody or trying to duck anyone like Rutgers but there is a medium ground. Just because you play top echelon teams doesnt mean your team somehow gets better, if that was the case Indiana and Duke wouldnt be doormats year after year. Recruiting is going great but if the team goes 4-8 watch how fast the class will be in jeopardy due to negative recruiting.

 

[JeremyCuse]

My point is that even with all the big boys on the schedule it is not like we are playing in the SEC here. I agree that there is a happy medium, but Northwestern is a team that is being deemed too tough in the OOC with the ACC schedule. If we can't beat Northwestern going forward then we have some issues.2

NW isnt being deemed to tough at all. If we have a loaded ACC schedule then Penn State and NW in the same OOC year isnt a smart move. Newsflash NW is on our level and has beaten us recently, you act like were talking about Toledo.

 

[JeremyCuse]

It would be 10x rutgers. All Jeremy and others said issue getting all the good ACC teams in the same year would be tough. I don't think the ACC would do that anyways. We wont get FSU, Miami, VaTech and Clemson all in the same year.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Thanks, I am glad someone besides me gets it. Our schedule would still be light years ahead of Rutgers I dont think some people on this board realize you have to schedule some wins each year.

 

[Crusty]

How has that worked for Duke? Vandy? Oregon State? Indiana? No ones talking about fearing anybody or trying to duck anyone like Rutgers but there is a medium ground. Just because you play top echelon teams doesnt mean your team somehow gets better, if that was the case Indiana and Duke wouldnt be doormats year after year. Recruiting is going great but if the team goes 4-8 watch how fast the class will be in jeopardy due to negative recruiting.

I don’t buy your examples. Indiana, Vandy and Duke have never put any money or energy into their football programs. All three have lifetime losing records over 124, 121 and 66 years, respectively. None of them has really tried to improve their programs. While the Oregon State Beavers also have a lifetime losing record (503-547-49), they have gone 64-59 (.566 winning percentage) under Mike Riley, their current coach. They have only had tough times the last two seasons. So, I’m not sure why they belong in this discussion.

We are not Indiana, Vandy or Duke (or even Oregon State for that matter). We have a long winning tradition and are putting the money and energy into the football program. We have to step up the schedule and ramp up the competition if we want to improve. We’re playing catchup.

Under your logic that losing records kill recruiting, we should not be having the improvement in recruiting we are enjoying, especially this year. You also have to explain the great class Vandy is having (#17 or 34 in the nation). I expect a 4-8 to 6-6 type season and I don't think that will change a thing.

Yes, winning is better than losing – but only if the competition is high caliber. I would rather play USC on national TV and lose, than play a Stony Brook and win. Beating Stony Brook helps us do what? Impress recruits?

Everybody is going to be limited to a couple of record-padding games and the rest will be competitive. Our schedule will not be any worse than anyone else. Last year Clemson played two patsies and the rest were ACC or SEC opponents. FSU played two patsies and then ACC, Oklahoma and Miami. We are in with the big boys now and we need to adjust our thinking. After all, we are going to have to beat these folks to get anywhere anyway.

Time to say bring it on.

 

[JeremyCuse]

I don’t buy your examples. Indiana, Vandy and Duke have never put any money or energy into their football programs. All three have lifetime losing records over 124, 121 and 66 years, respectively. None of them has really tried to improve their programs. While the Oregon State Beavers also have a lifetime losing record (503-547-49), they have gone 64-59 (.566 winning percentage) under Mike Riley, their current coach. They have only had tough times the last two seasons. So, I’m not sure why they belong in this discussion.

We are not Indiana, Vandy or Duke (or even Oregon State for that matter). We have a long winning tradition and are putting the money and energy into the football program. We have to step up the schedule and ramp up the competition if we want to improve. We’re playing catchup.

Under your logic that losing records kill recruiting, we should not be having the improvement in recruiting we are enjoying, especially this year. You also have to explain the great class Vandy is having (#17 or 34 in the nation). I expect a 4-8 to 6-6 type season and I don't think that will change a thing.

Yes, winning is better than losing – but only if the competition is high caliber. I would rather play USC on national TV and lose, than play a Stony Brook and win. Beating Stony Brook helps us do what? Impress recruits?

Everybody is going to be limited to a couple of record-padding games and the rest will be competitive. Our schedule will not be any worse than anyone else. Last year Clemson played two patsies and the rest were ACC or SEC opponents. FSU played two patsies and then ACC, Oklahoma and Miami. We are in with the big boys now and we need to adjust our thinking. After all, we are going to have to beat these folks to get anywhere anyway.

Time to say bring it on.

Substitute Washington State for Oregon State, either way you get the picture. Also you may want to double check that statement those schools havent put any money into football you maybe surprised with the results. I know you pointed out how my logic seemed off but I have to again point out that what your saying isnt adding up. You state we have to "step up the schedule and ramp up the competition if we want to improve". How exactly is playing a tougher schedule going to improve the program overall less the win loss record? Also how are we playing catchup? We play a tough OOC every year plus WVU in Conference, what are we catching up to?

Your example of CLemson and FSU last year basically made my point. You stated they played a couple patsies and then one tough OOC. Thats exactly what we should be lookign at. One top level BCS team, one MAC level and one D1AA for our OOC schedule. Losing records do lose recruiting how many teams have losing records 3 out of 4 years and are pulling in top 30 recruiting classes? Marrone has proven to be a pretty dame good recruiter but if the results dont start showing up on the field I dont care how much money and energy you put into the program its going to fail.

 

[Crusty]

Substitute Washington State for Oregon State, either way you get the picture. Also you may want to double check that statement those schools havent put any money into football you maybe surprised with the results. I know you pointed out how my logic seemed off but I have to again point out that what your saying isnt adding up. You state we have to "step up the schedule and ramp up the competition if we want to improve". How exactly is playing a tougher schedule going to improve the program overall less the win loss record? Also how are we playing catchup? We play a tough OOC every year plus WVU in Conference, what are we catching up to?

Your example of CLemson and FSU last year basically made my point. You stated they played a couple patsies and then one tough OOC. Thats exactly what we should be lookign at. One top level BCS team, one MAC level and one D1AA for our OOC schedule. Losing records do lose recruiting how many teams have losing records 3 out of 4 years and are pulling in top 30 recruiting classes? Marrone has proven to be a pretty dame good recruiter but if the results dont start showing up on the field I dont care how much money and energy you put into the program its going to fail.

Last year Alabama spent 980,882 on recruiting alone, Auburn 950,378, Georgia Tech 883,430 and Arkansas 666,419, Indiana spent 202,172 and Washington State 202,172. Duke and Vandy are private schools so comparable data is not available. I stand by my statement about spending. These football programs have never had high aspirations.

I guess we can agree that there are many more factors that affect recruiting than just recent w-l record. Perhaps, we can leave it at that.

We are playing catch up because we sucked for a decade. That means we were not on the radar when these kids starting playing Pop Warner. We were nowhere, a non-starter, i.e. not in the conversation.

A tough OOC schedule? Really? This year's schedule will be the first tough OCC in a long time.
2011 - Wake Forest, Rhode Island, USC, Tulane, Toledo
2010 - Akron, Washington, Maine, Colgate, Boston College
2009 - Minnesota, PSU, Northwestern, Maine, Akron
2008 - Northwestern, Akron, PSU, Notre Dame

If you think that playing 10 ACC/SEC teams plus 2 patsies is comparable to our schedule then lets just agree to disagree.

Do you think you get better playing Tiger Woods or the NYS Amateur champ? Playing against a 95 mph fastball or an 85? Playing against guys running 4.5 forties or 4.9? Ebo said it in the NY Post article.

​

“I think I stacked up pretty good,” Ogundeko said. “I had to get used to the competition. It’s not like New York where one move will work. I had to learn different moves. … I had to turn it up.”​

DM has the right idea.

 

[OrangeChris]

We will almost surely fill the 12th game of the schedule with a non BCS team, probably a Colgate/Maine/URI type school that will not require a home and home to come to the Dome.

We probably won't be playing Colgate again anytime soon. They don't offer enough scholarships for us to count the win. We only played them in 2010 because we already had an FCS team on the schedule, so we couldn't count the 2nd win anyway. I actually wish we could play them again. They still own the advantage in the all-time series... by one game. ARGH!

 

[sutomcat]

We probably won't be playing Colgate again anytime soon. They don't offer enough scholarships for us to count the win. We only played them in 2010 because we already had an FCS team on the schedule, so we couldn't count the 2nd win anyway. I actually wish we could play them again. They still own the advantage in the all-time series... by one game. ARGH!

I don't understand this. You can count 1 win against an FCS opponent when determining bowl eligibility.

NCAA Postseason Rules for College Football

Currently, there are 30 other bowl games that contractually tied to the FBS conferences. To become bowl eligible a team must have a winning record, which may include one win against a FCS opponent, or win their conference and the team must not be on postseason probation. The NCAA allows one victory per season over a FCS team to count toward an FBS team's bowl eligibility, so long as the FCS team has supplied financial aid for football averaging out to at at least at 90 percent of the 63 scholarships allowed over "a rolling two-year period" that can include the current season.

Just about every BCS team takes advantage of this and plays an FCS opponent.

We aren't doing this in 2012, either because the AD offices think no one will come to watch an FCS opponent or we were completely out flanked trying to book one. Probably a bit of both.

I bet we end up playing one each season in the future, especially in years when we have sold out the local fans to get a paycheck playing at MetLife Stadium. It might not happen in 2013, since the slot we were going to use for an FCS opponent will be taken up with a 9th ACC conference game, but I think it happens from that point forward.

If we have to play an FCS opponent (and given our need to schedule winnable OOC home games, we do), I would rather play Colgate than someone like Rhode Island or Maine. Not sure if they want to play Syracuse.

 

[KaiserUEO]

tom, the reason is colgate wont count.

you posted why. they must have 90% of the roster on some type of aid or scholarship...they dont.

hence, SU shouldnt play them.

when scheduling a d1aa, SU needs to make sure it will count.

just like, yes, every other big school does.

otherwise, its a scrimmage and totally useless.

 

[TexanMark]

Cuse is playing Stony Brook this Fall...they will provide a decent challenge.

Isn't the Patriot League going to scholarships (up to the 63 level) sometime over the next few years? IIRC they are doing a four year phase in. If true, I could see Colgate on the schedule every year going forward...as they will travel 3-4,000 fans.

 

[JeremyCuse]

Cuse is playing Stony Brook this Fall...they will provide a decent challenge.

Isn't the Patriot League going to scholarships (up to the 63 level) sometime over the next few years? IIRC they are doing a four year phase in. If true, I could see Colgate on the schedule every year going forward...as they will travel 3-4,000 fans.

Yeah that Stony Brook team isnt a horrendous D1AA team and with the amount of NYC kids they have on the team playing Syracuse is going to be like there super bowl. This game will probably be closer then it should be though I would love if we could finally crush a D1AA opponent and just cruise in the second half and play some young guys.

 

[OttoMets]

Cuse is playing Stony Brook this Fall...they will provide a decent challenge.

Isn't the Patriot League going to scholarships (up to the 63 level) sometime over the next few years? IIRC they are doing a four year phase in. If true, I could see Colgate on the schedule every year going forward...as they will travel 3-4,000 fans.

I believe this is the case. Not sure if it's beneficial for Colgate (my alma mater) to be moving in that direction (they already began offering athletic scholarships in all non-football sports in 2004 or 2005), but a Colgate-Syracuse game is great fun and the most attractive IAA opponent SU can get. If they offer enough scholarships, that ought to be an annual September game.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

It is time to postpone/cancel the PSU game

 

[OrangeChris]

I don't understand this. You can count 1 win against an FCS opponent when determining bowl eligibility ... Just about every BCS team takes advantage of this and plays an FCS opponent.

You can count the win if they offer enough scholarships, which Colgate currently does not (but apparently might in the future). In 2010 we were able to count the win over FCS Maine in our total towards bowl eligibility. We weren't able to count the Colgate win. Fortunately, we didn't need to!

When it became obvious that we would need a 2nd FCS opponent in 2010, I was one of many alums that lobbied for Colgate. The thinking being, "the win won't count anyway (can't count a 2nd FCS win), so why not not revisit an historical rivalry?"