4 and 3 with a bye week and 5 more games

[CNYGuy]

You mean back when we were competing and beating ranked teams?Back then I felt confident we could win playing top 10 teams , but I have zero confidence nowadays playing the big boys.

I mean, we have like 12 top-10 wins in program history and one of those was Babers.

There’s also a lot of clunkers in there by 40-50 points. I think there’s some revisionist history of blocking out all the things we don’t want to remember going on.

 

[tbonezone]

the BYE week hopefully gives the team some much needed recovery time. and the fans too.

 

[HOFCeluck]

9-3 is 9-3. It isn't like kissing your sister. I also don't believe we will see 9-3. But if we do, it is still a very good year even with the 3 butt kicking we just took.

So that’s a yes..

 

[orangecuse]

That’s moving the bar again. For THIS year everyone talked about being bowl eligible again or winning 7 games etc. I don’t remember anyone saying the only measuring stick was conference record.

You won't see a post of mine anywhere that stated 7 games and bowl eligible was good enough.

As you are most likely aware from my posts relative to Babers' coaching prowess, or lack thereof, I've long opined that he is not a P5 level coach in any capacity, as the proof is in the pudding with his atrocious 18-42 conference record to date, which, clearly speaks screams for itself.

My view has nothing to do with the kind of human being he is, etc., as I realize he does represent the university well in other areas. However, IMO, he's first and foremost a P5 football coach, and, IMO, his #1 requirement (at 4 mil/yr) is/should be to win football games...period. At 18-42 he has failed miserably at it. At this point, even if he gets to 7 wins this year that still places him AGAIN with a losing conference record at 3-5 and 21-44 overall after EIGHT seasons, eight!

IMO, it's speaks volumes in regards to what is acceptable, not only for the university, but for our fan base.

 

[orangecuse]

It's called living in reality and if you don't like it then sure stop contributing. And while a school like Kansas has hired a really good coach, what do you think their true ceiling is? I mean people can blow as much smoke as they want.

After the 5 win season in 2021, Wildhack said that going to bowl games is the expectation for the program, most accepted that as a decent expectation. The last 3 games have been horrific there is no disputing that but lets see how the last 5 play out before we just pack it in on Dino. If he falls short or only wins 6 then sure I could definitely see the University going another direction and hey that would probably be best

I think lost in the conversation is that hiring and firing coaches every 2-3 years takes donor $ to pull off. At the end of the day there isn't a ravenous type fanbase to pull this type of stuff off if you think that's not accurate I just don't know what to tell you. The University and the athletic department has to live in reality and they also have a responsibility to try and stay sound financially regardless of what the internet says

Hope springs eternal.

However, 8 seasons in, whether he gets to 6 or one more at 7, it's still a losing conference record, again. In a conference mind you, that other than Clemson for the most part, has been very mediocre in nature. Based on same, even going .500 isn't really that much of a feat. What does it say for a coach who can't even whiff .500 in such a conference, let alone the fact that he is 24 games below it. TWENTY FOUR!!!

In the end, whether he wins 6 or 7, he has shown who he is as a P5 level coach, as 8 seasons is plenty enough cross sample of his true colors from a pure coaching performance/results related matter. I'm not sure why anyone really can/should expect much difference, if any, from the generally norm/standard that has been. If the university is okay with living in that 18-42 reality, it's their decision no doubt. But, they only have themselves to blame in regards to poor attendance, lost revenue, etc. as folks aren't going to pay or continue to pay for such a poor product.

IMO, it's this position, et al or at least a contributing factor, that will be detrimental for SU a decade or so from now when the GOR is near or at expiration.

 

[JustPherU]

I mean, we have like 12 top-10 wins in program history and one of those was Babers.

There’s also a lot of clunkers in there by 40-50 points. I think there’s some revisionist history of blocking out all the things we don’t want to remember going on.

I was referring to the Mcnabb years where we competed against good competition.Getting beat is one thing but knowing before the game starts you have zero chance is not acceptable.

 

[Scooch]

More likely, the pendulum would swing the other way. Win, and a lot of folks will say, "so what, we were 'expected' to win anyway... doesn't change that we weren't competitive in the last three games..."

Maybe, but around here I suspect more people will hail a, say, 8-4 season as a raging success. That’s the nature of this place, which is good.

 

[baggerbob]

How can anyone complain about 9-3? I don’t care if we got smoked in our last three games.

If he gets to 9-3 after the last 3 games then that means Dino has won all the games he should have and stays.
Then he would need to recruit better to take the next step.

 

[suorange08]

You won't see a post of mine anywhere that stated 7 games and bowl eligible was good enough.

As you are most likely aware from my posts relative to Babers' coaching prowess, or lack thereof, I've long opined that he is not a P5 level coach in any capacity, as the proof is in the pudding with his atrocious 18-42 conference record to date, which, clearly speaks screams for itself.

My view has nothing to do with the kind of human being he is, etc., as I realize he does represent the university well in other areas. However, IMO, he's first and foremost a P5 football coach, and, IMO, his #1 requirement (at 4 mil/yr) is/should be to win football games...period. At 18-42 he has failed miserably at it. At this point, even if he gets to 7 wins this year that still places him AGAIN with a losing conference record at 3-5 and 21-44 overall after EIGHT seasons, eight!

IMO, it's speaks volumes in regards to what is acceptable, not only for the university, but for our fan base.

Minor point, though he is 19-42:

16- 2-6
17- 2-6
18- 6-2
19- 2-6
20- 1-9 (1 loss was ND)
21- 2-6
22- 4-4
23- 0-3

I agree with your point overall. Again, this is minor though I prefer keeping to the actual record.

 

[MadNY3]

That’s moving the bar again. For THIS year everyone talked about being bowl eligible again or winning 7 games etc. I don’t remember anyone saying the only measuring stick was conference record.

The only measuring stick no, but 75% of our games are in conference related and about to be more.

Beating up on crap September teams and going 2-6 in the ACC is not the diet of a good program.

 

[MadNY3]

How can anyone complain about 9-3? I don’t care if we got smoked in our last three games.

Totally with you. 8-4, which would come with a .500 conference record, sounds good overall.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Hope springs eternal.

However, 8 seasons in, whether he gets to 6 or one more at 7, it's still a losing conference record, again. In a conference mind you, that other than Clemson for the most part, has been very mediocre in nature. Based on same, even going .500 isn't really that much of a feat. What does it say for a coach who can't even whiff .500 in such a conference, let alone the fact that he is 24 games below it. TWENTY FOUR!!!

In the end, whether he wins 6 or 7, he has shown who he is as a P5 level coach, as 8 seasons is plenty enough cross sample of his true colors from a pure coaching performance/results related matter. I'm not sure why anyone really can/should expect much difference, if any, from the generally norm/standard that has been. If the university is okay with living in that 18-42 reality, it's their decision no doubt. But, they only have themselves to blame in regards to poor attendance, lost revenue, etc. as folks aren't going to pay or continue to pay for such a poor product.

IMO, it's this position, et al or at least a contributing factor, that will be detrimental for SU a decade or so from now when the GOR is near or at expiration.

Delusional

 

[rrlbees]

The only measuring stick no, but 75% of our games are in conference related and about to be more.

Beating up on crap September teams and going 2-6 in the ACC is not the diet of a good program.

Just reiterating what most people’s goals were for this year.

 

[Scooch]

Just reiterating what most people’s goals were for this year.

I saw a lot of people saying we could notch 8 or 9 wins.

7 saves Dino's job, but it doesn't show improvement and it's not anything particularly impressive against this soft schedule.

 

[Scooch]

Just reiterating what most people’s goals were for this year.

I went and looked at the season prediction thread...

Wins	Picks
10	3
9	8
8	12
7	8
6	1
5	1
4	1

The prevailing expectation of the board was that we'd win at least 8 games, not 7.

Let's not rewrite history.

 

[rrlbees]

I went and looked at the season prediction thread...

Wins	Picks
10	3
9	8
8	12
7	8
6	1
5	1
4	1

The prevailing expectation of the board was that we'd win at least 8 games, not 7.

Let's not rewrite history.

Didn’t rewrite history at all. I’m talking about posts made about making a bowl again for the second year in a row. And I said 7 etc. The main point was people wanted an easier OOC schedule to help be bowl eligible.

 

[Reyes39]

How can anyone complain about 9-3? I don’t care if we got smoked in our last three games.

I wouldn't complain, but I wouldnt be excited and it wouldn't have me feeling optimistic for the future. If we lost to Purdue, beat Clemson, lost to UNC by 50 bc we refused to punt or kick a FG, and even showed somewhat of a functional offense at FSU then I'd feel a lot different even though the record would be the same.

I think we should be at the point where we should expect to compete with the top half of the conference, but we seem to be getting further from that. I'm tired of thinking making a meaningless bowl game is going to do anything to change that.

 

[Reyes39]

Didn’t rewrite history at all. I’m talking about posts made about making a bowl again for the second year in a row. And I said 7 etc. The main point was people wanted an easier OOC schedule to help be bowl eligible.

When we agreed to play WMU, they were coming off a 13 win season. We caught Purdue a year after Brohm left for Louisville. Army has four 9 win seasons in the last 7 years.

If we're building an OOC schedule for easy wins, we're doing it wrong...we just caught these teams at the right time.

 

[CNYGuy]

I was referring to the Mcnabb years where we competed against good competition.Getting beat is one thing but knowing before the game starts you have zero chance is not acceptable.

We went from "compete for conference championships" to "lose closer" in just three posts of yours haha.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

When we agreed to play WMU, they were coming off a 13 win season. We caught Purdue a year after Brohm left for Louisville. Army has four 9 win seasons in the last 7 years.

If we're building an OOC schedule for easy wins, we're doing it wrong...we just caught these teams at the right time.

Sounds like syracuse needs a crystal ball when scheduling out of conference and needs to be able to flex their ACC conference schedule depending in how our opponents are playing throughout the year.

 

[Scooch]

Didn’t rewrite history at all. I’m talking about posts made about making a bowl again for the second year in a row. And I said 7 etc. The main point was people wanted an easier OOC schedule to help be bowl eligible.

That's fine. But let's just be clear: the consensus expectation of this board was 8 or more wins.

So when people start to rationalize and make excuses for getting 6 or 7, let's not pretend that was the expectation.

 

[Reyes39]

Sounds like syracuse needs a crystal ball when scheduling out of conference and needs to be able to flex their ACC conference schedule depending in how our opponents are playing throughout the year.

Seems like they already have one, since they could forecast when this years OOC opponents would have down years so we could get off to an easy start.

He said people wanted an easier OOC schedule. My point is this years OOC, when built, was made of solid quality programs. There was no way we'd look at this schedule 5 years ago and say "Oh, theres 4 easy wins."

 

[JustPherU]

We went from "compete for conference championships" to "lose closer" in just three posts of yours haha.

Is it really that hard to understand I want a team that is competitive against good competition? You cant win conference championships unless you have a chance of winning when facing good teams.Yippee we go 9-3 without beating a winning team all year and get absolutely embarrassed against every winning team we face.

 

[Scooch]

Is it really that hard to understand I want a team that is competitive against good competition? You cant win conference championships unless you have a chance of winning when facing good teams.Yippee we go 9-3 without beating a winning team all year and get absolutely embarrassed against every winning team we face.

Meh, you play the schedule. 9 wins is 9 wins.

If you want to be miserable that we end up with 9 wins, you're welcome to. And you're going to be pretty alone on that island.

 

[JustPherU]

Meh, you play the schedule. 9 wins is 9 wins.

If you want to be miserable that we end up with 9 wins, you're welcome to. And you're going to be pretty alone on that island.

You think I’m the only fan that wants to see us be competitive against good teams?