As fired up as people seem to be getting from Friday

[rrlbees]

I don't think the attrition is what hurt our depth. I don't think we had depth to begin with. A roster full of players is not depth. Depth is a roster full of guys who can play. We're not there yet, but we're pretty close, and we're a LOT closer than we were three years ago...four years ago...five years ago...

Except for the very very best teams, nobody has 85 players that can go out on the field and get it done. People just like to point to that number as an excuse. We don't need quality depth 85 deep, nobody does. #61-85 is practice fodder anyways. Whether we are a 12-0 team or 0-12 team, 25% of the players aren't contributing much anyways.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OttoinGrotto]

"At least" 3 more years? For what? Did Marrone or anyone ever say it will be "at least" 7 years before we are a good program again? If that is the case, he was the wrong guy. And if people are expecting too much before 7 years, then how the heck did we win 8 games including a bowl in year 2???

Marrone actually said this wasn't a rebuild, FWIW.

 

[rrlbees]

It's funny, Hackett is WAY down on the list to me. I've never bought into the whole play-calling thing. When plays work, it was a good play call. When it doesn't, you're a schmuck. For the most part, I don't think that we as fans can see what they're trying to set up from series to series, or game to game. We just don't have the information at our disposal from practices. I think coaches play the cards they're dealt. Good teams execute plays and win games. Mediocre teams, not as much. I'll agree with those who say HCDM/OCH have played things close to the vest. But that's a different argument than play calling IMHO.

Whether it was Hackett or Marrone or a total staff decision, that decision last year made vs rutgers on 4th and inches for a TD told me a lot about their mindset.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[RF2044]

Except for the very very best teams, nobody has 85 players that can go out on the field and get it done. People just like to point to that number as an excuse. We don't need quality depth 85 deep, nobody does. #61-85 is practice fodder anyways. Whether we are a 12-0 team or 0-12 team, 25% of the players aren't contributing much anyways.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

That's true, but don't understate the importance of that 25%, because for a team like SU that isn't a selector school, many of that group are developmental guys. Players who might need to be immersed in the program for 2-3 years before they are capable of being contributors. Then, when the time comes, they become players we rely upon. This pattern is going to be particularly true as we look to mine athletic kids from NYC metro, who don't have as extensive of a football background as kids from other regions.

I'd much rather have the margin of having that developmental talent on the roster, and give them time to develop than be forced to play true frosh just to fill out the two deep like we've had to do the last couple of years. Doesn't mean that EVERY kid you recruit is going to end up being a contributor, just that the roster [and depth] are headed in the right direction now. About time.

 

[kuethstheman]

"At least" 3 more years? For what? Did Marrone or anyone ever say it will be "at least" 7 years before we are a good program again? If that is the case, he was the wrong guy. And if people are expecting too much before 7 years, then how the heck did we win 8 games including a bowl in year 2???

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

He may have been the wrong guy to get it done in 5 years (I say "may" because there might not have been a right guy). I believe keeping him is the right choice to get it done three years from now.

 

[RF2044]

He may have been the wrong guy to get it done in 5 years (I say "may" because there might not have been a right guy). I believe keeping him is the right choice to get it done three years from now.

If we get back to a bowl this year, I think a lot of those concerns will die down.

 

[All4SU]

Except for the very very best teams, nobody has 85 players that can go out on the field and get it done. People just like to point to that number as an excuse. We don't need quality depth 85 deep, nobody does. #61-85 is practice fodder anyways. Whether we are a 12-0 team or 0-12 team, 25% of the players aren't contributing much anyways.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I used 85, because that's the total roster. My point was that on good teams (you chose the term "great" which I'm okay with), everyone on their roster is/or will be capable of being a player. On a team like SU, when there was no depth, there was no depth because a lot of the backups really weren't quality depth. They were guys in jerseys.

 

[MadNY3]

this is still, until proven otherwise, a .500 team.

It is starting to fill out a full roster 1-85, and those players as a whole are starting to look like a D-1 team. Hopefully the days of being smaller and slower across the board than the opponent are over.

When Marrone keeps saying "there's a lot of work to do", he means it. There is a lot that needs to happen to get to the point where they can be considered a "good" team.

Each year, at this time of year:

* All the returning players are bigger and faster than they were before.
* We receive articles on each player who each have a quote saying how "this is the year" and they can't wait to prove the doubters/pollsters wrong
* We all, ALL, can't help ourselves to get excited...because, hell, we are fans.

And while I think we are looking at a .500ish team, this is a pivotal year to show we are a better team, because:

* The Big East sucks.
* 5th-year QB starting his third-year.
* This is year #4 for Doug and it is his program.

Every team has injuries, etc. Enough excuses. Time to:

* not come in last in the Big East again.
* show the disciplined Marrone style to be awesome at Special Teams at least
* win some games in November/December for a change.

War. Damn. Otto.

 

[OrangeinBoston]

For me, I just want to see improvement on a year to year basis. It doesn't have to be dramatic but it has to be tangible, obvious improvement. I. for one, do not feel that he has peaked and I think it takes a considerable amount of time to rebuild a program from the ground up without cheating. Every year the team improves should buy him another year. It may not always show in wins and losses depending on SOS , injuries, and that sort of thing, but you should be able to see it getting better.

Given that, what would you have done with last year?

 

[OrangePA]

Except for the very very best teams, nobody has 85 players that can go out on the field and get it done. People just like to point to that number as an excuse. We don't need quality depth 85 deep, nobody does. #61-85 is practice fodder anyways. Whether we are a 12-0 team or 0-12 team, 25% of the players aren't contributing much anyways.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I don't think that's right.

The full roster is very important.

 

[Chip]

this is still, until proven otherwise, a .500 team.

It is starting to fill out a full roster 1-85, and those players as a whole are starting to look like a D-1 team. Hopefully the days of being smaller and slower across the board than the opponent are over.

When Marrone keeps saying "there's a lot of work to do", he means it. There is a lot that needs to happen to get to the point where they can be considered a "good" team.

Maybe I'm being too literal, but I think when he says there's a lot of work to do, he's talking about this season because it's only the first week of practice. Things are going to change considerably in the next 2-3 weeks of camp.

That's the problem with having the fan fest this early. I'm grateful for the reports, but really, outside of hearing about the size and speed increases, the rest is somewhat meaningless this early on. But hearing about the size and speed improvements is a great foundation to start from, because that's not going to improve in the next 2-3 weeks before the opener.

Given the better #'s, I hope one part of this season is like 2009, but unlike 2010 and 2011. In that we actually get better towards the end of the season.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Each year, at this time of year:

* All the returning players are bigger and faster than they were before.
* We receive articles on each player who each have a quote saying how "this is the year" and they can't wait to prove the doubters/pollsters wrong
* We all, ALL, can't help ourselves to get excited...because, hell, we are fans.

And while I think we are looking at a .500ish team, this is a pivotal year to show we are a better team, because:

* The Big East sucks.
* 5th-year QB starting his third-year.
* This is year #4 for Doug and it is his program.

Every team has injuries, etc. Enough excuses. Time to:

* not come in last in the Big East again.
* show the disciplined Marrone style to be awesome at Special Teams at least
* win some games in November/December for a change.

War. Damn. Otto.

That's a great breakdown.

 

[OrangePA]

"At least" 3 more years? For what? Did Marrone or anyone ever say it will be "at least" 7 years before we are a good program again? If that is the case, he was the wrong guy. And if people are expecting too much before 7 years, then how the heck did we win 8 games including a bowl in year 2???

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

it's not about the "guy".

It's about the money and the facilities.

We still are not where we need to be


We just completed some much needed improvements in the facility.

We need an indoor facility with a "wow" factor.

It will take three more years at least.

 

[phil77]

And while I think we are looking at a .500ish team, this is a pivotal year to show we are a better team, because:

* The Big East sucks.
* 5th-year QB starting his third-year.
* This is year #4 for Doug and it is his program.

For the above 3 points Doug has to be on the hot seat IMO. If we want to turn our football program around we can not keep waiting on Doug to "turn it around". We need to get someone in here that will turn it around...

He plays in a crappy crappy conference. We have a 5th year senor QB with his 3 year starting in this system. IMO this is a huge year for Doug. He has to get us to a bowl game because moving next year with an unproven QB into the ACC will not be a smooth transition and you need to gain recruiting momentum before the move and you do that with a winning record and a bowl win. If that doesn't happen this year I do not know when it will happen again unless Allen is the real deal and can be a program changer from day 1.

Big Big Big year this year NO EXCUSES.

 

[JeremyCuse]

it's not about the "guy".

It's about the money and the facilities.

We still are not where we need to be


We just completed some much needed improvements in the facility.

We need an indoor facility with a "wow" factor.

It will take three more years at least.

Marrone doesnt have 3 more years, in todays day and age you dont get 7 years to turn a program around. If this team isnt .500 by next year hes not going to survive.

 

[Rocco]

Expectations are set. Some people think Bowl or Bust this year. Others don't. I am in the latter. I think Marrone will have this team competitive to say the least this year. Where the W-L finishes up is TBD.

 

[rrlbees]

That's true, but don't understate the importance of that 25%, because for a team like SU that isn't a selector school, many of that group are developmental guys. Players who might need to be immersed in the program for 2-3 years before they are capable of being contributors. Then, when the time comes, they become players we rely upon. This pattern is going to be particularly true as we look to mine athletic kids from NYC metro, who don't have as extensive of a football background as kids from other regions.

I'd much rather have the margin of having that developmental talent on the roster, and give them time to develop than be forced to play true frosh just to fill out the two deep like we've had to do the last couple of years. Doesn't mean that EVERY kid you recruit is going to end up being a contributor, just that the roster [and depth] are headed in the right direction now. About time.

Of course some of those kids are development kids. But in any given season, to say we will be good or bad that season has nothing to do with 85 players.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[All4SU]

For the above 3 points Doug has to be on the hot seat IMO. If we want to turn our football program around we can not keep waiting on Doug to "turn it around". We need to get someone in here that will turn it around...

You want to ruin a program? Play musical coaches every few years -- a guaranteed approach to failure. Marrone is an SU guy who wants to be here. He has proven he will make changes necessary to try and improve. Give him the tools he needs in terms of budget and facilities, and the time he needs to do it. Teams that keep rolling the dice on new coaches, roll craps more times than not.

 

[phil77]

You want to ruin a program? Play musical coaches every few years -- a guaranteed approach to failure. Marrone is an SU guy who wants to be here. He has proven he will make changes necessary to try and improve. Give him the tools he needs in terms of budget and facilities, and the time he needs to do it. Teams that keep rolling the dice on new coaches, roll craps more times than not.

How long? How long do you wait? 5 years 10 years? How many seasons go by before you go that is enough? How long can you afford to wait? How many years does he get? Just because he is an SU guy and wants to be here shouldn't give him a longer leash.

 

[rrlbees]

Marrone actually said this wasn't a rebuild, FWIW.

Yes he did. But to point that out would cause an uproar here.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[All4SU]

How long? How long do you wait? 5 years 10 years? How many seasons go by before you go that is enough? How long can you afford to wait? How many years does he get? Just because he is an SU guy and wants to be here shouldn't give him a longer leash.

Year 1 was considerably improved over GRob.
Year 2 was further evidence the program was on track. Including a bowl game and a winning season.
Year 3 was a step backwards to essentially a .500 team, but remained head and shoulders above anything GRob put on the field.
You want to bail now? To answer your question, you want to see continued progress -- BOTH in terms of competitiveness and wins. And there are two ways this has been done. (1) The Lightning in a Bottle Fix -- Take Tulane when Shaun King played there. Exceptional athlete, took Tulane's program to new heights. Coach leaves, King leaves. Program is in the s#!++er again. (2) Brick by brick. Less reliant on that one spectacular talent to get you over the hump -- the kind of program that absorbs losses of players and assistants (and even HC's if necessary).

Yes, it would be GREAT to combine both. Maybe HCDM's "Brick by brick" approach will be impacted by an individual player, such as Ashton Broyld. Maybe not. But I think most here knew this was not a quick fix situation. We're entering year 4. I believe this year and next SU will continue to improve both in competitiveness and wins. I also believe the program is far more solid than it was several years ago, and will only get better. We're building a program, not a season.

 

[All4SU]

Yes he did. But to point that out would cause an uproar here.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

What do you expect him to say? He wanted folks to be excited about the program. You want people to have expectations. You don't step in and squash enthusiasm. When GRob stepped in, it was not a rebuild. By the time Marrone got here, it was.

 

[RF2044]

Of course some of those kids are development kids. But in any given season, to say we will be good or bad that season has nothing to do with 85 players.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Having a full roster isn't a benefit only if every player, 1-85, can make positive contributions any given year--it's also about year-over-year continuity. Having a full roster is important because college athletics is attrition-based; players graduate every year. When important players leave, do you have the talent in the pipeline for guys to step into vacated roles, or are you forced to throw players to the wolves before they are ready?

Because the alternative is to play musical chairs every year and stick your thumb into the dam hoping to avoid a leak. Getting back to having full roster means better depth, more opportunities to redshirt incoming frosh, being able to better withstand injuries, more robust practices, etc. all of which supports the long term well being of a program.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

What do you expect him to say? He wanted folks to be excited about the program. You want people to have expectations. You don't step in and squash enthusiasm. When GRob stepped in, it was not a rebuild. By the time Marrone got here, it was.

This is problematic.

If he said that believing it wasn't a rebuild, he wasn't very well prepared to be a head coach.

If he said that believing it was a rebuild, we have to take everything he says about the team with a grain of salt.

I'm a stickler on what Marrone says because truthfully, he says a lot of weird stuff.

 

[rrlbees]

Year 1 was considerably improved over GRob.
Year 2 was further evidence the program was on track. Including a bowl game and a winning season.
Year 3 was a step backwards to essentially a .500 team, but remained head and shoulders above anything GRob put on the field.
You want to bail now? To answer your question, you want to see continued progress -- BOTH in terms of competitiveness and wins. And there are two ways this has been done. (1) The Lightning in a Bottle Fix -- Take Tulane when Shaun King played there. Exceptional athlete, took Tulane's program to new heights. Coach leaves, King leaves. Program is in the s#!++er again. (2) Brick by brick. Less reliant on that one spectacular talent to get you over the hump -- the kind of program that absorbs losses of players and assistants (and even HC's if necessary).

Yes, it would be GREAT to combine both. Maybe HCDM's "Brick by brick" approach will be impacted by an individual player, such as Ashton Broyld. Maybe not. But I think most here knew this was not a quick fix situation. We're entering year 4. I believe this year and next SU will continue to improve both in competitiveness and wins. I also believe the program is far more solid than it was several years ago, and will only get better. We're building a program, not a season.

Really, who cares if it is better than Grob? Seriously, what does that prove?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2