At the midway point of the season, how satisfied are you with the teams performance? | Syracusefan.com

At the midway point of the season, how satisfied are you with the teams performance?

How satisfied are you with the teams performance?


  • Total voters
    70
  • Poll closed .

Czar

All Conference
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,166
Like
1,471
Decided to make a poll rather than just have endless posts about it. So what do you think? Depending on the response I may make more opinion polls to occupy the bye week.
 
I think if you added the option of "somewhat satisfied somewhat disappointed" it would win out
 
I think if you added the option of "somewhat satisfied somewhat disappointed" it would win out
Used the neither for that then. You're basically in the middle and not dominant either way.
 
How about an option: Satisfied with the record, not satisfied with the performance.
 
Considering
1)Defections. Check out the fifth year senior class. Some graduated greatness and a handful of starters, but most long gone or doing little.
http://syracuse.At their request, t...ked from this site./a.z?s=185&p=9&c=8&yr=2007

2) Lack of redshirt years for a long time(for example=Lemon, Chibane, Thomas, Davis, Suter, Hogue, etc)

3) GRobs last few uneven classes (2007 and 2008) are upperclassmen(other than Marrones first class-the heart of the team)
Looking back on it, more LB's, WR's and DB's would have helped. We should not be in a position of having all the frosh talent on the field first game.

They have done well.
 
I'd be completely satisfied if they'd beaten Rutgers. But 4-2 isn't bad, especially since Wake is much better than anyone thought and Toledo is a good team. And with the injuries we've had.
 
Decided to make a poll rather than just have endless posts about it. So what do you think? Depending on the response I may make more opinion polls to occupy the bye week.

Whomever said completely satisfied didn't have to sit through 4 and a half hours of that Rutgers game. No chance.
 
I'd be completely satisfied if they'd beaten Rutgers. But 4-2 isn't bad, especially since Wake is much better than anyone thought and Toledo is a good team. And with the injuries we've had.

^^^What he said ^^^^
 
Considering
1)Defections. Check out the fifth year senior class. Some graduated greatness and a handful of starters, but most long gone or doing little.
http://syracuse.At their request, t...ked from this site./a.z?s=185&p=9&c=8&yr=2007

2) Lack of redshirt years for a long time(for example=Lemon, Chibane, Thomas, Davis, Suter, Hogue, etc)

3) GRobs last few uneven classes (2007 and 2008) are upperclassmen(other than Marrones first class-the heart of the team)
Looking back on it, more LB's, WR's and DB's would have helped. We should not be in a position of having all the frosh talent on the field first game.

They have done well.
I agree with the conclusion (4-2 is pretty good; some concern about the performance, and 1 of those wins came from a blown call), but not some of these qualifications.
1. Defections -- Marrone used JUCO recruiting to fill some of the gaps. Might be a wash overall.
2. Redshirt years -- you want some of your frosh to be good enough to play in year 1. Lemon, Hogue, the two Thomases, & Suter were ready to go; same this year for Lynch and Crume. Bailey played as a frosh -- got 100 yds plus against ND. Others in the mix now (Nassib, Chandler, Vaughn, Boatman, Pugh, Chew, Provo) did redshirt. Several others had a PG year before playing for us (Davis, Kobena, Ball, Marinovich) and a few others came in as upperclassmen (Tiller, Goggins). Bottom line -- not clear to me that redshirting (or not) has had much effect on where we are this year.
3. GROB's 2007 and 2008 classes provided much of the talent that got 8 wins last year: Holmes, Hogue, Provo, Tribbey, Merkeson, Suter, Scott from 2007. Nassib, Bailey, Sales, Chew, Marinovich, Boatman, Vaughn, Graham from 2008.
4. LBs -- several reasons why we are short of experience -- for example, EJ Carter and Malcolm Cater were good enough to start as frosh, but washed out for non-football reasons. Can't put that back to GROB.
 
Whomever said completely satisfied didn't have to sit through 4 and a half hours of that Rutgers game. No chance.

It was me.
I'm good with the season. I expected a major stepback.

Think of RU as all the bad luck in one game for this part of season.
(Ive been at every home game.)
 
Breaking it down, I would say the following:

QB position: B. Would have as high as an A- but the last 2 games have shown he still has some work to do. I do believe that teams are working hard to stop him as he should be a real strength to this team based on his overall body of work. Can't remember the last time I said that about a QB.

RB: B+. Again could be higher but the loss of PTG will hurt. AAM could change this as the season goes on. Ant is a work horse and has done well while carrying the load. In my mind he can do no wrong; he pretty much was the difference maker in South Bend as a freshman and I loved witnessing that in person. We've also had decent production out of Harris.

TE: A- This unit has been solid and I bumped up the grade from B+ simply because of Provo's run after catch last week. What an effort. Would like to see more balls thrown to Stevens.

WR: B- Seems like great potential here but I've seen a few too many drops that probably should have been caught. West looks promising but Chew does disappear at times. I can't tell if they aren't getting as many looks or they simply aren't open since Nassib doesn't seem to throw downfield as often as it seems he could. (at least from my idiot perspective)

OL: C While certain phases would have earned even lower grades (most recently Hay's performance against Tulane), this unit is the biggest disappointment on this team when you consider what was expected of them. While we can debate Mac's position at Center all day (a few times that has happened), the fact remains he is still young and any new Center would probably need some time given his move into the starting lineup. This unit has to improve to make a decent run at 3-3 over the 2nd half of the season.

DL: B- I love the defense's ability to stop the run, but the fact remains that we really just don't see them get to the QB that often. I believe part of the secondary's issues has to do with opposing QBs having plenty of time in the packet with decent passing lanes. Jones's return to the field could really help here. I do like the young guys we have and Goggins is finally showing some of the promise we all heard about when he arrived.

LB: B. I didn't expect much fom this unit so I may be grading on a curve. If they were more experienced and we had this type of production, I may have rated them lower (see the OL). I think this unit could really start grabbing even more headlines as they mature and the rest of the defense gets healthy.

DB: C+. While some of this can be attributed to injuries, we have seen too many examples of guys out of position when defending the pass. How many 3rd and longs have we seen converted? For a group of guys that doesn't have a monster, they do hit pretty hard. Again I think/hope we will see more progress as they mature.

Special Teams: B+/D+: I love the return game, and that is more than just Kobena. The punting unit has done a decent job, especially when you consider the kind of player who we just replaced. I didn't think we had too many issues with the FG unit but when you lose a game due to several breakdowns with that same unit, I think its pretty clear the D+ is justified for that portion of the group.

Overall I really thought this team could be 5-1. When I see how poorly Rutgers played and how much this defense stepped up in that game, it leads me to believe this team has some serious work to do. They were slow out of the gate against WF, played somewhat flat against URI, Toledo and Tulane. I appreciate the idea that these teams might be better than their uniforms would suggest but I really saw SU at a different level than those teams. I believe it will take some significant improvement just to get to 6-6 (which for the record I do not believe should put anyone in a bowl).

That's all I got to say about that...
 
Decided to make a poll rather than just have endless posts about it. So what do you think? Depending on the response I may make more opinion polls to occupy the bye week.
Considering how bad the state of SU FB was just 2.5 years ago, being 4-2 is just peachy. Sure, we could be 5-1, but we could also be 2-4 (if the Wake QB doesn't leave the game; if the SU placekick vs. Toledo is correctly ruled no-good). But beyond W's & L's, SU players play hard and stay in the game throughout, and are not coached by an incompetent. What's not to like?
 
Considering
1)Defections. Check out the fifth year senior class. Some graduated greatness and a handful of starters, but most long gone or doing little.
http://syracuse.At their request, t...ked from this site./a.z?s=185&p=9&c=8&yr=2007

2) Lack of redshirt years for a long time(for example=Lemon, Chibane, Thomas, Davis, Suter, Hogue, etc)

3) GRobs last few uneven classes (2007 and 2008) are upperclassmen(other than Marrones first class-the heart of the team)
Looking back on it, more LB's, WR's and DB's would have helped. We should not be in a position of having all the frosh talent on the field first game.

They have done well.

You said it in #2. That 2007 class was pretty good and was ranked 46th in the country. But some are gone like Hogue because they played as true frosh. Plus that is the class where we had Pierce but then he was medically not allowed to play. The 2008 class wasn't bad either and ranked 50th. Many of them start now while a couple like Sales and Collier would help right now. Also the kid that would be our best lineman right now, Nick Speller was in that class and left when Marrone arrived. I don't think either of those classes are uneven and the 2 of them were probably our best 2 in the past 8-9 years.
 
It was me.
I'm good with the season. I expected a major stepback.

Think of RU as all the bad luck in one game for this part of season.
(Ive been at every home game.)

Fair enough. I'm good with the season so far as well, somewhat.

I went to the USC game was not completely embarrassed (in fact. I was proud of their effort).

And I though they had good moments in other games...and they are 4-2...

But that Rutgers game...
 
You said it in #2. That 2007 class was pretty good and was ranked 46th in the country. But some are gone like Hogue because they played as true frosh. Plus that is the class where we had Pierce but then he was medically not allowed to play. The 2008 class wasn't bad either and ranked 50th. Many of them start now while a couple like Sales and Collier would help right now. Also the kid that would be our best lineman right now, Nick Speller was in that class and left when Marrone arrived. I don't think either of those classes are uneven and the 2 of them were probably our best 2 in the past 8-9 years.

Uneven=not in the talent, number of guys who contributed in each positional group.

For example:2007's class had ONE olineman who left and 3 DE's who are all long gone.
.
 
I'm thrilled with their record but very disappointed to be 0-1 in the big east (most big east games don't get easier than the RU game). 98 out of a 100 seasons with yard differentials like what they have, they wouldn't be 4-2. (I used no statistics in that statement, people just like hearing X out of 100).

I know you are what your record says you are but we are really pushing that to the limit... i'm expecting that record to not be so great in the end.

i never expected the offense to carry us and I figured the defense would take a step back, like everyone else did.
 
Breaking it down, I would say the following:

QB position: B. Would have as high as an A- but the last 2 games have shown he still has some work to do. I do believe that teams are working hard to stop him as he should be a real strength to this team based on his overall body of work. Can't remember the last time I said that about a QB.

RB: B+. Again could be higher but the loss of PTG will hurt. AAM could change this as the season goes on. Ant is a work horse and has done well while carrying the load. In my mind he can do no wrong; he pretty much was the difference maker in South Bend as a freshman and I loved witnessing that in person. We've also had decent production out of Harris.

TE: A- This unit has been solid and I bumped up the grade from B+ simply because of Provo's run after catch last week. What an effort. Would like to see more balls thrown to Stevens.

WR: B- Seems like great potential here but I've seen a few too many drops that probably should have been caught. West looks promising but Chew does disappear at times. I can't tell if they aren't getting as many looks or they simply aren't open since Nassib doesn't seem to throw downfield as often as it seems he could. (at least from my idiot perspective)

OL: C While certain phases would have earned even lower grades (most recently Hay's performance against Tulane), this unit is the biggest disappointment on this team when you consider what was expected of them. While we can debate Mac's position at Center all day (a few times that has happened), the fact remains he is still young and any new Center would probably need some time given his move into the starting lineup. This unit has to improve to make a decent run at 3-3 over the 2nd half of the season.

DL: B- I love the defense's ability to stop the run, but the fact remains that we really just don't see them get to the QB that often. I believe part of the secondary's issues has to do with opposing QBs having plenty of time in the packet with decent passing lanes. Jones's return to the field could really help here. I do like the young guys we have and Goggins is finally showing some of the promise we all heard about when he arrived.

LB: B. I didn't expect much fom this unit so I may be grading on a curve. If they were more experienced and we had this type of production, I may have rated them lower (see the OL). I think this unit could really start grabbing even more headlines as they mature and the rest of the defense gets healthy.

DB: C+. While some of this can be attributed to injuries, we have seen too many examples of guys out of position when defending the pass. How many 3rd and longs have we seen converted? For a group of guys that doesn't have a monster, they do hit pretty hard. Again I think/hope we will see more progress as they mature.

Special Teams: B+/D+: I love the return game, and that is more than just Kobena. The punting unit has done a decent job, especially when you consider the kind of player who we just replaced. I didn't think we had too many issues with the FG unit but when you lose a game due to several breakdowns with that same unit, I think its pretty clear the D+ is justified for that portion of the group.

Overall I really thought this team could be 5-1. When I see how poorly Rutgers played and how much this defense stepped up in that game, it leads me to believe this team has some serious work to do. They were slow out of the gate against WF, played somewhat flat against URI, Toledo and Tulane. I appreciate the idea that these teams might be better than their uniforms would suggest but I really saw SU at a different level than those teams. I believe it will take some significant improvement just to get to 6-6 (which for the record I do not believe should put anyone in a bowl).

That's all I got to say about that...

dont see how you can hive the rb's a B+...BAILEY HAS BEEN BORDERLINE bad...fumbles, physical presense between the tackles and thanks to not taking care of business in the rhoddy game we have not developed aam. gulley is our best running back. we need him to return. also, the secondary a C+? wow...they have been badly burned, out of position and off balance or falling down for 5 weeks! the safely play is what elevates this group to a D
 
I'm happy with 4-2, would have liked to be 5-1. I like the depth being developed for the defense and there is potential. Offense needs to execute better and take advantage of situations along with putting teams away when the opportunity presents itself. I'd like to see this team play to their potential and not the other teams ability.

Quality wins vs Wake and Toledo and one bad loss so there again we have a 67% team. If SU can continue that pace I'll be quite happy with this 2011 edition of Syracuse football.
 
Somewhat disappointed. W/L record notwithstanding, which is a little disappointing, I see little to no improvement from last year, at least from a team perspective.
I know we've had quite a few injuries to go with less than optimal depth, but I expected both the OL and DB's to be much better, in particular. I also worry a little bit about a coach who says he needs recruiting to 'rejuvenate' himself. You'd think that helping the team improve would be rejuvenation enough. Almost like he feels the need to get away.

Half-Full or half-empty? I dunno. Half-over? Yes. Other than that, I've got nothing.
 
dont see how you can hive the rb's a B+...BAILEY HAS BEEN BORDERLINE bad...fumbles, physical presense between the tackles and thanks to not taking care of business in the rhoddy game we have not developed aam. gulley is our best running back. we need him to return. also, the secondary a C+? wow...they have been badly burned, out of position and off balance or falling down for 5 weeks! the safely play is what elevates this group to a D

These kinds of posts make me pull my hair out. Is Bailey the best running back we've had here? No, but at this point his main sin is not being Delone Carter, who is an NFL back with a knack for turning negatives into positives (-2 yard runs became 2 yard runs with him routinely -- a ridiculously valuable skill for a back). Gulley is our best back? Because he had a good game? And it's bailey's fault we didn't "take care of business" in the rhode island game? And AAM would be developed if we had?

I don't even know where to start.
A) I think you could argue that in an ideal world AAM would redshirt. So his not developing with 8 carries in the URI game is the least of our worries.
B) Bailey's on pace for 1100 yards, 10 TDs and is a capable threat catching the ball out of the backfield (been underutilized here, IMO). He's been fine. I wouldn't give him an A and his RU fumble was a tough one to take. But please, the guy has been solid.
C) You think he's running behind a great offensive line?
D) Physical presence between teh tackles? Wasn't it just the Toledo game where bailey ran over and injured one of their linebackers? Again, the guy's not carter and maybe he doesn't have the raw ability of Gulley and/or AAM, but he's been OK between the tackles.
 
dont see how you can hive the rb's a B+...BAILEY HAS BEEN BORDERLINE bad...fumbles, physical presense between the tackles and thanks to not taking care of business in the rhoddy game we have not developed aam. gulley is our best running back. we need him to return. also, the secondary a C+? wow...they have been badly burned, out of position and off balance or falling down for 5 weeks! the safely play is what elevates this group to a D

I am also grading this stuff versus what I expected going into the season; perhaps that is the source of our disconnect. Bailey's numbers are decent and Harris has been OK at FB. Perhaps I graded Ant a touch higher because he didn't make excuses after the RU loss. After losing Carter, I thought we would see a huge fall off. Honestly I thought he'd break down by now given all the extra carries.

And while I agree the secondary has been burned, you can't deny that the scheme from the coaches has been for them to play up and support the run. If they do that, of course they are going to be vulnerable deep. Plus I do believe the Dline's inability to pressure the QB has been our biggest issue with the pass defense. If given enough time, any receiver will break free from a DB. Their technique isn't perfect, as I noted, but given the injuries, commitment to stop the run and added time the QB is able to enjoy, I think C+ both sides of the equation.
 
Decided to make a poll rather than just have endless posts about it. So what do you think? Depending on the response I may make more opinion polls to occupy the bye week.

Very worried about how much we played down to our competition against URI and Toledo.

Rutgers we should have won, but didn't. Crap happens. Would prefer it didn't happen against Rutgers.

USC we could hold our heads up.

Wake and Toledo are better wins than I thought they would be.

I would love to get to 7 regular season wins this year and 8 regular season wins next year.
 
I would love to get to 7 regular season wins this year and 8 regular season wins next year.

Next year's win total depends on which conference we're in.

If we get 7 wins this year and are still in the Big East, the team goal should be 10 wins, based on what we have coming back.
 
Next year's win total depends on which conference we're in.

If we get 7 wins this year and are still in the Big East, the team goal should be 10 wins, based on what we have coming back.

Tend to agree, 7 would be solid this year, 8 which I doubt we get would be fantastic. I still think if we can play 4 quarters in the next 6 games, we get 2 more with one that we will need some big breaks to get to 7. This team has simply not played well yet this year, IMO talent aside. We will need to play well to win any game at this point, there isn't an effort on the field the first 6 that will get us a win in the next 6, I dont see us as being a better team than any of the remaining games, about even with Ville and UConn but of we play like we have both UCONN and LVille will beat us by 7-14 points, IMO. There is very little margin for error. 6 wins is bare minimum but like I said, we have not played one good game this year, not one, IMO. We are better than what we have shown
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,424
Messages
4,703,089
Members
5,908
Latest member
AlCuse

Online statistics

Members online
312
Guests online
2,172
Total visitors
2,484




Top Bottom