Babers Clean Slate Philosophy Good or Bad?

[Ish88888]

Sorry, but a coach's first experience into P5 competition, a look at the food in the cupboard might be a decent idea. I would want to know who looked decent at least vs. ACC talent in game speed.

 

[rrlbees]

our first brick in the agenda

Not hardly. I'd say OPA is far less an agenda setter than 99% of the posters. In fact he's been a huge supporter of every coach we've had. Why make stuff up?

 

[RMH44]

Not hardly. I'd say OPA is far less an agenda setter than 99% of the posters. In fact he's been a huge supporter of every coach we've had. Why make stuff up?

That's simple...now that Will Hicks has been moved, he has nothing else to whine about. He needs a new straw man.

 

[Lou_C]

Interesting. My first reaction was What? Doesn't make sense on the surface.

But it actually does make sense I think. I agree with others that it's coach speak. First of all, he acknowledges as a staff that tape will be reviewed. But it is all about sending a message and creating an atmosphere of competition I think.

I think it's another way of saying that every position is open. Part of that is a "fresh start" for guys who might have found themselves buried on the depth chart previously. I bet the bigger message is that every position is open to competition, especially with a new system, but NOBODY is guaranteed anything based on last year. And it's probably a bit of a heads up to the fans, who could be surprised by personnel moves that they wouldn't expect. I remember when Jimbo Fisher took over as OC for FSU, he made lightly recruited/regarded sophomore Christian Ponder the QB over a guy who had been a three year starter, which raised it's share of eyebrows. We also moved to taller DBs as a philosophy, and saw effective starters basically hit the bench never to return.

Considering the system change, I bet you guys have a couple of eyebrow raisers yourself when his team takes the field next year, and I think part of this is his way of telegraphing that.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Why would you want to go into anything with preconceived biases?

Well, the designated star system works for Boeheim, so there is that.

 

[baggerbob]

Both sides have merit. I think more than anything, its a decision by Babers rooted in fairness. He knows that his opinion carries the most weight when everything is said and done, he has the most influence. I think it signals an admirable desire on his part to be as objective in his decision making as possible. On the other hand, evaluating players in practice has its own limitations. No matter what you do, it's very difficult to replicate the intensity of a game situation. Guys always hold back in practice, even if they don't realize it. The speed of the game changes, guys react slower, make decisions slower without that adrenaline pump that they can't just flip the switch and turn on. It can disguise the gamers. Remember they said that about Hunt. After they put him in against Northwestern and he marched them down the field and punched it in, everyone was like 'Coach, why was this guy on the bench for the last two games?' Shaf responded with something about how he didn't know Hunt was such a gamer. He didn't know he would be such am effective runner because they could never truly evaluate his running in practice.

That was one problem with the previous staff, people who practiced well continued to play, even when they were terrible in games.

 

[OrangePA]

our first brick in the agenda

Just to be clear.

I love the decision to hire Babers - I am a huge fan of his. He is a very impressive guy. I think he will do very well for Syracuse University.

I have no agenda.

I will share one thing that might better explain my thinking.

A few years ago I heard a pre-bowl game interview of Bill Snyder of K-State.

He indicated that he had watched every game played by his opponent during the previous four years - every game.

He leaves nothing to chance. He consumes as much information as he can obtain.

I have great respect for Snyder and I believe that he does things the right way.

 

[OrangePA]

Saying that premiere talent trumps most else is so patently obvious that it doesn't need any debate.

What's odd is that the innovative system that was implemented by George DeLeone allowed us to compete on a national level. So now we're dismissing systems? Obviously Mac and P upgraded our talent, but I think it's safe to say that schools like LSU, Michigan, Texas, Ohio State, Auburn, Penn State all had substantially more talent top to bottom on their rosters than SU. Yet we beat them, and our system was a significant factor as to why.

So strange to dismiss that.

My admiration for P and D is no secret.

And, I truly enjoyed watching the Pro Option offense.

I recall that the offense DeLeone implemented - many refer to it as the freeze option - began to really work when Coach D made Donnie Mac the QB in 1985. He matched the talent with the system very effectively.

So, talent clearly played a role in the success of the system. Many years later - 2003- I asked him why he had abandoned the option scheme. He told me that "we don't have a QB with the necessary quickness to run it."

Another thing.

Much of the success that P and D had at SU was their attention to detail - that obsessive approach had a lot to do with their ability to beat more talented teams.

I recall Coach D telling me that in 2003 they knew mid-week that they would beat ND easily in the final game because they had figured out the ND defensive tendencies.

The game was won days before it was played.

So, yes, scheme with appropriate talent is very important. But, the scheme itself is not the final answer.

 

[baggerbob]

My admiration for P and D is no secret.

And, I truly enjoyed watching the Pro Option offense.

I recall that the offense DeLeone implemented - many refer to it as the freeze option - began to really work when Coach D made Donnie Mac the QB in 1985. He matched the talent with the system very effectively.

So, talent clearly played a role in the success of the system. Many years later - 2003- I asked him why he had abandoned the option scheme. He told me that "we don't have a QB with the necessary quickness to run it."

Another thing.

Much of the success that P and D had at SU was their attention to detail - that obsessive approach had a lot to do with their ability to beat more talented teams.

I recall Coach D telling me that in 2003 they knew mid-week that they would beat ND easily in the final game because they had figured out the ND defensive tendencies.

The game was won days before it was played.

So, yes, scheme with appropriate talent is very important. But, the scheme itself is not the final answer.

That offense was best when we had Moose, and Rob 2 Fullbacks who could run, catch, and were tremendous blockers. They were the keys to making the option work, along with the Quarterbacks.

 

[TheCusian]

My admiration for P and D is no secret. And, I truly enjoyed watching the Pro Option offense. I recall that the offense DeLeone implemented - many refer to it as the freeze option - began to really work when Coach D made Donnie Mac the QB in 1985. He matched the talent with the system very effectively. So, talent clearly played a role in the success of the system. Many years later - 2003- I asked him why he had abandoned the option scheme. He told me that "we don't have a QB with the necessary quickness to run it." Another thing. Much of the success that P and D had at SU was their attention to detail - that obsessive approach had a lot to do with their ability to beat more talented teams. I recall Coach D telling me that in 2003 they knew mid-week that they would beat ND easily in the final game because they had figured out the ND defensive tendencies. The game was won days before it was played. So, yes, scheme with appropriate talent is very important. But, the scheme itself is not the final answer.

The vast majority of the board agrees that system + talent is what makes teams good.

I think the smarter way for team running a talent deficit is to invest in a proven system.

And make no mistake, Babers is a guy who is known as a guy who pays attention to detail.

 

[kcsu]

My admiration for P and D is no secret.

And, I truly enjoyed watching the Pro Option offense.

I recall that the offense DeLeone implemented - many refer to it as the freeze option - began to really work when Coach D made Donnie Mac the QB in 1985. He matched the talent with the system very effectively.

So, talent clearly played a role in the success of the system. Many years later - 2003- I asked him why he had abandoned the option scheme. He told me that "we don't have a QB with the necessary quickness to run it."

Another thing.

Much of the success that P and D had at SU was their attention to detail - that obsessive approach had a lot to do with their ability to beat more talented teams.



I recall Coach D telling me that in 2003 they knew mid-week that they would beat ND easily in the final game because they had figured out the ND defensive tendencies.

The game was won days before it was played.

So, yes, scheme with appropriate talent is very important. But, the scheme itself is not the final answer.

Great post. It also helps to have a genius at the helm and in his day i dont think that there was a better football mind on the planet college or pro than George. I know that is one heck of a statement but he was truly a genius might have been the been best coach that has ever worn orange.

 

[Scooch]

So, yes, scheme with appropriate talent is very important. But, the scheme itself is not the final answer.

And no one is suggesting that you can drag 11 kids in off the street and win because of a magical system.

So since just about everyone in this thread understands that there is a base level of quality talent necessary to win, I would content that systems are not "overrated". They are properly rated.

e.g. Syracuse basketball = talent + system

 

[kcsu]

Great post. It also helps to have a genius at the helm and in his day i dont think that there was a better football mind on the planet college or pro than George. I know that is one heck of a statement but he was truly a genius might have been the been best coach that has ever worn orange.

Another thing about George if he had time to prepare he almost always won. Michigan, Ohio State, CU, Florida, the list goes on the guy didnt beat those teams with better talent. He beat them because he had talent and gift of how to apply it.

 

[Scooch]

Another thing about George if he had time to prepare he almost always won. Michigan, Ohio State, CU, Florida, the list goes on the guy didnt beat those teams with better talent. He beat them because he had talent and gift of how to apply it.

Well, until the last couple years. They had all summer to prepare for Purdue and a month to prepare for Georgia Tech in 2004. Ouch.

 

[kcsu]

Well, until the last couple years. They had all summer to prepare for Purdue and a month to prepare for Georgia Tech in 2004. Ouch.

In his day

 

[OrangePA]

The vast majority of the board agrees that system + talent is what makes teams good.

I think the smarter way for team running a talent deficit is to invest in a proven system.

And make no mistake, Babers is a guy who is known as a guy who pays attention to detail.

Yes, but I'll take talent over scheme in every instance.

And no one is suggesting that you can drag 11 kids in off the street and win because of a magical system.

So since just about everyone in this thread understands that there is a base level of quality talent necessary to win, I would content that systems are not "overrated". They are properly rated.

e.g. Syracuse basketball = talent + system

Maybe we are quibbling. But in my view talent is more important than scheme.

And Syracuse University BB is a good example of that.

When we have talented players we win and when we have less talented players we don't win as much.

 

[fairfaxcuse]

Another thing about George if he had time to prepare he almost always won. Michigan, Ohio State, CU, Florida, the list goes on the guy didnt beat those teams with better talent. He beat them because he had talent and gift of how to apply it.

Actually, I think we beat many of those teams you list because we did indeed have better talent despite their big names. For example, one of his guys is going to the hall of fame next year. DeLeone was a good coach and perhaps reached the "great" level in the late 80s given he did truly innovate during that time period. He also had some limitations where he over thought situations, particularly in the later stages of his career, and didn't rely on his talent enough. For example, we way underutilized some players, such as Rob Konrad, which resulted in some of the What losses.

that said, it would be nice to see the university do something for P and D given their long tenure here. It wasn't always easy for them, but they were major cornerstones of a fun run in Syracuse football, particularly in the early 90s. Their run really amplified Coach Mac's legacy here, who was the one who built the program from the ashes in the 80s.

 

[TheCusian]

Yes, but I'll take talent over scheme in every instance. Maybe we are quibbling. But in my view talent is more important than scheme. And Syracuse University BB is a good example of that. When we have talented players we win and when we have less talented players we don't win as much.

Yeah, I agree magic would be a good way to build a program.

EDIT: What I mean is - in a vacuum? Yeah talent. Problem is you need both and if you're not able to get the best kids automagically - you need identity, "swag", and wins: all of which the right system can provide.

 

[Scooch]

Yeah, I agree magic would be a good way to build a program. EDIT: What I mean is - in a vacuum? Yeah talent. Problem is you need both and if you're not able to get the best kids automagically - you need identity, "swag", and wins: all of which the right system can provide.

I like where you took this. So perhaps we can say that ultimately premiere talent trumps systems. But that systems are often necessary to attract premiere talent.

 

[orange79]

I like where you took this. So perhaps we can say that ultimately premiere talent trumps systems. But that systems are often necessary to attract premiere talent.

 

[TheCusian]

I like where you took this. So perhaps we can say that ultimately premiere talent trumps systems. But that systems are often necessary to attract premiere talent.

Not a new thought, by any means. But I think that's what the evidence shows. Traditional powers in recruiting hotbeds are starting from a better position than the rest of us.

You have to do something to compete.

 

[SWC75]

It bothers me a little that he acts like he's reinvented the game and nothing that happened before him matters. Doesn't he look at film to evaluate recruits? He wouldn't be looking for how plays work. He's be looking for the physical capabilities of the players.

That said, if score 35 a game next year and wind up in a bowl game, what he said about the roster when he showed up isn't going to cross my mind.

 

[OrangePA]

Great post. It also helps to have a genius at the helm and in his day i dont think that there was a better football mind on the planet college or pro than George. I know that is one heck of a statement but he was truly a genius might have been the been best coach that has ever worn orange.

Coach D would have been a very good HC.

And he would have been very good - surprisingly good - with the media and the fans.

He changed everything when he arrived on the Hill in 1985 - he is as responsible for the ensuing success as anybody.

 

[OrangePA]

I like where you took this. So perhaps we can say that ultimately premiere talent trumps systems. But that systems are often necessary to attract premiere talent.

I have no problem with that.

Clearly, the system Briles implemented at Baylor attracted RGIII.

And that changed the trajectory of that program.

It seems so far that Dino's system is at least drawing attention from some talented offensive HS players.

And that's pretty exciting.

 

[OrangePA]

It bothers me a little that he acts like he's reinvented the game and nothing that happened before him matters. Doesn't he look at film to evaluate recruits? He wouldn't be looking for how plays work. He's be looking for the physical capabilities of the players.

That said, if score 35 a game next year and wind up in a bowl game, what he said about the roster when he showed up isn't going to cross my mind.

If I am coaching against Syracuse University next year and somebody offers me all the game and practice video I want from 2015 - I take it all and I review every second of it.