Babers is exactly average according to SRS

[dasher]

i know. what i meant was the way we were playing it felt like we were a top 15 team by the end of the year

Well, you are entitled to your opinion but we beat some so so teams. We were nothing special. It's just that we had been so bad that any kind of good play, made us so happy that we saw things that might not have been there. I saw the same thing with Kadary Richmond a few years ago. We hadn't seen any type of pt guard play forever and when we finally did, we went a bit over board with it.

 

[Millhouse]

i know. what i meant was the way we were playing it felt like we were a top 15 team by the end of the year

I agree. that team should've been better than 8-5.

 

[anomander]

I agree. that team should've been better than 8-5.

Tough start without Pugh. I think we at least win the Minnesota game if he plays. Once he got back after game 4 the OL started to click and they started to roll. I remember a terrible call at a good Cincinatti team that changed the game when we were going in to score .

 

[swish7]

Over his eight years at Syracuse, he is exactly average with a strength of schedule 2.45 point margin per game higher than average

At bgsu, he was .72 point margin per game better than average and the strength of schedule is 3.1 point margin per game worse than average

This year our SRS is -0.16

Shafer was -1.18 here

Marrone was exactly average too! What are the odds

Greg -8.19

P was 7.22 here. -0.2 the last three years. -5.91 at uconn. 4.9 overall

Mac 6.85

Maloney 2.49

Ben 6.38

Chick Meehan 11.56

What does all this mean?

 

[HOFCeluck]

Don’t you factor in circumstances? Marrone had a total gutting job to do with absolutely no resources. In 3 years he turned us into a top 15 team by the end of the 2012 season.

We had several games where we won with a combination of last second wins or one point wins against mediocre competition. We had one “good” win all year.

We blow 2012 waaaay out of proportion

 

[SmilinBob]

Tough start without Pugh. I think we at least win the Minnesota game if he plays. Once he got back after game 4 the OL started to click and they started to roll. I remember a terrible call at a good Cincinatti team that changed the game when we were going in to score .

Was that the game when the holder bobbled the ball on a FG and threw the ball to an open receiver who just happened to be near an ineligible OL downfield in the end zone for a TD?

 

[Millhouse]

What does all this mean?

Marrone Shafer babers and end stage pasqualoni weren't that different after accounting for schedule

 

[Symphony Steve]

If Babers is 'exactly average', which I tend to agree with, and if we are indeed a 'below-average' program when it comes to our ability to recruit and to otherwise maintain a competitive P-5 program, then we'd need a 'decidedly above-average' coach to get us back to respectability.

We're once again in that 'likely to lose our key recruits and likely to have a bleepload of transfers' wash/rinse/repeat cycle.

One word sums up my enthusiasm for the future:

"Meh".

 

[Millhouse]

If Babers is 'exactly average', which I tend to agree with, and if we are indeed a 'below-average' program when it comes to our ability to recruit and to otherwise maintain a competitive P-5 program, then we'd need a 'decidedly above-average' coach to get us back to respectability.

We're once again in that 'likely to lose our key recruits and likely to have a bleepload of transfers' wash/rinse/repeat cycle.

One word sums up my enthusiasm for the future:

"Meh".

But they can do that! It's easier to hire a good coach than it is to get a bigger fan base and more money and better recruiting area

So pull the plug and keep trying to find that above average guy

I didn't mean for this post to be a defense of babers, I really hoped for more

 

[syrBossHogg]

Don’t you factor in circumstances? Marrone had a total gutting job to do with absolutely no resources. In 3 years he turned us into a top 15 team by the end of the 2012 season.

It was a gutting job partly because Marrone drove guys away himself. And top 15 team? What?

 

[anomander]

It was a gutting job partly because Marrone drove guys away himself. And top 15 team? What?

By the end of the 2012 season there was no way there were 15 teams better than us. Pugh missed the first 4 games. 2 of those could easily had been wins if he played. That very easily could have been a 10 win season. Once he got back the OL clicked and the offense took off. Best OL i remember a Syracuse team having.

 

[syrBossHogg]

By the end of the 2012 season there was no way there were 15 teams better than us. Pugh missed the first 4 games. 2 of those could easily had been wins if he played. That very easily could have been a 10 win season. Once he got back the OL clicked and the offense took off. Best OL i remember a Syracuse team having.

We could've easily have lost two other games (Pitt, USF) that year so it balances out. That O-line was good but I also really liked the 2018 unit

 

[SWC75]

I like to keep it simple. I was wondering if Babers had done better than Shafer, which is relevant since their tenures correspond exactly to our time in the ACC. Can any coach, including the next one, allow us to compete in this conference?

I just used this: Syracuse Historical Scores

Shafer was 14-23 (.378) overall in his three years, (2013-15). His teams scored 808 points and gave up 1,085, an average of 21.8-29.3 and a difference of -7.5 points per game.

Babers, to date, (2016-present) is 40-54 (.426). His teams have scored 2,575 points and given up 2,654, an average 27.4-28.2, a difference of -0.8 points per game. Babers is clearly better.

But did Babers face easier out-of-conference schedules?

Shafer was 7-6 in non-conference games (.538), out-scoring the opponents 398-305 (30.6-23.5 = +7.1).

Babers is 20-10 in non-conference games (.667), outscoring his opponents 1069-704, (35.6-23.5 = +12.1). Dino has lived off these games.

Which leaves the conference record.

Shafer was a dismal 7-17 (.292), getting out-scored 410-780 (17.1-32.5 = -15.4).

Babers is 20-44, (.3125) and has been out-scored 1,504-1,950 (23.5-30.5 = -7.0).

My conclusion is that Dino Babers has, indeed, been an upgrade over Scott Shafer, but only a mild one. If the next coach has a record similar to either, it' either the fault of the administration and the community or maybe we are just in the wrong conference.

 

[orange_in_VA]

I like to keep it simple. I was wondering if Babers had done better than Shafer, which is relevant since their tenures correspond exactly to our time in the ACC. Can any coach, including the next one, allow us to compete in this conference?

I just used this: Syracuse Historical Scores

Shafer was 14-23 (.378) overall in his three years, (2013-15). His teams scored 808 points and gave up 1,085, an average of 21.8-29.3 and a difference of -7.5 points per game.

Babers, to date, (2016-present) is 40-54 (.426). His teams have scored 2,575 points and given up 2,654, an average 27.4-28.2, a difference of -0.8 points per game. Babers is clearly better.

But did Babers face easier out-of-conference schedules?

Shafer was 7-6 in non-conference games (.538), out-scoring the opponents 398-305 (30.6-23.5 = +7.1).

Babers is 20-10 in non-conference games (.667), outscoring his opponents 1069-704, (35.6-23.5 = +12.1). Dino has lived off these games.

Which leaves the conference record.

Shafer was a dismal 7-17 (.292), getting out-scored 410-780 (17.1-32.5 = -15.4).

Babers is 20-44, (.3125) and has been out-scored 1,504-1,950 (23.5-30.5 = -7.0).

My conclusion is that Dino Babers has, indeed, been an upgrade over Scott Shafer, but only a mild one. If the next coach has a record similar to either, it' either the fault of the administration and the community or maybe we are just in the wrong conference.

This isn't apples to apples though. Dino has had ACC level facilities and 4 times the budget to coach from. Shafer was coaching Big East recruits with a D2 coaching staff and MAC level facilities against established ACC programs.

 

[SWC75]

This isn't apples to apples though. Dino has had ACC level facilities and 4 times the budget to coach from. Shafer was coaching Big East recruits with a D2 coaching staff and MAC level facilities against established ACC programs.

Which misses the point that neither one was adequate if we are to be a "rising program" or whatever Wildhack said. The next guy needs to do a lot better- if that's possible.

 

[orange_in_VA]

Which misses the point that neither one was adequate if we are to be a "rising program" or whatever Wildhack said. The next guy needs to do a lot better- if that's possible.

I agree that neither was good. I'm just not convinced Babers was actually an upgrade. Different circumstances and he only looked above average one season with Shafer's recruits on offense.

 

[Scooch]

By the end of the 2012 season there was no way there were 15 teams better than us. Pugh missed the first 4 games. 2 of those could easily had been wins if he played. That very easily could have been a 10 win season. Once he got back the OL clicked and the offense took off. Best OL i remember a Syracuse team having.

The narrative of 2012 is so weird. We were 4-5. Then we won three games to finish out the regular season. One of those was against Temple.

It was a nice year. Fun at the end, for sure. Much better than the ten that preceded it.

There were also a LOT of people noting that after game 9 that year Marrone was on an awful 4-10 stretch going back to 2011.

We weren’t a top 15 team, or a top 25 team, because rankings take the entire season into account. And we started 4-5.

The retconning of 2012 into a season that was basically 1992 is completely a SyracuseFan.con phenomena. I don’t know anyone outside of this place that holds that season so dear.

 

[Millhouse]

I like to keep it simple. I was wondering if Babers had done better than Shafer, which is relevant since their tenures correspond exactly to our time in the ACC. Can any coach, including the next one, allow us to compete in this conference?

I just used this: Syracuse Historical Scores

Shafer was 14-23 (.378) overall in his three years, (2013-15). His teams scored 808 points and gave up 1,085, an average of 21.8-29.3 and a difference of -7.5 points per game.

Babers, to date, (2016-present) is 40-54 (.426). His teams have scored 2,575 points and given up 2,654, an average 27.4-28.2, a difference of -0.8 points per game. Babers is clearly better.

But did Babers face easier out-of-conference schedules?

Shafer was 7-6 in non-conference games (.538), out-scoring the opponents 398-305 (30.6-23.5 = +7.1).

Babers is 20-10 in non-conference games (.667), outscoring his opponents 1069-704, (35.6-23.5 = +12.1). Dino has lived off these games.

Which leaves the conference record.

Shafer was a dismal 7-17 (.292), getting out-scored 410-780 (17.1-32.5 = -15.4).

Babers is 20-44, (.3125) and has been out-scored 1,504-1,950 (23.5-30.5 = -7.0).

My conclusion is that Dino Babers has, indeed, been an upgrade over Scott Shafer, but only a mild one. If the next coach has a record similar to either, it' either the fault of the administration and the community or maybe we are just in the wrong conference.

If you take out 2020 (not saying anyone has to but that year was so dumb), babers has the same SRS overall here at SU that North Carolina State has this year. About 2.4 points better than the average schedule adjusted game margin.

Oddly similar to Dave clawson's SRS at Wake

Fwiw Shafer's schedule was about one point harder per game than babers

 

[SWC75]

If you take out 2020 (not saying anyone has to but that year was so dumb), babers has the same SRS overall here at SU that North Carolina State has this year. About 2.4 points better than the average schedule adjusted game margin.

Oddly similar to Dave clawson's SRS at Wake

Fwiw Shafer's schedule was about one point hate per game than babers

"hate per game"?

 

[Millhouse]

"hate per game"?

Phone auto correct. One point harder. Sorry about that

 

[MadNY3]

I thought Dino’s 18-44 in the ACC is absolutely awful, but I stand corrected that he’s actually average based on data!

 

[Millhouse]

I thought Dino’s 18-44 in the ACC is absolutely awful, but I stand corrected that he’s actually average based on data!

Compared to all the teams in fbs.

Average fbs teams in good conference will have below average conference records

You really got me!

 

[HRE Otto IV]

I'll try to go step by step.
Games are decided by points.
Teams that score a lot and give up few are good.
This is where it gets confusing.
You might play teams that are good or bad.
So how much you score and allow to be scored can change based on how good your competition is.
If you play lots of games, you can add up all those "numbers" and divide them by how many times you played. This tells how you did on average.
Computers can adjust that margin up or down based on the averages of the teams you played.

Wow what a mouthful

But what's great about using facts instead of emotions is you can compare coaches who played different schedules

Now there is a downside to using facts. Some people don't like facts. Facts make them sad if they have already decided what they want to believe is true. Often times sad people in this predicament will, as very uncouth rude people might say, throw shart against the wall

This sadness can lead people to think that there was a huge difference in facilities between 2009 and 2015 where it would be only reasonable to expect far better average adjusted scoring margins.

I see a trend where the end of Pasqualoni's tenure looks pretty similar to Marrone/Shafer/Babers on average with a 4 year debacle in between. I had big hopes for babers and it's hard for me to admit he's average. It really hurts my feelings. But here i am admitting he's average because I try not be a baby.

Facts are facts. Computer rankings are not facts. They are influenced by human premises and are biased to the data points included, excluded, and given weights. On top of that CFB has few data points and a ton of variance (unlike the NFL). You can manipulate the same data to show both sides of opposite arguments.

Dino has trailed by 17 points in the 1st half of over 20% of his games. Even if he ended up losing by the "average" given his SOS, the fact that his losses are over in the 1st half while Coach X's happen in the 4th Q is a huge difference. Sure they end up at the same place, but how you get there matters.

If Dino's games are over at halftime and in garbage time nothing changes in the 2nd half, how is that the same as another coach hanging around until the 4th Q where the opponent finally pulls away? In Dino's case the team is unprepared and doesn't show up. In the later case, in the end you cannot make up for the talent gap.

UNC only scored 13 points in the 2nd half. Was that due to garbage time or good coaching by Dino? Or VA Tech only scoring 8 in the 2nd half? Then you have a team like Duke who lost to FSU by 18 points. That is a lot of points, but Duke lead until 13:03 in the 4th D. There is a huge difference in losing by 18 that way and losing by 18 only because the entire 2nd half is garbage time. I rather have the avg score regress to the avg from a positive halftime starting point and not from a negative halftime deficit.

Have you get to the avg matters, and in Dino's case it is a major issue.

 

[MadNY3]

Compared to all the teams in fbs.

Average fbs teams in good conference will have below average conference records

You really got me!

Our peer set is P5 not FBS.

Data doesn’t matter when the base proposition is obviously subpar. That’s it.

 

[Millhouse]

Facts are facts. Computer rankings are not facts. They are influenced by human premises and are biased to the data points included, excluded, and given weights. On top of that CFB has few data points and a ton of variance (unlike the NFL). You can manipulate the same data to show both sides of opposite arguments.

Dino has trailed by 17 points in the 1st half of over 20% of his games. Even if he ended up losing by the "average" given his SOS, the fact that his losses are over in the 1st half while Coach X's happen in the 4th Q is a huge difference. Sure they end up at the same place, but how you get there matters.

If Dino's games are over at halftime and in garbage time nothing changes in the 2nd half, how is that the same as another coach hanging around until the 4th Q where the opponent finally pulls away? In Dino's case the team is unprepared and doesn't show up. In the later case, in the end you cannot make up for the talent gap.

UNC only scored 13 points in the 2nd half. Was that due to garbage time or good coaching by Dino? Or VA Tech only scoring 8 in the 2nd half? Then you have a team like Duke who lost to FSU by 18 points. That is a lot of points, but Duke lead until 13:03 in the 4th D. There is a huge difference in losing by 18 that way and losing by 18 only because the entire 2nd half is garbage time. I rather have the avg score regress to the avg from a positive halftime starting point and not from a negative halftime deficit.

Have you get to the avg matters, and in Dino's case it is a major issue.

Points scored and allowed by your team and your opponents are facts. If you want to assume that other teams are competitive longer and fall apart, go ahead, but you don't have any factual basis for that