Brian Ward Fired

Chip

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
17,481
Like
35,456
There wasn't much to work with. Had Briles been installed last year like Taggart wanted, FSU would have likely looked better in Year 2.
Which is what someone would run into here. That was my point.
 

sufandu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
7,531
Like
7,766
I see what ur saying but we were clamoring for shy to get a shot for how long. He runs his guys even when it’s not working. So Clemson was a bad choice but u get my thought process. Now after Clemson going into Pitt we new their qb was crappy so what do u think they are gonna do. Did we do anything. No that reason right there is a reason to be fired. Cmon any dc would try something different. We have a decent talent pool on defense and I hear some people saying that it’s hard cause of this years three and outs but it doesn’t count when it’s in the second quarter ya know.
Yeah. I'm with you. There were games that I thought the defense looked ok for 2 1/2-3 quarters and then gassed at the end from being thrown back on the field so quickly throughout the game. That absolutely was not the case last saturday.
 

SkyTopBus44

2nd String
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
647
Like
585
And that’s why we need to hire more assistants who can recruit above our current level. And that means we’ll have to be willing to pay more.
To the players or the coaches?
 

HRE Otto IV

Starter
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,355
Like
1,601
Anyone have any thoughts on Brian Norwood? He's done a good job in his co-DC role this year at Navy, and Dino coached with him at Baylor?
Was talked about in a different thread. He isn’t the brains behind the system.

Personally I think we should go with a 3-2-6 D. Give me a giant at NT, 2 big DEs, 2 bigger LBs, 2 bigger SSs who will play more like OLBs but faster and better in coverage, 2 FSs, and 2 CBs. That personnel will be able to handle the spread no problem. Offenses will have a hard time identifying coverage and who to block. You are a bit undersized vs meathead Os but if you are aggressive and get penetration, where will the RB go? Since no one else runs it, teams will have a more difficult time prepping and running scout for it. That’s a competitive advantage.
 

TheCusian

Living Legend
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
18,236
Like
22,725
Was talked about in a different thread. He isn’t the brains behind the system.

Personally I think we should go with a 3-2-6 D. Give me a giant at NT, 2 big DEs, 2 bigger LBs, 2 bigger SSs who will play more like OLBs but faster and better in coverage, 2 FSs, and 2 CBs. That personnel will be able to handle the spread no problem. Offenses will have a hard time identifying coverage and who to block. You are a bit undersized vs meathead Os but if you are aggressive and get penetration, where will the RB go? Since no one else runs it, teams will have a more difficult time prepping and running scout for it. That’s a competitive advantage.
I'm not sure we know for sure how much he was responsible for the Navy D or not - Was he a co the entire time it was being implemented?

And I'm all for doing something weird on D - but I don't think we can recruit the types of guys you've outlined
 

HRE Otto IV

Starter
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,355
Like
1,601
I'm not sure we know for sure how much he was responsible for the Navy D or not - Was he a co the entire time it was being implemented?

And I'm all for doing something weird on D - but I don't think we can recruit the types of guys you've outlined
IMO there is a dearth of LBs in football today. So only requiring 2 will help us. Pass rushing DEs are hard to come by despite having that currently. So don’t require any. Good DTs are hard to come by, so why not require only one and let him eat. Tweener DL who are too big for most schools at DE but too small for DT (Josh Black) now have a home at SU. Come here and play!

Of the guys who get PT now I would go with:

NT Ruff
DEs Black and Coleman (tad undersized but strong)
LB Williams and Armstrong (no other option)
SS Foster and Cordy (undersized)
CB Frederick and Iffy
FS Trill and Cisco

We are almost there without even recruiting to the system.
 

FloridaFan

Starter
Joined
Nov 3, 2017
Messages
1,460
Like
2,304
Exactly, Time to open up the checkbook. There’s plenty of good recruiters out there we just got to pay them to get here. It’s all about money baby. Most of the time you get what you pay for if you go cheap the results are going to show on the field. It looks like Syracuse is starting to get that picture but I just wish that step it up even more
You do realize we never have had the worse recruiting ranking in our entire time in the ACC right?
 

Cuse#1

Scout Team
Joined
Jan 21, 2019
Messages
356
Like
231
You do realize we never have had the worse recruiting ranking in our entire time in the ACC right?
I’m a lil surprised by that but after our latest commitment I don’t think our ranking is the worst is the acc. Right where it usually is,around 10th or so
 

PhatOrange

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,579
Like
22,020
Anyone have any thoughts on Brian Norwood? He's done a good job in his co-DC role this year at Navy, and Dino coached with him at Baylor?
Minus the child rape I like the fact that he was at Penn State for 7 years.

1990–1991 Arizona (GA)
1992–1994 Richmond (OLB)
1995–1999 Navy (DB)
2000 Texas Tech (DB)
2001–2007 Penn State (S)
2008–2010 Baylor (DC)
2011–2015 Baylor (AHC/S)
2015–2017 Tulsa (AHC/Co-DC/S)
2018 Kansas State (Co-DC/DB)
2019–present Navy (Co-DC/S)--
 

TheCusian

Living Legend
Joined
Sep 24, 2012
Messages
18,236
Like
22,725
IMO there is a dearth of LBs in football today. So only requiring 2 will help us. Pass rushing DEs are hard to come by despite having that currently. So don’t require any. Good DTs are hard to come by, so why not require only one and let him eat. Tweener DL who are too big for most schools at DE but too small for DT (Josh Black) now have a home at SU. Come here and play!

Of the guys who get PT now I would go with:

NT Ruff
DEs Black and Coleman (tad undersized but strong)
LB Williams and Armstrong (no other option)
SS Foster and Cordy (undersized)
CB Frederick and Iffy
FS Trill and Cisco

We are almost there without even recruiting to the system.
I like the thought - and this is a good argument. I’m sure the issue would be BC and PITT running it down our throats.

but I don’t know - Dino thinks outside of the box on some things.
 

HRE Otto IV

Starter
Joined
Jan 14, 2016
Messages
1,355
Like
1,601
I like the thought - and this is a good argument. I’m sure the issue would be BC and PITT running it down our throats.

but I don’t know - Dino thinks outside of the box on some things.
I think we would be fine vs a BC type. We can just play for penetration. Not like we are sitting back.

A NT always gives a C problems. The Gs can’t really help because of the 2 LBs right on the NTs hip that need to be accounted for whether they come or fall back or twist the OL won’t know. The Ts will be forced to block down on the DEs which isn’t easy and almost forces BC to run off T which is already a win. The SSs are showing blitz from the outside so the TEs have to account for them.

We would be showing a 7 man front with the O having no clue what 4 guys will do. They won’t know who to block pre snap. It is all about TFL no sitting back and taking up space for the LBs to make a play. That is the old way of thinking. Also playing for penetration makes it very difficult to pull any OL as the D is looking to disrupt behind the LOS. I hate seeing teams do that in short yardage situations. It fails too often because of the penetration. Taking pulling of OL away from BC hurts their bread and butter plays.

We wouldn’t have a true 2nd level. That is a weakness. Should the OL pick everyone up the two FSs need to come up and make a play. But against a team like BC you could cheat one of them up. We would also be vulnerable to off tackle runs. But to me that is a win getting Dillon running outside vs inside the Ts.
 

CuseOnly

All American
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
5,743
Like
5,636
I agree. He would have helped and not using Richards isn’t helping either.
Why does everyone think that Richards playing time is the answer to everything on defense?

What has he done when he has played that has shown that he is some sort of game changer?

Other than the defensive coaches saying that he is super athletic, really what has he done? DO you have some sort of inside info that the rest of us don't?

I know a few players that literally were athletic freaks that couldn't get on the field...Ashton Broyld and Dorian Graham come to mind, neither of them were difference makers at the end of the day.

Are you one of those prognosticators that thought that Tommy should have started over Dungey last year too?

Wow, I will wait for the Tyrell Richards proof that he was dominant for any snap he has been on the field.
 

shu 49

All Conference
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
2,392
Like
2,784
Why does everyone think that Richards playing time is the answer to everything on defense?

What has he done when he has played that has shown that he is some sort of game changer?

Other than the defensive coaches saying that he is super athletic, really what has he done? DO you have some sort of inside info that the rest of us don't?

I know a few players that literally were athletic freaks that couldn't get on the field...Ashton Broyld and Dorian Graham come to mind, neither of them were difference makers at the end of the day.

Are you one of those prognosticators that thought that Tommy should have started over Dungey last year too?

Wow, I will wait for the Tyrell Richards proof that he was dominant for any snap he has been on the field.
Well what we have done isn’t working so maybe Richards plays and isn’t what we need but at least we tried. How do we know he isn’t the answer and trust me he isn’t the whole answer. When things aren’t working don’t keep doing the same thing with the same guys. We have three games left and no experience next year there but Jones who I think is pretty decent. Yes I was one of them guys and I was wrong and I told everyone how wrong I was. But I was also the guy saying shy should play and magically they realized he could. It’s not super difficult to see if a kid is a player. Richards is tough as hell on specials and super aggressive. Oh he is also the type of size we need too. The most important thing is he is a downhill defender who tries making plays at los and not wait after a five yard gain.
 

reedny

Stable Genius
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
9,841
Like
12,933
Why does everyone think that Richards playing time is the answer to everything on defense?

What has he done when he has played that has shown that he is some sort of game changer?

Other than the defensive coaches saying that he is super athletic, really what has he done? DO you have some sort of inside info that the rest of us don't?

I know a few players that literally were athletic freaks that couldn't get on the field...Ashton Broyld and Dorian Graham come to mind, neither of them were difference makers at the end of the day.

Are you one of those prognosticators that thought that Tommy should have started over Dungey last year too?

Wow, I will wait for the Tyrell Richards proof that he was dominant for any snap he has been on the field.
Hard to understand this post when our current starting LB's are the worst in the ACC by a large margin. Yes we have issues with our interior DL, which can't keep offensive linemen off our LB's. But our starters struggle to read plays. They're out of position more often than not on runs. If they're lucky enough to read the play they have trouble getting off blocks. And even when they get free they can't hold the edge or tackle the ball carrier. Why not play a kid with safety speed, (big) LB size, relentless motor and the strength to shed blocks and hit with power - exactly what we lack. Even at DE (a position at which he's underutilized IMO), I've seen him run down a back who outsprinted our safeties - from the opposite side of the field. It was an NFL-caliber play from out of nowhere. I get that he has some assignment issues, but failing to give him a chance to correct these on the field was criminal. I've been saying this since this summer, along with bcubs9497.

Maybe now that the DC is gone and we've been humiliated repeatedly ... we can try something new. It couldn't have been any worse.
 
Last edited:

money3189

All American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,200
Like
9,645
Hard to understand this post when our current starting LB's are the worst in the ACC by a large margin. Yes we have issues with our interior DL, which can't keep offensive linemen off our LB's. But our starters struggle to read plays and get in the right holes. They can't get off blocks, and even when they're free they can't catch the ball carrier. Why not play a kid with safety speed and (big) LB size, who can shed blocks and hits with power - exactly what we lack. Even at DE (a position at which he's underutilized IMO), I've seen him run down a back who had gotten by our safeties - from the opposite side of the field. It was an NFL play. He came out of nowhere - amazing motor. Failing to give him more snaps at LB this year was criminal. I've been saying that since this summer, along with jdubs30.

Maybe now that the DC is gone and we've been humiliated repeatedly ... we can try something new. It couldn't get any worse.
I was told Richards is inconsistent at LB. Has great raw ability but there are things holding him back that are keeping him from being a every down player. I would love to see him play a full game at LB so he can learn through game experience because the upside is there.
 

P Vasiloff

Murcerfan
Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
629
Like
1,670
I was told Richards is inconsistent at LB. Has great raw ability but there are things holding him back that are keeping him from being a every down player. I would love to see him play a full game at LB so he can learn through game experience because the upside is there.
Richards may be inconsistent and does possibly have things that hold him back. I like you still think he should be out there more. My God, I have watched Evan Foster make the same mistakes over and over again for three years yet he loses no time. Don't forget Ward/Monroe/McCloud had Cordell Hudson playing over Fredrick for the first 7 games in 2016. You remember him, the star of the Lamar Jackson highlight reel. That has been my main criticism of this staff. They are too stubborn regarding giving other players time. All you ever get is they aren't ready, yet the guys that are playing don't play like they are ready either. Sometimes change is good.
 

shu 49

All Conference
Joined
Apr 2, 2013
Messages
2,392
Like
2,784
I was told Richards is inconsistent at LB. Has great raw ability but there are things holding him back that are keeping him from being a every down player. I would love to see him play a full game at LB so he can learn through game experience because the upside is there.
And that’s all I’m saying is just try him ya know. Can’t be worse than what’s happening now. We didn’t know what shy would bring until he played and did well. He does well great and if he doesn’t ok too at least now we know.
 

money3189

All American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
4,200
Like
9,645
And that’s all I’m saying is just try him ya know. Can’t be worse than what’s happening now. We didn’t know what shy would bring until he played and did well. He does well great and if he doesn’t ok too at least now we know.
I look at it both ways. I get what you are saying and I agree. I want to see how he will do with an opportunity in a game but in the staff's eyes they've been putting him in game situations for 3 years and he hasn't shined over the current starters.
 
Last edited:

sufandu

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 30, 2011
Messages
7,531
Like
7,766
I would like to see the LB's used to attack downhill more. I forget what game I was watching, it may have been a pro game, but the analyst during the game mentioned how a well respected DC, again I forget who but I recognized the name at the time, used to tell guys to attack the QB and play the run on the way there.

With how often we see our LB's get lost in the wash and have difficulty getting off blocks and considering they're a bit undersized but fairly athletic, it seems like putting them in attack mode would allow them to play faster and creating some havoc may benefit us even if it did open us up to a few more big plays. Could we really give up more big plays than have been anyway? It may also let us use someone wirh physical tools but poorly developed skills, like Armstrong may be, effectively.
 

Online statistics

Members online
299
Guests online
1,404
Total visitors
1,703

Top Bottom