Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="billsin01, post: 1843812, member: 837"] I know there's already been massive arguments on here about S&C but tidbits like this are very interesting and absolutely speak to a couple of things that appear to be beyond argument about strength and conditioning in general. Namely: 1. S&C, with the exception of the short Marrone period, has been a problem for this program since the end of the P era. That's not to say we haven't had nice moments or that S&C was the primary reason we have struggled or that the S&C coaches didn't know what they were doing or that we haven't had other issues (facilities perhaps, recruiting, etc). Rather, relatively simply put, we haven't had the physical edge on many teams the past few years and generally it hasn't been a strength since those badass teams of the late 90s (and of course, Freeney). and 2. There is clearly a new philosophy on the hill. It's not like this has come up once or twice, it seems like almost every day since spring practice up through when players started trickling in, there has been some sort of intriguing nugget regarding the type of training they are doing, the shape and body composition of returning players, etc. Bottom line is that it will be an interesting story to watch. One of the points I don't think I've seen made around here is how important S&C is to Syracuse as opposed to some of the big boys. Obviously it's huge for everyone but particularly if you are a school that it going to have to rely on developing kids that a little bit more raw at a school like Syracuse vs. some of the big boys who are pulling in kids that look NFL ready from day 1 (Ronnie Stanley at ND is one of those guys I remember them saying basically walked on campus ready to play LT). There will be a ton of stories here over the next couple years but watching if there is any notable difference in the way these kids develop year-to-year will be a big one. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?