Dino can't recruit QBs. The OL OL OL crowd is on meth. | Page 9 | Syracusefan.com

Dino can't recruit QBs. The OL OL OL crowd is on meth.

We had a system that worked on offense. Going fast was the great equalizer of talent; so much so that that meathead teams with great players complained enough to get the rules changed. That was the point when Dino's teams started to struggle. Gimmick? In a way I suppose it was but it allowed teams to even the playing field. If it wasn't effective, teams wouldn't have resorted to faking injuries and the like to slow the game down. I personally liked it and found the new rules crap. Cry baby stuff.
 
to be fair, a lot of us said to fire him after Vtech because we thought it was an opportunity to right the ship a bit with an interim coach.

He's had every chance to succeed. And Syracuse has black coaches in all three prominent sports (women's bball being third). Hard to see how race would be a factor at Syracuse. He's had a longer leash than anyone in the country.
I'm not saying any of the criticism that wildsack would get would be fair or that I would agree with it. I'm just saying it would happen.
 
We had a system that worked on offense. Going fast was the great equalizer of talent; so much so that that meathead teams with great players complained enough to get the rules changed. That was the point when Dino's teams started to struggle. Gimmick? In a way I suppose it was but it allowed teams to even the playing field. If it wasn't effective, teams wouldn't have resorted to faking injuries and the like to slow the game down. I personally liked it and found the new rules crap. Cry baby stuff.
Show me someone who thinks it's a gimmick and I'll show you someone who loves watching the ny football giants on his rca console TV
 
to be fair, a lot of us said to fire him after Vtech because we thought it was an opportunity to right the ship a bit with an interim coach.

He's had every chance to succeed. And Syracuse has black coaches in all three prominent sports (women's bball being third). Hard to see how race would be a factor at Syracuse. He's had a longer leash than anyone in the country.
Not only that but to write a racism hit piece on the school that had the first African American Heisman winner would be … well it would be dumb.
 
My point was defense travels far better than air raid … of course if I recall you wanted a guy like Dino, he won’t get to 60%. Leach is a very rare animal you can’t just bring in air raid and make it work … his results while good wouldn’t translate here, plus he is one of a handful that could pull it off and rest in peace he is not available so yeah let’s go find an air raid guy no matter how mediocre because you’ll think we will have success flinging it all over … worked real well this time around :rolleyes:

We haven't lacked passers and we haven't lacked defense.
We've lacked a functional line for about 16 of the last 20 years.
It all starts with the offensive line.
 
We haven't lacked passers and we haven't lacked defense.
We've lacked a functional line for about 16 of the last 20 years.
It all starts with the offensive line.
I don’t disagree … however our only chance to beat BC came because of the D. Same thing last year as the D nearly handed us a Clemson win on the road. Never have I said don’t have a good offense but to ignore a coach due to having defensive roots is foolhardy …
 
That was always Deleone. I may have spelled that wrong. George was a great teacher on oline.

Absolutely. Pasqualoni knew something about line play, too. He had several stints as a d line coach in the NFL. Both were great teachers of the game.
 
The eagerness and persistent willingness to piss away the one truly unique advantage our program has, the dome, is legitimately astounding.

Just because you pick a coach who has a background coaching good offensive lines doesn't mean he will never throw the ball. If you want to throw the ball downfield, you have to have competent protection.
 
We haven't lacked passers and we haven't lacked defense.
We've lacked a functional line for about 16 of the last 20 years.
It all starts with the offensive line.
A good O line makes everyone look better. Give a mediocre QB another second in the pocket and he improves greatly and his confidence skyrockets. An average RB can find holes behind a good line. Average WRs have time to get open. This moves the chains and increases time of possession which gives the D a rest.
 
We haven't lacked passers and we haven't lacked defense.
We've lacked a functional line for about 16 of the last 20 years.
It all starts with the offensive line.
Which makes playing a pro style power game completely idiotic.

And defensive coaches love to punt and never go for it on fourth down so they lose by less.

This is insane.
 
Which makes playing a pro style power game completely idiotic.

And defensive coaches love to punt and never go for it on fourth down so they lose by less.

This is insane.
Dan Lanning disagrees
 
Which makes playing a pro style power game completely idiotic.

And defensive coaches love to punt and never go for it on fourth down so they lose by less.

This is insane.
This is why I say good defense in college football is an illusion. At least for us.

There's a difference between having the talent and schemes to lock teams down consistently, and making decisions on the football team that favor your defense. We could maybe have the schemes, but we're not going to out talent other teams on defense, and decisions favoring the difference are losing ones. We just lose by less.
 
We aren’t Oregon. Every coach that goes there wins 10 games.
I’m not saying we are … I’m saying there are defensive coaches that don’t all function as you describe. That was my whole point, look no further than what he did in the UW game
 
Which makes playing a pro style power game completely idiotic.

And defensive coaches love to punt and never go for it on fourth down so they lose by less.

This is insane.
Anyone who likes a pro style is because there is a focus on oline play/development. You can make average recruits into good lineman. Thats all we want - and its possible.

When you focus on other areas, line play may suffer. If you have average skill players? You can certainly be average, but could be at a disadvantage vs. Better talent. Even worse if your oline is mehh...

Its not a vote for full meathead. It's a vote for improving an area that coaching and scheme CAN give an advantage. If you are a legitimate threat, here? Go ahead. Sling it all over the field- if you can. Just make the oline a fundamental threat, that always needs to be accounted for.
 
Which makes playing a pro style power game completely idiotic.

And defensive coaches love to punt and never go for it on fourth down so they lose by less.

This is insane.

You're putting words in my mouth.
All I said was that I want the next coach to have experience producing good offensive lines.
I never said I was against passing the ball.
But in case you haven't noticed, you can't do that either without a competent offensive line.
 
I’m not saying we are … I’m saying there are defensive coaches that don’t all function as you describe. That was my whole point, look no further than what he did in the UW game
My main annoyance is it seems like that’s all we are considering. If we hire someone who gets a good OC and leaves them alone then fine, but 80% of the time it doesn’t work that way.
 
You're putting words in my mouth.
All I said was that I want the next coach to have experience producing good offensive lines.
I never said I was against passing the ball.
But in case you haven't noticed, you can't do that either without a competent offensive line.
I wasn’t calling you out Matt. I was just adding to your comments. I didn’t disagree with anything in your post.
 
Anyone who likes a pro style is because there is a focus on oline play/development. You can make average recruits into good lineman. Thats all we want - and its possible.

When you focus on other areas, line play may suffer. If you have average skill players? You can certainly be average, but could be at a disadvantage vs. Better talent. Even worse if your oline is mehh...

Its not a vote for full meathead. It's a vote for improving an area that coaching and scheme CAN give an advantage. If you are a legitimate threat, here? Go ahead. Sling it all over the field- if you can. Just make the oline a fundamental threat, that always needs to be accounted for.
Then hire a coach that stresses that. How does a defensive coach stress offensive line play?
 
Anyone who likes a pro style is because there is a focus on oline play/development. You can make average recruits into good lineman. Thats all we want - and its possible.

When you focus on other areas, line play may suffer. If you have average skill players? You can certainly be average, but could be at a disadvantage vs. Better talent. Even worse if your oline is mehh...

Its not a vote for full meathead. It's a vote for improving an area that coaching and scheme CAN give an advantage. If you are a legitimate threat, here? Go ahead. Sling it all over the field- if you can. Just make the oline a fundamental threat, that always needs to be accounted for.
Per the title of the thread, you are obviously on meth.

Good post RG
 
Per the title of the thread, you are obviously on meth.

Good post RG

youre-goddamn-right-breaking-bad.gif
 
Anyone who likes a pro style is because there is a focus on oline play/development. You can make average recruits into good lineman. Thats all we want - and its possible.

When you focus on other areas, line play may suffer. If you have average skill players? You can certainly be average, but could be at a disadvantage vs. Better talent. Even worse if your oline is mehh...

Its not a vote for full meathead. It's a vote for improving an area that coaching and scheme CAN give an advantage. If you are a legitimate threat, here? Go ahead. Sling it all over the field- if you can. Just make the oline a fundamental threat, that always needs to be accounted for.

Look at 2010. Our OL was horrendous at pass blocking but we could move the ball on the ground. When our OL was better in 2012, we slung it around. We are a school that will have to let its OL grow. When they are full of upperclassmen, you can throw at will. When they are full of underclassmen, you need to run it more.

If we could get good QBs or decent WRs, we can try to sling it around to hide the bad OL play. But as we saw in 2019, it didn't work out. On top of that your QB will take a ton of hits.

Going full meat head or playing like BC did Friday is dumb. Going full Leach without Leach actually there and without a decent QB or WRs is dumb. We can throw the ball 50x a game when we have the talent. When we don't, we have to 2021 it. Ideally we are in between. Having a system that is flexible to go in either direction given the talent makeup IMO will work best.

On top of that a coach with a NFL background will be able to come up with a good O gameplan much more than a college O guy who is all about system. Just going on system can lead to bad matchups and poor performances. As opposed to scheming to your opponents weaknesses.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
166,562
Messages
4,645,167
Members
5,883
Latest member
syra72cuse

Online statistics

Members online
259
Guests online
917
Total visitors
1,176


Top Bottom