Does it matter how we win?

[Crusty]

The only style of football I really dislike is losing football. While I prefer high scoring offensive football, I really don't care what we run so long as we win.
Ground and pound? Fine - just win.
Spread? Fine - just win.
Hurry up? Fine - just win.
Pro style? Fine - just win.
Option? Fine - just win.
So, in that spirit, I am prepared to be patient with Lester's offense, whatever it turns out to be, as long it shows sign that we can win with it. Just demonstrate that it works with our talent and doesn't require talent we cannot recruit and I will believe.
Does style matter to you?

 

[dasher]

The only style of football I really dislike is losing football. While I prefer high scoring offensive football, I really don't care what we run so long as we win.
Ground and pound? Fine - just win.
Spread? Fine - just win.
Hurry up? Fine - just win.
Pro style? Fine - just win.
Option? Fine - just win.
So, in that spirit, I am prepared to be patient with Lester's offense, whatever it turns out to be, as long it shows sign that we can win with it. Just demonstrate that it works with our talent and doesn't require talent we cannot recruit and I will believe.
Does style matter to you?

agree 100%

 

[Chip]

Right now it doesn't. But SU's roadmap should be offense. Based on our stadium and I'm sure some positive correlation between offensive firepower and interested fan base.

If the Shafer/Lester era isn't going to work out and our next head coach hire is one with a background coaching on the defensive side of the ball, then maybe we should explore ripping the Dome off the top altogether.

 

[Scooch]

Style doesn't matter if you win A LOT. Take, JB's hoops teams for example, there are lots of people who would prefer we not play a 2-3 zone, but when you're winning 25+ games and going to conference tournament finals and Sweet 16s, it's hard to argue about aesthetics.

So if our football team played a low-scoring, boring offensive style, but had a great D/ST and won 9+ every year with the occassional trip to the ACC CG and top 15 national finishes, I think that'd be fine.

The problem is that playing that style and going 7-5 doesn't excite anyone. If our ceiling is 8 wins we might as well do it by playing exciting, high-scoring football.

 

[FAL]

agree 100%

Ditto

 

[GoSU96]

A great mind has said it's better to be "exciting" and lose than be boring and win.

I wonder what they think of that in Pullman.

 

[IHeartSUFball]

The only style of football I really dislike is losing football. While I prefer high scoring offensive football, I really don't care what we run so long as we win. Ground and pound? Fine - just win. Spread? Fine - just win. Hurry up? Fine - just win. Pro style? Fine - just win. Option? Fine - just win. So, in that spirit, I am prepared to be patient with Lester's offense, whatever it turns out to be, as long it shows sign that we can win with it. Just demonstrate that it works with our talent and doesn't require talent we cannot recruit and I will believe. Does style matter to you?

nope need wins ASAP... Chomping at bit for sept slate to try and right this ship some

 

[RMH44]

A great mind has said it's better to be "exciting" and lose than be boring and win.

I wonder what they think of that in Pullman.

I'm confused...who are you quoting? ML or OIG?

 

[GoSU96]

I'm confused...who are you quoting? ML or OIG?

I don't think Mike Leach would say anything that ridiculous.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Chip and Scooch get it. If we're a blank slate, winning however we can as Crusty suggests works. We're not a blank slate though. We've got a recent history of fleeting moments where the fanbase gets excited and gets immediately let down. You can't keep nut punching your fans and have the same old lines while nothing changes before the broader fan base just quits. That's where we're at right now because the wheels fell off for P, Robinson was a disaster, things fell apart after that WVU winning game at the Dome in 2011, we got off to such a bad start after 2012, then Villanova and the rest of this season after the year before ended on a high note.

So I'm tired of Go and RMH and others failing to understand that if we hope to ever see anything more out of our program it makes sense that we need more sizzle (fun and entertaining offense) than steak (hoping to claw out close wins in defensive battles where we have no margin for error) because that's a really low quality peice of meat being offered and we keep seeing that our approach Does. Not. Work. We keep losing for a lot of reasons, but part of it is that the game has passed us by even though we arguably play in the stadium best suited to modern offense, and we construct a low ceiling for ourselves by making everything a grind. Then we lie to ourselves thinking it will get better once we fit our offense to our talent, instead of asking what exactly we offer to a talented offensive player and until we can answer that accept that we're probably limiting ourselves right out of the gate, and rationalize to ourselves the reasons why it makes sense that our head coach values possession of the ball so little and is so eager to give up on his offense, punt, and expect his defense to make something happen.

It is insanity. I thought Syracuse was better than that. We're not. We're comfortable failing. We'll give the pain we know all the time in the world, and immediately pull the plug once anything is attempted that's different.

The fans that stay home are the smart ones.

 

[Cusejuicy]

I don't care how we do it but we need to win early and often. A lot more than the coaches' future depend on our producing a winning team.

 

[Finwad32]

I don't care how it happens, I just want to win. I want to win in everything I do, and I expect to as well. At the end of the day, when people look back at history, the W's and L's is what they look at, always.

Sizzle suffices for only so long when you're losing. Same for grinding it out. Winning with sizzle is more fun. Winning while grinding is still winning. I think everyone would like some flare more than the alternative, but, let's get the W's first and foremost however necessary.

*disclaimer, I'm jumping in mid conversation without reading the thread, so excuse me if I'm missing some things.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I don't care how it happens, I just want to win. I want to win in everything I do, and I expect to as well. At the end of the day, when people look back at history, the W's and L's is what they look at, always.

Sizzle suffices for only so long when you're losing. Same for grinding it out. Winning with sizzle is more fun. Winning while grinding is still winning. I think everyone would like some flare more than the alternative, but, let's get the W's first and foremost however necessary.

*disclaimer, I'm jumping in mid conversation without reading the thread, so excuse me if I'm missing some things.

Finwad, I'd counter that in today's game sizzle is coupled with winning. If you bail on sizzle, it's a low probability that you win.

This ain't Lombardi era football.

 

[TheCusian]

Chip and Scooch get it. If we're a blank slate, winning however we can as Crusty suggests works. We're not a blank slate though. We've got a recent history of fleeting moments where the fanbase gets excited and gets immediately let down. You can't keep nut punching your fans and have the same old lines while nothing changes before the broader fan base just quits. That's where we're at right now because the wheels fell off for P, Robinson was a disaster, things fell apart after that WVU winning game at the Dome in 2011, we got off to such a bad start after 2012, then Villanova and the rest of this season after the year before ended on a high note. So I'm tired of Go and RMH and others failing to understand that if we hope to ever see anything more out of our program it makes sense that we need more sizzle (fun and entertaining offense) than steak (hoping to claw out close wins in defensive battles where we have no margin for error) because that's a really low quality peice of meat being offered and we keep seeing that our approach Does. Not. Work. We keep losing for a lot of reasons, but part of it is that the game has passed us by even though we arguably play in the stadium best suited to modern offense, and we construct a low ceiling for ourselves by making everything a grind. Then we lie to ourselves thinking it will get better once we fit our offense to our talent, instead of asking what exactly we offer to a talented offensive player and until we can answer that accept that we're probably limiting ourselves right out of the gate, and rationalize to ourselves the reasons why it makes sense that our head coach values possession of the ball so little and is so eager to give up on his offense, punt, and expect his defense to make something happen. It is insanity. I thought Syracuse was better than that. We're not. We're comfortable failing. We'll give the pain we know all the time in the world, and immediately pull the plug once anything is attempted that's different. The fans that stay home are the smart ones.

I agree that sizzle matters - and I'd rather have an innovative offense. That's the only think that makes sense in that whole post.

The last two paragraphs is exactly what's wrong with the fan base. Defeatist attitude is the plague of our fan base. We need to spend more time freaking cheering and less time complaining and moaning about what we are not. First hint of adversity in the Shafer era and fans like you started the drum beat. It's BS.

I don't care how hard it is to cheer for a style that you don't think fits our dome.

 

[ImperialOrange]

You play to win the game.

We need to find a style that is proactive rather than reactive and trying to catch up. We're not going to outrecruit established spread/air raid teams for the pieces so we need to have a different tact. Whether that be playing big on offense it doesn't much matter. If we go back to the triple option, wishbone or try something else it doesn't much matter. We need to work the pieces we have into and advantage rather than try and run something despite the pieces. As soon as we find something we do consistently well to build off of we will much better served by it. Would love to get more out of special teams for starters to more consistently flip the field.

 

[Chip]

A great mind has said it's better to be "exciting" and lose than be boring and win. I wonder what they think of that in Pullman.

It gets easy to forget that only an offensive minded Saint knows how to hire a good defensive coordinator. Can lightning strike our program twice?

 

[cusefan88]

Just win baby! That's my favorite style!

 

[omg_cuse_rules]

The ends justify the means. That being said, I could care less what offensive style they play to achieve a winning record.

So... Does anyone know what style lester will employ? Or are we looking at another year of multiple offense, multiple defense with no true identity?

 

[GoSU96]

It gets easy to forget that only an offensive minded Saint knows how to hire a good defensive coordinator. Can lightning strike our program twice?

What does any of that mean?

 

[bcubs9497]

A win is a win. Period. Doesn't matter if it's with a ground pounding attack, or a spread/fun-and-gun attack, or whatever. Find what works best with the personnel on hand, and go with it.

 

[omg_cuse_rules]

What does any of that mean?

Pretty simple. Doug hired Shafer. Great DC. Did our current HC hire a decent DC?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I agree that sizzle matters - and I'd rather have an innovative offense. That's the only think that makes sense in that whole post.

The last two paragraphs is exactly what's wrong with the fan base. Defeatist attitude is the plague of our fan base. We need to spend more time freaking cheering and less time complaining and moaning about what we are not. First hint of adversity in the Shafer era and fans like you started the drum beat. It's BS.

I don't care how hard it is to cheer for a style that you don't think fits our dome.

You're blaming the kicked dog for not wanting to get up under the grounds that it's a new person doing the kicking. You don't see a problem with that?

Whenever the argument begins with "the problem with the fan base is..." that argument has already lost because it is focusing on the wrong things.

What's BS is that we habitually piss away a completely unique advantage. That's the problem. And we're so thrilled to do it!

 

[Chip]

What does any of that mean?

Sounded like you were promoting the theory that guys like the guy in Pullman pay no attention to defense, give up 40-50 points per game, and lose more than they win.

 

[bcubs9497]

You're blaming the kicked dog for not wanting to get up under the grounds that it's a new person doing the kicking. You don't see a problem with that?

Whenever the argument begins with "the problem with the fan base is..." that argument has already lost because it is focusing on the wrong things.

What's BS is that we habitually piss away a completely unique advantage. That's the problem. And we're so thrilled to do it!

Would you still bitching if, in 2015, we win 8 games and whatever bowl running a boring "I"?

 

[GoSU96]

You're blaming the kicked dog for not wanting to get up under the grounds that it's a new person doing the kicking. You don't see a problem with that?

Whenever the argument begins with "the problem with the fan base is..." that argument has already lost because it is focusing on the wrong things.

What's BS is that we habitually piss away a completely unique advantage. That's the problem. And we're so thrilled to do it!

Do you really think that this has been some run heavy power offense the last six years?