Don't tell me it's a talent-deficiency problem...

[PhatOrange]

It would be nice if the the coaches did "a pretty good job" against all of the teams on the schedule and not just the two we have little chance of beating.

by the same token, it would also be nice if the players performed well against all of the teams on the schedule.

 

[Statesman1]

Really? If you didn't see the talent difference out on the field than you need to move your seats closer to the field or get a newer television. They were bigger, faster and stronger at pretty much every position.

The talent gap between us and the upper echelon teams is real.

Totally agree. Two home games where Clemson and LSU played down to us, and those were arguably our best efforts and we still come up short. The gap in talent couldn't be more obvious, unfortunately.

 

[PhatOrange]

2. Really hard to reconcile the level of play Sat with USF through Lville.
.

It’s hard to reconcile how we kept Clemson close. Statistically very little difference btw the 3 games.

Was the effort better, or the breaks, or how the other team played ? idk.

 

[orangenirvana]

by the same token, it would also be nice if the players performed well against all of the teams on the schedule.

Yes it would. But lack of effort / poor execution isn't the same as poor talent.

 

[rrlbees]

True. Clemson is young. I think I counted a total of seven frosh/sophs starting on offense?

It's still talent. Clemson young kids > SU young kids. The better question is were the teams we should have beat as young as us? I don't think so.

 

[Oakland]

And their DBs had 30 lbs and 6 inches on our receivers.

My wife even remarked about how much more physically imposing Clemson is compared to the Syracuse roster. Their Wr's had like 6 inches and 30 pounds on our dbs.

 

[reedny]

We're definitely as talented as Clemson .. except:
1- the O line;
2- the D line;
3- Wide receivers;
4- RB;
5- QB;
6- TE's;
7- The entire D secondary.

oops, forgot LB's.

This was a good coaching job, plain and simple. We had a good defensive game plan and our kids are learning, and that minimized the cavernous talent deficit. Lester's offensive scheme is also working .. as should be obvious since we were able to gain yards against a very good defense with a 5th string QB.

 

[Forza Azzurri]

when we go toe-to-toe with the #1 team in the country with a fifth-string walk-on quarterback. A couple months from doing the same against LSU.

A team that is lacking talented players isn't capable of that. People seem to be glowing because we were relatively close to knocking off Clemson. And while I'm proud of the effort from the players, it just makes me that much more frustrated that this team is ranked in the 100's on both offense and defense and we've won a combined six games in two years.

People were riding high after the LSU loss, too - yet we followed it up by getting blown out by USF. Don't forget the horrid game management and puzzling decision-making that led to losses to Virginia and Pitt.

I'm willing to see how these final two games play out because I like Shafer and for the most part the kids play hard for him. But there are offensive wizards out there for the taking and we can't sit idly by while other schools take them because we're holding on to false hope that Shafer can be more than a 3-6 win coach.

This program is as healthy from a talent standpoint as it has been since the late 90's. And yet we're on the verge of back-to-back three win seasons and statistically we are Gergerian on both sides of the ball - Offense ranked #120 in yards per game, Defense ranked #106 in yards per game.

How are there people who are still okay with this?

I'm really getting the sense that you want Shafer fired...

And, btw, I'm still fine with keeping him for a 4th year...

 

[Millhouse]

We're definitely as talented as Clemson .. except:
1- the O line;
2- the D line;
3- Wide receivers;
4- RB;
5- QB;
6- TE's;
7- The entire D secondary.

oops, forgot LB's.

This was a good coaching job, plain and simple. We had a good defensive game plan and our kids are learning, and that minimized the cavernous talent deficit. Lester's offensive scheme is also working .. as should be obvious since we were able to gain yards against a very good defense with a 5th string QB.

how good can a defensive game plan be where you give up 570 yards?

 

[BKCuse]

If you don't think there is a significant talent gap between these 2 programs just look at their big physical receivers standing next to our small, young and yet to develop CB's

 

[orangenirvana]

This was a good coaching job, plain and simple. We had a good defensive game plan and our kids are learning, and that minimized the cavernous talent deficit. Lester's offensive scheme is also working .. as should be obvious since we were able to gain yards against a very good defense with a 5th string QB.

It was a fairly solid defensive game plan. But keep in mind Clemson averaged 6.8 yards per play. For the season they average 6.2 (27th in the country) and on defense SU averages 6.4 allowed (115th in the country). So even on what we perceive as a good day on defense we weren't able to hold Clemson under their average or under our own average allowed. But nevertheless it was a decent day in preventing points.

On offense, our veteran OLine did a great job opening some big holes against a talented front, and our redshirt junior running back found those holes and showed some burst (5.7 ypc). Upperclassmen stepped up.

So we can give Lester credit also if we want. But Syracuse had four runs of 51 (Morris), 30 (Mahoney), 42 (Fredericks) and 28 (Phillips). They count, don't get me wrong. But the other 51 plays we averaged 3.35 ypp. Which is basically what most of us would have expected going in.

Regardless, I don't think we should be rewarding our head coach with a fourth season because of one or two good game plans.

 

[orangenirvana]

how good can a defensive game plan be where you give up 570 yards?

Clemson averaged nearly a yard more per play against Syracuse than their season average. And many of us were impressed.

That's how far our expectations have fallen.

 

[TheCusian]

Two years in a row 10 points within Clemson. Kudos.

This is why people are nuts when they say any team on our schedule is an automatic loss.

 

[baggerbob]

when we go toe-to-toe with the #1 team in the country with a fifth-string walk-on quarterback. A couple months from doing the same against LSU.

A team that is lacking talented players isn't capable of that. People seem to be glowing because we were relatively close to knocking off Clemson. And while I'm proud of the effort from the players, it just makes me that much more frustrated that this team is ranked in the 100's on both offense and defense and we've won a combined six games in two years.

People were riding high after the LSU loss, too - yet we followed it up by getting blown out by USF. Don't forget the horrid game management and puzzling decision-making that led to losses to Virginia and Pitt.

I'm willing to see how these final two games play out because I like Shafer and for the most part the kids play hard for him. But there are offensive wizards out there for the taking and we can't sit idly by while other schools take them because we're holding on to false hope that Shafer can be more than a 3-6 win coach.

This program is as healthy from a talent standpoint as it has been since the late 90's. And yet we're on the verge of back-to-back three win seasons and statistically we are Gergerian on both sides of the ball - Offense ranked #120 in yards per game, Defense ranked #106 in yards per game.

How are there people who are still okay with this?

We were within a TD of USF, and outside of a freshman mistake, would have received the ball with a chance to tie, late in the game. USF has proven to be a fairly decent team having badly beaten the #22 team in the nation on Saturday night, so quit using that game as an reference.

 

[longtimefan]

Totally agree. Two home games where Clemson and LSU played down to us, and those were arguably our best efforts and we still come up short. The gap in talent couldn't be more obvious, unfortunately.

Mr. Watson hardly "played down".

 

[RMH44]

Yes it would. But lack of effort / poor execution isn't the same as poor talent.

Lack of effort? Seriously?

 

[reedny]

how good can a defensive game plan be where you give up 570 yards?

Yards surrendered is only one stat. More significantly, we gouged them for 242 yards on the ground and held them (the #1 team in the country) to 37 points. That's more than respectable, given that we spotted them 2 early scores (one was a freebie with the fumble). After that, we settled down on D and played them even. The Clemson offense couldn't even score a TD in the entire second half against us (2 FGs). In the meantime, our offense moved the ball against them. Considering these facts and the serious talent deficit, I think we benefited from solid coaching and an amazing effort.

[By Edit: And I forgot to mention, Clemson really gained 525 yards. The other (45) yards were added by game officials with funny accents and quick whistles on SU players]

 

[reedny]

It was a fairly solid defensive game plan. But keep in mind Clemson averaged 6.8 yards per play. For the season they average 6.2 (27th in the country) and on defense SU averages 6.4 allowed (115th in the country). So even on what we perceive as a good day on defense we weren't able to hold Clemson under their average or under our own average allowed. But nevertheless it was a decent day in preventing points.

On offense, our veteran OLine did a great job opening some big holes against a talented front, and our redshirt junior running back found those holes and showed some burst (5.7 ypc). Upperclassmen stepped up.

So we can give Lester credit also if we want. But Syracuse had four runs of 51 (Morris), 30 (Mahoney), 42 (Fredericks) and 28 (Phillips). They count, don't get me wrong. But the other 51 plays we averaged 3.35 ypp. Which is basically what most of us would have expected going in.

Regardless, I don't think we should be rewarding our head coach with a fourth season because of one or two good game plans.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. I'm as frustrated with losing as you are. However, I do see progress. Any "game plan" relies on execution, and when you compete with lesser talent the only possible explanation is that your coaches are doing something right. Clemson is loaded top to bottom and we were outmatched at every position except punter. Despite this disparity, we played them pretty even for 3 quarters, held them to 0 TD's in the second half and moved the ball with a 5th string QB and our best RB out of the game. The only reason we didn't get blown out is good coaching.

 

[Statesman1]

Mr. Watson hardly "played down".

The stats disagree with you: he had what was for him a slightly below average game, with a 146 rating vs his season average of 160.3; an adjusted qbr of 78.1 vs 85.6 with a YPA of 7.66 vs 8.42 for the season. Certainly our defense deserves some credit for a well played game but this was a let down game after Florida St for Clemson. If we get their best effort this game isn't close, imo.

 

[Statesman1]

And their DBs had 30 lbs and 6 inches on our receivers.

You could say the same for the majority of teams on the schedule- we don't pass the look test vs anybody in the ACC, except Wake.

 

[longtimefan]

The stats disagree with you: he had what was for him a slightly below average game, with a 146 rating vs his season average of 160.3; an adjusted qbr of 78.1 vs 85.6 with a YPA of 7.66 vs 8.42 for the season. Certainly our defense deserves some credit for a well played game but this was a let down game after Florida St for Clemson. If we get their best effort this game isn't close, imo.

Re: Watson--

Whatever the qbr, etc., I doubt he has had many games this year where he amassed 360 passing yards and 105 on the ground.

 

[Chris02M]

the offense is better than 106 but the defense not being able to get off the field limited our possessions on offense

 

[Chris02M]

by the same token, it would also be nice if the players performed well against all of the teams on the schedule.

theres the rub with young players there inconsistent

 

[OrangeMojo]

We were within a TD of USF, and outside of a freshman mistake, would have received the ball with a chance to tie, late in the game. USF has proven to be a fairly decent team having badly beaten the #22 team in the nation on Saturday night, so quit using that game as an reference.

and USF is a team coming off a 2 win season, from a much lower profile conference, playing a lot of young kids, with a coach in his 3rd season - which has developed as the season has gone on to the point where they've won a bunch of games including badly beating the #22 team in the nation

doesn't appear to be the case with SU - I can't say I see the team developing and getting better as the year goes on - the last two games against less than stellar opponents should be a very good barometer

 

[cuseguy]

and USF is a team coming off a 2 win season, from a much lower profile conference, playing a lot of young kids, with a coach in his 3rd season - which has developed as the season has gone on to the point where they've won a bunch of games including badly beating the #22 team in the nation doesn't appear to be the case with SU - I can't say I see the team developing and getting better as the year goes on - the last two games against less than stellar opponents should be a very good barometer

South Florida has better talent than SU.

It would be nice if SU had so many good players in its backyard.