Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="RF2044, post: 1875737, member: 40"]
No offense, but your logic is extremely faulty.  You look at true frosh campaigns for Ealy / Shepperd and conclude that since they didn't make an impact last year, that they wouldn't have a bigger role moving forward?  Okay...

Your take on Arcinega couldn't be more off, IMO.

Also, the secondary stunk last year.  Did you not watch the team?  Winfield was the best out of a fairly lousy group of corners, and he is undersized for the new system.

Speaking of said system--you know, the one that is NEW and vastly different from the previous one we ran--our personnel aren't suited for it [yet], and the kids are still learning it.  So, even being undersized, if they had been immersed in it longer, then maybe--with an emphasis on "maybe"--we might be able to expect them to play faster and have better results.

But personnel limitations coupled with not being familiar with the new system @ game 2 is what's holding them back.

"9 spots are better" is frankly a ridiculous assertion.  We are OK [not great] at DT, and subpar everywhere else from a personnel standpoint for this defensive system.  Case in point: I love Franklin / Bennett, but they are too small for Tampa 2.

I think the viewpoints you're expressing fail to take into account how decidedly subpar the defense was last year, and looks at our personnel through the undeserved orange goggles lens where the personnel are better than they actually are.

If they were--especially the back 7--then we wouldn't be so poor defensively.  Or if we could generate more pass rush from the DEs--which we undoubtedly would be better equipped to do with a proven commodity like Arcinega and two ascending sophomores [one of whom ended up at an SEC school when he transferred].
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?