First post new board re rebuild: warning LONG! | Syracusefan.com

First post new board re rebuild: warning LONG!

SUskibum

All Conference
Joined
Aug 19, 2011
Messages
2,590
Like
7,106
First this is my 4th ish move with the board, thankfully I started with "syracusefan" so Ive been able to keep tabs on my favorite place on the web. Thank you to everybody who puts in so much time/money for the enjoyment of so many.

I usually dont post much because most of what Im feeling is expressed by another poster so I just read. However I fel there is one aspect of this program rebuild from the late P years and all Grob years that the majority dont seem to be taking into account. There are two ways (fastest when both are together), I think that turnarounds happen very quickly eg. 1-3 years to consistant top 2o status.

1: An established prolific coach comes in and brings "name brand" eg; spurrier, saben, meyer. The important part of this is that top recruits will instantly give the program serious consideration based on the rep of the coach. This is usually the most certain way to ensure success of rebuilding, though I happen to think we have found an exception to the rule on our second try.

2: A program has fallen but it hasnt been too long since they have been consistant top 20 status. This was us in the late P years. This makes it easier because the kids that we are recruiting (remember your memory at 15?) remeber us being good in the not to distant past and can envision helping us get back to that level IMMEDIATELY with new leadership/strategy/talent.

The problem we are having is that we have neither one of these senerios. I think people underestimate what recruits thought of our program during Grob years after just having gone through 5 pretty mediocre years before that. We were arguably the WORST team in D1.

Our best (only?) chance for success is that Marrone was instantly able to take Grobs team and turn it into a .500+ program that won a bowl game or two for a couple years. Then when recruits see 6-7 win program they can envision that with the new leadership and talent they can become a 8-11 win program they cannot however envison taking a 1-4 win program and envision how the hell that ship is ever gonna sail, therefore we will get recruits in years 3-5 that we were not able to get after years 1-2.

And its important to note, the recruits are NOT looking at who we beat at that point, they will mostly be focused on the record (so these ugly wins vs. "crap" teams is still helping given the level we are currently). Who we beat will only become important when Marrone gets to JB's level of recruiting. (yes i think he will get there, and before the decade is over).

Gradually we will increase the level of our recruiting and if Marrone is able to continue the success he has already domstrated, it should be reflected in our record. I think Marrone's early track record may actually be similar to how JB has built his program. As an elite "GM" of the program but not by most standards an elite gameday coach.

Lets see how he does when he is able to recruit off of multiple winning seasons and bowl appreances (which he has single handedly created from the previously worst team in BCS btw). If we do not break through to a new level then, I will have been wrong. I almost think he would have more suport this season from his diehards (us) if we went 7-6 or 6-7 last year instead of 8-5. That way we will have still had improvement last year and the 7-6 we end up this year would look more acceptable and not a "step back". We would then be free to continue to improve. He is already a victim of his own success (a lot like JB actually).

The last thing Ill say (I did NOT expect to write a novel) is that I dont think Marrone is currently coaching or "GM'ing" at an elite level. However the immediate results he has demonstrated combined with his desire to build this program and the blueprint he has delivered give some confidence in his ablity. This is his first head coaching gig and he has the skills I believe to only get better over time and I think he has given himself a pretty good starting point.
 
Problem with Marrone is he has not showed the ability to keep any of the top in state talent so far. It's going to have to start with recruiting New York State before being able to get quality recruits from other states. The facilities are bad. My cousin starts for UConn and his parents have attended every home and road game the 3 years he's been there. They have both stated the Carrier Dome was the worst or very close to the worst place they watched a football game. Plus, the cold weather is a big negative for recruiting. Until Syracuse significantly upgrades their facilities, it's going to be extremely tough to consistently grab 4 star or better recruits.
 
He was recruiting against how many wins in the 4 years before he got here? Read the post, I said first he has to consistantly get to .500+ with what hes got. THEN recruiting should improve. I am confident that we will improve facilities along the way as a tail wind but being over .500 consistantly will be the most important thing he will have to recruit off of. And oh by the way, thats exactly what hes on his way to doing after inheriting the WORST team in BCS.

If he cant improve recruiting after 2-3 years of bowl appearances/wins then start worrying. Give the guy a minute cripes.
 
Which is why the Rutgers loss hurts that much more. Not only are we recruiting NY/NJ/PA kids against RU, but a 5-1 record looks a lot nicer than 4-2. Has we beat Rutgers and be sitting at 5-1 we probably get some votes in the latest poll.
 
Good first post. The best we can hope for is incremental improvement, and Marrone is demonstrating that.

Without a name coach or some recent evidence of national relevance, Syracuse won't reel in the most highly-rated recruits from New York or elsewhere. That ought to change after half a decade of consistent winning (and facilities upgrades).
 
An incremental annual increase of $10M in conference TV revenue certainly won't hurt in terms of facilities, keeping key assistant coaches, etc. Winning records, lots more money and expanded recruiting territory will hopefully build on one another so that we are top 25 year in and year out.
 
In five years, we'll have an entirely new football-only facility at Skytop, we'll hopefully be coming off six consecutive winning seasons and bowl appearances, and we'll actually have legitimate complaints about starting a season 4-2 or playing down to the level of D-IAA teams and Tulane. Until then, we're going to see some occasional ugly football and growing pains.
 
In five years, we'll have an entirely new football-only facility at Skytop, we'll hopefully be coming off six consecutive winning seasons and bowl appearances, and we'll actually have legitimate complaints about starting a season 4-2 or playing down to the level of D-IAA teams and Tulane. Until then, we're going to see some occasional ugly football and growing pains.
What will become of the dome? BBall and Lax only?
 
I agree that HCDM is learning a lot, and I hope he remains open to learning. He's done a remarkable job. I think this year is a big test for him. I'll be satisfied with 6-6, but I really hope he gets the offense turned around sooner rather than later.
 
Gradually we will increase the level of our recruiting and if Marrone is able to continue the success he has already domstrated, it should be reflected in our record. I think Marrone's early track record may actually be similar to how JB has built his program. As an elite "GM" of the program but not by most standards an elite gameday coach.

The question is can we recruit using Marrone's philosophy? I think it is highly flawed. Measurables are for the NFL. We are not looking to solely develop players for the NFL. We are not a minor league team. We are looking to win games. We need to be willing to take kids who have ceilings of All ACC but not have the measurables to be pros. There are plenty of examples of great CFB players who never sniff the pros. All that matters is Ws and Ls, who cares if a kid makes the NFL or not? I care about whether or not a kid can play NOW for SU. Not what he has the potential to be in the NFL. IMO it is highly flawed to use the same recruiting philosophy as Tenn, UGA, and GA Tech where Marrone was previously. We aren't going to out recruit teams like that. So why have a system that has you go all for the same kids? You need the kids who slip through the cracks. Give me a team of Shamarko Thomases, not Lavar Lobdells.
 
The new facility better be an inclosed facility or no one will go. I'm a big fan who's currently on the River Boat cruise in New Orleans, but I'm not going to commit to season tickets with Syracuse weather. The Dome is fine.
 
My cousin starts for UConn and his parents have attended every home and road game the 3 years he's been there. They have both stated the Carrier Dome was the worst or very close to the worst place they watched a football game. Plus, the cold weather is a big negative for recruiting. Until Syracuse significantly upgrades their facilities, it's going to be extremely tough to consistently grab 4 star or better recruits.

So the cold weather is a big negative for a school that plays games indoors, but NOT for a school like UConn that plays outdoors?

Having talked to some DI recruits, I put them in the same category as fans that don't attend football games - ask them why they make the decisions they do and they lie. often and always. We're not getting recruits because we sucked hind tit for the entire lifetime of kids that are being recruited now. All the other reason (too cold/facilities/lack of pretty co-eds/better educational opportunities at USF/etc) are just cover because they don't want to say the truth. It'll take some time to rinse the stink off from the GRob era...which is why we need to make bowl game, any bowl games...we need the impression that recruits have of an up-and-coming program. Right now they think we're a lousy program that maybe got a dead cat bounce last year. So the original poster was right on.
 
Problem with Marrone is he has not showed the ability to keep any of the top in state talent so far. It's going to have to start with recruiting New York State before being able to get quality recruits from other states. The facilities are bad. My cousin starts for UConn and his parents have attended every home and road game the 3 years he's been there. They have both stated the Carrier Dome was the worst or very close to the worst place they watched a football game. Plus, the cold weather is a big negative for recruiting. Until Syracuse significantly upgrades their facilities, it's going to be extremely tough to consistently grab 4 star or better recruits.

FWIW, Broyld was the top talent in the State last year, followed by Reddish. I know the recruiting services loved the kid from Lincoln High (name escapes me this second), and I would have loved to have landed him too, but Broyld is every bit the athlete and seems to be far more versatile.

The best thing this staff can do going forward is either turn Kinder into the Qb of the future, or recruit someone over all of the current candidates. Hunt and Broyld could really help this team at other positions. Both are elite athletes.
 
FWIW, Broyld was the top talent in the State last year, followed by Reddish. I know the recruiting services loved the kid from Lincoln High (name escapes me this second), and I would have loved to have landed him too, but Broyld is every bit the athlete and seems to be far more versatile.

The best thing this staff can do going forward is either turn Kinder into the Qb of the future, or recruit someone over all of the current candidates. Hunt and Broyld could really help this team at other positions. Both are elite athletes.
Ishaq Williams?
 
The question is can we recruit using Marrone's philosophy? I think it is highly flawed. Measurables are for the NFL. We are not looking to solely develop players for the NFL. We are not a minor league team. We are looking to win games. We need to be willing to take kids who have ceilings of All ACC but not have the measurables to be pros. There are plenty of examples of great CFB players who never sniff the pros. All that matters is Ws and Ls, who cares if a kid makes the NFL or not? I care about whether or not a kid can play NOW for SU. Not what he has the potential to be in the NFL. IMO it is highly flawed to use the same recruiting philosophy as Tenn, UGA, and GA Tech where Marrone was previously. We aren't going to out recruit teams like that. So why have a system that has you go all for the same kids? You need the kids who slip through the cracks. Give me a team of Shamarko Thomases, not Lavar Lobdells.

Im not sure why where you got the NFL referrence from. My reference to JB and being a "GM" of the program is that on the macro level he is making decisions most of us agree with (current offensive philosophy not withstanding). Most of the board agrees that his game day decisions have not had as much support.

Those macro decisions will over time improve the record (process begun) and thus improve the recruits we will be in the running for ( hopefully seen in the next couple years) I do think that after 3-4 years of winning records and bowls if the recruiting has not picked up then we can start questioning his abilities to run a top BCS program. But his first step (that Grob never got to) was to get us to a winning record with bowl appearance to change our image to highschool players/coaches, and he is doing so (and needs to maintain this).

One thing that I think is weird though was back in the P days didnt a lot posters pitch that the "pro style" offense would be a system kids would groom them for the NFL and thus bring in NFL caliber players. Im not sure how brining in future NFL players can be bad for any program regardless of what system brings them in. Thats not to say I like our current offense, just saying its funny how everyone is sour on the Pro style offense now when iirc everyone was pushing for it the 90's/early 2000s's. I thought the argument was valid though it doesnt seem to be very prolific in the early years
 
Sorry, I meant practice facility.
I agree I think that would make SU more attractive. Most athletes live in skytop and would rather walk for 3 minutes than drive and worry about parking, or take the school shuttle.

My practice facility was literally a one minute walk from where I lived... pretty convenient
 
Problem with Marrone is he has not showed the ability to keep any of the top in state talent so far. It's going to have to start with recruiting New York State before being able to get quality recruits from other states. The facilities are bad. My cousin starts for UConn and his parents have attended every home and road game the 3 years he's been there. They have both stated the Carrier Dome was the worst or very close to the worst place they watched a football game. Plus, the cold weather is a big negative for recruiting. Until Syracuse significantly upgrades their facilities, it's going to be extremely tough to consistently grab 4 star or better recruits.
You're right. Recruiting by # of stars has significantly helped teams like Notre Dame.
 
No where did I knock Marrone as not being the guy in my post. I said it is difficult for Marrone, actually, difficult for any coach to come in here and recruit due to the facilities being poor. Also, being in upstate New York doesn't help either. I actually think recruiting has declined through his first years at Syracuse. However, I think Marrone is an excellent coach and definitely the right choice for the program. Do not like Hackett at all though.
 
Cold weather is a negative for a place you are basically going to live through your time at college. What is more attractive? Living in a warm weather environment or an environment that gets tons of snow.
 
The question is can we recruit using Marrone's philosophy? I think it is highly flawed. Measurables are for the NFL. We are not looking to solely develop players for the NFL. We are not a minor league team. We are looking to win games. We need to be willing to take kids who have ceilings of All ACC but not have the measurables to be pros. There are plenty of examples of great CFB players who never sniff the pros. All that matters is Ws and Ls, who cares if a kid makes the NFL or not? I care about whether or not a kid can play NOW for SU. Not what he has the potential to be in the NFL. IMO it is highly flawed to use the same recruiting philosophy as Tenn, UGA, and GA Tech where Marrone was previously. We aren't going to out recruit teams like that. So why have a system that has you go all for the same kids? You need the kids who slip through the cracks. Give me a team of Shamarko Thomases, not Lavar Lobdells.

I think Marrone's point about going after kids with "measurables" is that we need to spot underdeveloped kids with potential. The south has the advantage of having kids in their back yard with way more experience (more games played and spring ball) and therefore are far more developed. If we're going to recruit in our backyard it's going to have to be kids that have to be developed once they get on campus but have the athletic ability to be good when they're juniors and seniors. I think those ARE the kids that slip through the cracks. The kids that can play and help you win now are the ones everyone fights over and we'll get them only once we've proven to them that we can win consistantly without them (like the orinal post suggested). It's a vicious cycle that's hard to break. If we go .500 or better this year we'll be one step closer to breaking it. Our program will be one of baby steps because we aren't in texas, florida, or california, and we don't have 100 D1 prospects in our state to choose from.
 
Star rankings aren't everything, but if you don't feel a 5 star caliber recruit with offers to every program doesn't have more potential to be a playmaker than a 2 star with offers to only about 3 BCS programs then you are blind. Marrone understands he isn't going to get highly developed players right away so he is recruiting speed with the hopes of coaching them to the next level.
 
I mean if you are telling me you wouldn't want a Jarron Jones or Ishaq Williams, who are both highly ranked recruits, then you are just stupid. Regardless if they pan out or not, you can clearly see their potential.
 
Right, so you're basing your judgments off other people's judgments without actually seeing many of these players to make an um... judgment. Maybe you should be a recruiter for SU... But I'd prefer it be Buttgers ;)
 
I think Marrone's point about going after kids with "measurables" is that we need to spot underdeveloped kids with potential. The south has the advantage of having kids in their back yard with way more experience (more games played and spring ball) and therefore are far more developed. If we're going to recruit in our backyard it's going to have to be kids that have to be developed once they get on campus but have the athletic ability to be good when they're juniors and seniors. I think those ARE the kids that slip through the cracks. The kids that can play and help you win now are the ones everyone fights over and we'll get them only once we've proven to them that we can win consistantly without them (like the orinal post suggested). It's a vicious cycle that's hard to break. If we go .500 or better this year we'll be one step closer to breaking it. Our program will be one of baby steps because we aren't in texas, florida, or california, and we don't have 100 D1 prospects in our state to choose from.

Good post sufandu. I agree with most of what you said. Marrone isn't a dummy. He knows the reputation of the SU program after GROB ran it into the ground. Coach Marrone knows that he isn't going to be able to bring the top talent in the country with SU's extremely poor performance in the GROB era (and, yes, it was an era, one I'd like to really forget). I think Coach is being realistic and recruiting players that SU can get that have potential to grow into great college players. Until we get to a consistent and winning program, we have to recruit the best potential recruits that will come to SU. But absolutely nothing wrong with going for the top recruits, just the percentages are not in our favor right now.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,516
Messages
4,709,005
Members
5,908
Latest member
Cuseman17

Online statistics

Members online
108
Guests online
1,670
Total visitors
1,778


Top Bottom