From the Rutgers-Pitt Game Recsp

[CuyahogaCuse]

"Pitt outgained Rutgers 365-207, won the field position battle and controlled both sides of the line of scrimmage after finding its footing in the second quarter."

Sounds a lot like our game, minus the turnovers, blocked kick and suspect replay calls.

But, I'm sure RU was more physical and talented in this one too.

Or, perhaps they are just not that good.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

We lost the game...move on.and yes I still believe Rutgers has better athletes on the field than we do.

 

[CuyahogaCuse]

We did lose. I'm not debating that. Sometimes the football doesn't bounce your way. Or the refs miss a fumble into the end zone. It happens. Rutgers won. We lost.

I'm just not buying the "better, more talented, more physical" mantra. Evenly talented? Play ten times and split? OK (It is 2-2 in the last four.) Just be fair and lose the agendas. Any objective observer should be able to see that.

 

[Cuseroc]

We lost the game...move on.and yes I still believe Rutgers has better athletes on the field than we do.

I agree that we should move on. But Rutgers having better athletes than SU I just cant bring myself to admit that. If Rutgers has better athletes than SU, then they would have almost doubled our offensive yardage, rather than it being the other way around. I like Rutgers defense and think its very good. But our offensive players are better than Rutgers defensive players.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

We did lose. I'm not debating that. Sometimes the football doesn't bounce your way. Or the refs miss a fumble into the end zone. It happens. Rutgers won. We lost.

I'm just not buying the "better, more talented, more physical" mantra. Evenly talented? Play ten times and split? OK (It is 2-2 in the last four.) Just be fair and lose the agendas. Any objective observer should be able to see that.

Any objective observer should be able to see that Rutgers has better athletes than we do. They have been out recruiting us for some time. Is what it is. Miami isn't a great team either but their athleticism is far superior to a team like Syracuse. Coaching and acumen do matter as well but Syracuse played rutgers game and they lost. Teams like rutgers force fumbles and turnovers.

 

[Stern]

"Pitt outgained Rutgers 365-207, won the field position battle and controlled both sides of the line of scrimmage after finding its footing in the second quarter."

Sounds a lot like our game, minus the turnovers, blocked kick and suspect replay calls.

But, I'm sure RU was more physical and talented in this one too.

Or, perhaps they are just not that good.

ha ha ha ha ha!! ha ha ha

 

[longislandcuse]

We're tougher. Go look at any messageboard after we play their team. The common theme "Syracuse is the hardest hitting team we've played all year." Maybe RU has better athletes (debatable), doesnt mean they are tougher, doesnt mean they are better. I honestly believe that we are the best team in the Big East right now.

Tell me who you think has a better shot at hanging with a BCS opponent at this point in the season? RU, Ville, Cinci or Cuse?

 

[Cuseman78]

We lost the game...move on.and yes I still believe Rutgers has better athletes on the field than we do.

You and OPa can keep blowing the trumpets but it doesn't make it so. There is very little overall difference in talent between the two teams. We certainly maximize our talent better on O (by a lot) and they maximize their talent better on D. And if you are going off of recruiting rankings, then I can't help you. But I choose to watch football with my eyes. The whole Big East, save Temple, is in the same ballpark talent wise. Some more talented than others, but nothing stark.

 

[CIL]

RU's defensive front 7 is bigger and more athletic across the board. Their D is a bit quicker to the ball at this stage. Outside of that I'd say it is a wash, although they do possess a matchup difficulty with WR Brandon Coleman. Marrone and staff have closed the gap significantly with regards to talent. I would like to see us get a few more playmakers on DL and LB.

 

[Upstate]

I'm surprised their RBs can even move at this point in the season. Flood runs Jamison like he'd beat a rented mule, and now he's started running Huggins into the ground

 

[orangenauburn]

We may have a pair of JUCO OL coming soon per Ron on orangefizz

 

[CuyahogaCuse]

You and OPa can keep blowing the trumpets but it doesn't make it so. There is very little overall difference in talent between the two teams. We certainly maximize our talent better on O (by a lot) and they maximize their talent better on D. And if you are going off of recruiting rankings, then I can't help you. But I choose to watch football with my eyes. The whole Big East, save Temple, is in the same ballpark talent wise. Some more talented than others, but nothing stark.

Couldn't agree more. Rutgers is a paper tiger, and while the two aforementioned posters may watch a lot of football, they don't "see" very much. RU's talented Nova threw six picks against Kent State at home and lost to a team that has one loss, to a winless SEC team. Syracuse needed last second drives to defeat a pretty bad South Florida team and a Mizzou team that just got whacked in conference last night. The margin between winning and losing in The Big East is a handful of plays each game. Records are impacted by strength of schedule. So 9-2 seems better than 7-5. But is it really? Over the course of a season, you tend to show who you are. And in The Big East, it's pretty even across the board with RU, U of L, SU and Cincy clearly at the top half of the conference this year. On any given day, any of them can win. And on others, those handful of plays result in a loss.

 

[GoSU96]

RU's defensive front 7 is bigger and more athletic across the board. Their D is a bit quicker to the ball at this stage. Outside of that I'd say it is a wash, although they do possess a matchup difficulty with WR Brandon Coleman. Marrone and staff have closed the gap significantly with regards to talent. I would like to see us get a few more playmakers on DL and LB.

Exactly.

Rutgers design is to take advantage of their strenghts on defense, but they don't really try to do anything with the talent that they do have on offense. Their offense has been in a shell so much all year that when they need it, it doesn't work.

 

[TheSpaz]

We may have a pair of JUCO OL coming soon per Ron on orangefizz

Don't know if Ron is accurate or not but the only JUCO OL I can find that have offers from us are Jaylen Hunter Arizona Western C.C., Marquis Wallace Lackawanna C.C., Jarell Broxton Lackawanna C.C.

 

[qdawgg]

Exactly.

Rutgers design is to take advantage of their strenghts on defense, but they don't really try to do anything with the talent that they do have on offense. Their offense has been in a shell so much all year that when they need it, it doesn't work.

Every time I watch part of their games it is absolutely perplexing what they are doing on offense. They have huge WR's and barely attempt to even use them to control and dominate the game. I absolutely don't get it. Maybe I'm just not that bright but based on their lack of scoring maybe it's the other way around.

 

[Chip]

Exactly.

Rutgers design is to take advantage of their strenghts on defense, but they don't really try to do anything with the talent that they do have on offense. Their offense has been in a shell so much all year that when they need it, it doesn't work.

If they are considered a talented team on offense, then they are in immediate need of at least one staffing change.

They were exposed yesterday.

 

[GoSU96]

If they are considered a talented team on offense, then they are in immediate need of at least one staffing change.

They were exposed yesterday.

They still have issues on the OL, nothing new there, and Nova is a soph. They have a lot of athletic talent at the skill positions. How they are as football players is another question. On measureables SU is still significantly behind. But that's only part of the equation.

 

[OrangePA]

"Pitt outgained Rutgers 365-207, won the field position battle and controlled both sides of the line of scrimmage after finding its footing in the second quarter."

Sounds a lot like our game, minus the turnovers, blocked kick and suspect replay calls.

But, I'm sure RU was more physical and talented in this one too.

Or, perhaps they are just not that good.

You're incorrect. Rutgers was not more physical than Pitt yesterday. I presume you watched the game, right?

The fact is that Pitt was more physical than Rutgers yesterday and controlled the LOS scrimmage against the Knights - we did not do that a few weeks ago.

As a result the Panthers were not forced into the two INTs, two fumbles (actually four fumbles with two lost) blocked FG that hurt our chances in Piscataway. Too, the Panthers were able to run the ball - Ray Graham had over 113 yards rushing - we were unable to run the ball against Rutgers.

So, the notion that the Pitt-Rutgers game "sounds a lot like our game, minus the turnovers, blocked kick . . . " is not only inaccurate but misses an important point.

TOs are obviously a big part of football and are a big part of Rutger's game.

Yesterday, Pitt not only avoided the mistakes we made, but forced Rutgers into some mistakes - the Panthers intercepted and sacked Gary Nova - we did neither.

Pitt controlled the game against Rutgers - Rutgers controlled the game against us.

Again we deal with the "Rutgers Myopia" on this board. The Knights beat us - they pretty much muscle us in doing so - they go 9-2 - they will likely win the BE Championship and they have out-recruited us for the past few years - and yet many on this board insist that we are better than they are.

Odd.

 

[OrangePA]

Exactly.

Rutgers design is to take advantage of their strenghts on defense, but they don't really try to do anything with the talent that they do have on offense. Their offense has been in a shell so much all year that when they need it, it doesn't work.

I think this is an accurate assessment.

Against the Orange, Flood played it very close to the vest on offense.

He took the lead and had his offense go into a shell.

 

[OrangePA]

ha ha ha ha ha!! ha ha ha

Two words - "season" and "tickets"

Call the box office or if you want I can do it for you!

 

[GoSU96]

I think this is an accurate assessment.

Against the Orange, Flood played it very close to the vest on offense.

He took the lead and had his offense go into a shell.

SU is the better all around football team. Play 10 times SU wins 7. Rutgers has an excellent defense, but they are awful on offense.

Rutgers had to win on a block, scoop and score, an SU dropped TD pass, and a bogus short field. Any two of just those three plays goes the other way SU wins.

 

[rrlbees]

You're incorrect. Rutgers was not more physical than Pitt yesterday. I presume you watched the game, right?

The fact is that Pitt was more physical than Rutgers yesterday and controlled the LOS scrimmage against the Knights - we did not do that a few weeks ago.

As a result the Panthers were not forced into the two INTs, two fumbles (actually four fumbles with two lost) blocked FG that hurt our chances in Piscataway. Too, the Panthers were able to run the ball - Ray Graham had over 113 yards rushing - we were unable to run the ball against Rutgers.

So, the notion that the Pitt-Rutgers game "sounds a lot like our game, minus the turnovers, blocked kick . . . " is not only inaccurate but misses an important point.

TOs are obviously a big part of football and are a big part of Rutger's game.

Yesterday, Pitt not only avoided the mistakes we made, but forced Rutgers into some mistakes - the Panthers intercepted and sacked Gary Nova - we did neither.

Pitt controlled the game against Rutgers - Rutgers controlled the game against us.

Again we deal with the "Rutgers Myopia" on this board. The Knights beat us - they pretty much muscle us in doing so - they go 9-2 - they will likely win the BE Championship and they have out-recruited us for the past few years - and yet many on this board insist that we are better than they are.

Odd.

You continue to discount the fact that we had twice as many 1st downs, almost double their total yardage, held them to 100 yards less than what they average on offense, gained 100 yards more than they give up on average and that the blocked fg for td which turned the game had nothing to do with talent or being physical.

How does that all happen if they were so much better and physical that day and controlled the game?

Btw, you always mention we couldn't rum the ball. Neither could rutgers unless you consider 80 yards rushing as good.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[RMH44]

I think this is an accurate assessment.

Against the Orange, Flood played it very close to the vest on offense.

He took the lead and had his offense go into a shell.

Going into a shell IS the RU offense.

 

[Stern]

Two words - "season" and "tickets"

Call the box office or if you want I can do it for you!

The act is old. And its not even funny or clever! Enough with me and my season tickets!! You can't fight off an argument and you resort to my season tickets (for some odd reason)...makes no sense! Defend you're point and don't bring me into it!!

 

[orangepassion]

is it possible that RU has more imposing athletes, but we have better PLAYERS