Honeymoon Over

[orange_in_VA]

Since people can't tell the difference:

When we're healthy under Babers, we compete.

Under Shafer, we rarely competed regardless of health.

That's it. That's the difference.

Please back up with source/data. Thanks

 

[TheCusian]

You're kind...or you just like getting "likes" here. We'll see. Interesting that you feel Dino already is a great coach vs. potentially being one, since objectively/factually, his record here so far is 8-16. I was apprised Hue Jackson was a great hire/coach too, also with a similar short/sample size track record. He's currently a 1-26 coach of my beloved Browns...in all his greatness.

Evaluating based on W/L alone is for suckers. It’s a lagging indicator.

- who did he beat?
- by how much?
- did he beat teams with better talent?
- did they lose to teams with lesser talent too often?
- what kind of support did he get from the admin?
- what was he left, talent-wise?
- injuries? Depth?

Sorry bout the Browns. Go Eagles

 

[TheCusian]

Agree

But in the end wins and losses are what matters.

For what?

 

[RandomGuy]

This thread cracks me up. Yeah. Last 3 games sucked. If you can't look past that? So be it.

For 9 games, we are a legitimate threat to the best teams in the country, for the first time, in a long time. If that ends your honeymoon, best of luck to you and your spouse.;-)

 

[storange]

This thread cracks me up. Yeah. Last 3 games sucked. If you can't look past that? So be it.

For 9 games, we are a legitimate threat to the best teams in the country, for the first time, in a long time. If that ends your honeymoon, best of luck to you and your spouse.;-)

To expect 6 wins in year 3, doesn't seem that hilarious to me.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Please back up with source/data. Thanks

I don't need to.

 

[orange_in_VA]

I don't need to.

So it's just an opinion that you stated as fact. Ok then

 

[OttoinGrotto]

So it's just an opinion that you stated as fact. Ok then

No. It is fact stated as fact. I am the source of truth.

 

[cuse309]

For me at least. 1 million excuses for being outscored 160 to 67 against 3 mediocre opponents the last 3 week's. I have to see a bowl next year or I'm off the Babers wagon.

Yes, because replacing your head coach every 3-4 years is a recipe for success. Look at how many successful programs hire a new coach every 3-4 years...NONE! 3-5 years people...EVERY SINGLE TIME a coach has been successful in turning around what is a perennial loser it has taken between 3-5 years to begin winning 6+ every year. in the beginning of those turnarounds, just like you saw the last 2 years, there are head scratching losses, unexpected wins, and statistics that make you think this guy can't do it. Why on earth would people expect that at Syracuse of all places, that everything would be in place in 2 years? It's unrealistic. Are we, as SU fans, above being as patient as all the other schools that waited up to 5 years to start seeing results.
Say what you want about 4-8 this year, but the bottom line is, that we were hoping to just see improvement this year, and we did. Against a more difficult schedule than last year, we scored more points, gave up less points, and were able to pull of our biggest win since 1984. That is an improvement.

 

[storange]

Yes, because replacing you head coach every 3-4 years is a recipe for success. Look at how many successful programs hire a new coach every 3-4 years...NONE!

Once again, I have not called for the removal of Dino Babers, Simply asked for 6 wins in year three, not a lot when you have one FCS and two very beatable non P5 teams on your schedule. More importantly , Babers will have more of his recruits then His predecessor on the field. Lets see if they can play a 12 game schedule instead of the 9 game one they played this year.

 

[cuse309]

Once again, I have not called for the removal of Dino Babers, Simply asked for 6 wins in year three, not a lot when you have one FCS and two very beatable non P5 teams on your schedule. More importantly , Babers will have more of his recruits then His predecessor on the field. Lets see if they can play a 12 game schedule instead of the 9 game one they played this year.

I guess I misunderstood what you meant by "I'll be off the Babers wagon if he doesn't win 6 next year." To me, if I'm off the wagon, that would mean I want a new coach who's wagon I can get on. I'm willing to wait 5 years.

 

[RandomGuy]

To expect 6 wins in year 3, doesn't seem that hilarious to me.

Nah.. it's not that. I expect 7 or 8. ;-)

It's the honeymoon part. The last 3 games were bad. I'm guessing it's just years, and years, of justified frustration, that they tapped in to. (Don't blame you). Kinda like bringing baggage into a relationship. Doesn't usually end well, but always rears it's head.

What I see is the first nine...and hanging with the best(if not beating them). In Shafer's 2013 bowl season, they were absolutely embarrassed by ranked teams.
2 Florida 3-59
4 Clemson 14-49
20 northwestern 27-48
Georgia tech 0-56

We played more ranked teams, this year, and hung with all of them. (Since when?). Yeah, I want a better record, but I see the glimpses. I'm just going to forget about my crazy ex, and enjoy me another piece of wedding cake.

 

[storange]

Nah.. it's not that. I expect 7 or 8. ;-)

It's the honeymoon part. The last 3 games were bad. I'm guessing it's just years, and years, of justified frustration, that they tapped in to. (Don't blame you). Kinda like bringing baggage into a relationship. Doesn't usually end well, but always rears it's head.

What I see is the first nine...and hanging with the best(if not beating them). In Shafer's 2013 bowl season, they were absolutely embarrassed by ranked teams.
2 Florida 3-59
4 Clemson 14-49
20 northwestern 27-48
Georgia tech 0-56

We played more ranked teams, this year, and hung with all of them. (Since when?). Yeah, I want a better record, but I see the glimpses. I'm just going to forget about my crazy ex, and enjoy me another piece of wedding cake.

fair enough

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Evaluating based on W/L alone is for suckers. It’s a lagging indicator.

- who did he beat?
- by how much?
- did he beat teams with better talent?
- did they lose to teams with lesser talent too often?
- what kind of support did he get from the admin?
- what was he left, talent-wise?
- injuries? Depth?

Sorry bout the Browns. Go Eagles

In general I agree that it isn’t all Ws & Ls. But how many HCs have been successful after showing zero improvement their first three years in terms of Ws? SU was a 4-8 team the year before Babers. If he goes 4-8 or worse next year, how can you expect a turn around when historically it doesn’t happen?

 

[PhatOrange]

In general I agree that it isn’t all Ws & Ls. But how many HCs have been successful after showing zero improvement their first three years in terms of Ws? SU was a 4-8 team the year before Babers. If he goes 4-8 or worse next year, how can you expect a turn around when historically it doesn’t happen?

Coaches don't last long enough to prove otherwise. If you turn it around y year 2 or 3 they take a new job and if they dont turn it around by year 3 or 4 they are canned.

Coaches who've been in their jobs 5-10 years may have had some lean years early on but were trending up (not just in Ws & Ls) until finally getting over the hump. Guys like Ferentz, Cutliff, Clawson, Rich Rod etc. Maybe someone else can do the research.

Unless it's obvious early on like Gump, I just don't understand how any coach should be judged before all 105 players are his.

 

[RandomGuy]

If someone told me preseason, we'd be 4-8, I woulda said we suck. 4-8 could very well be a prob, next year, but I gotta see why.

We were in all of the first 9. Not a cupcake, or a joke. Could have won any of them. They earned respect. Helluva turnaround, if you ask me. All 4-8's are not equal.

It's hard with the last three, but this team is on an upward trajectory.

 

[cuse309]

If someone told me preseason, we'd be 4-8, I woulda said we suck. 4-8 could very well be a prob, next year, but I gotta see why.

We were in all of the first 9. Not a cupcake, or a joke. Could have won any of them. They earned respect. Helluva turnaround, if you ask me. All 4-8's are not equal.

It's hard with the last three, but this team is on an upward trajectory.

We were 4-8 with a tougher schedule. We scored more points, and we gave up less. We pulled off our biggest win in 33 years. We improved.

 

[cuse309]

Coaches don't last long enough to prove otherwise. If you turn it around y year 2 or 3 they take a new job and if they dont turn it around by year 3 or 4 they are canned.

Coaches who've been in their jobs 5-10 years may have had some lean years early on but were trending up (not just in Ws & Ls) until finally getting over the hump. Guys like Ferentz, Cutliff, Clawson, Rich Rod etc. Maybe someone else can do the research.

Unless it's obvious early on like Gump, I just don't understand how any coach should be judged before all 105 players are his.

I have researched this, and posted it in other threads. I looked at coaches that turned around programs that were as bad as Syracuse...i.e...consistently less than 6 wins a year over the course of 10-20 years. Schools like, Baylor pre Briles, Stanford pre Harbaugh, K-State pre Snyder, Virginia Tech pre Beamer, Cuse pre Mac, Wake before Clawson, Duke before Cutcliff, Washington
State pre Leach and plenty of others I'm forgetting. What I discovered was that none of the coaches won 6+ in their second year other than Leach. And in Leaches third year he took a step back and won 3, before winning 7+ every year since then. Coach Marrone was a winner in his second year as well, but also took a step back winning just 5 in year 3, before winning 8 in year 4. I didn't include him in my list of coaches to turn around a program, because we'll never know if he could have won 6+ consistently. I feel he could have, but we'll never know, so he din't exactly "turn around" the program. In almost every case a consistent record of 6+ wins isn't achieved until year 4, and some guys were able to win 6 in year 3. So far Dino is right where the majority of these other cats were in year 2.
Some coaches won more gamers in year 2 than in year 1. Some won more in year 1 than in year 2. Some coaches had the same record through 2 years like Clawson with back to back 3-9 seasons. I attribute a lot of this to a lack of depth following a departure. Decommits, and transfers abound, and the new coach is left filling positions with JUCOS, grad transfers, and kids with no other P5 offers. It takes a good 3-4 years to build some quality depth. That's probably why when coaches have been successful in rebuilds as big as this one, the tangible success in wins and losses doesn't happen until years 3,4, or even 5.

 

[RandomGuy]

I have researched this, and posted it in other threads. I looked at coaches that turned around programs that were as bad as Syracuse...i.e...consistently less than 6 wins a year over the course of 10-20 years. Schools like, Baylor pre Briles, Stanford pre Harbaugh, K-State pre Snyder, Virginia Tech pre Beamer, Cuse pre Mac, Wake before Clawson, Duke before Cutcliff, Washington
State pre Leach and plenty of others I'm forgetting. What I discovered was that none of the coaches won 6+ in their second year other than Leach. And in Leaches third year he took a step back and won 3, before winning 7+ every year since then. Coach Marrone was a winner in his second year as well, but also took a step back winning just 5 in year 3, before winning 8 in year 4. I didn't include him in my list of coaches to turn around a program, because we'll never know if he could have won 6+ consistently. I feel he could have, but we'll never know, so he din't exactly "turn around" the program. In almost every case a consistent record of 6+ wins isn't achieved until year 4, and some guys were able to win 6 in year 3. So far Dino is right where the majority of these other cats were in year 2.

You can all feel free, to step back from the ledge.

Great stuff! Thnx

 

[cuse309]

Coaches record through 4 years trying to rebuild teams with a long history of losing just like us.

Clawson 3-9, 3-9, 7-6, 7-5/6

Briles 4-8, 4-8, 7-6, 10-3

Harbaugh 4-8, 5-7, 8-5, 12-1

Snyder 1-10, 5-6, 7-4, 5-6

Beamer 2-9, 3-8, 6-4-1, 6-5

Mac 4-6-1, 2-9, 6-5, 6-5

Cutcliff 4-8, 5-7, 3-9, 3-9

Leach 3-9, 6-7, 3-9, 9-4

There are plenty more that fit this category.

 

[qdawgg]

Coaches record through 4 years trying to rebuild teams with a long history of losing just like us.

Clawson 3-9, 3-9, 7-6, 7-5/6

Briles 4-8, 4-8, 7-6, 10-3

Harbaugh 4-8, 5-7, 8-5, 12-1

Snyder 1-10, 5-6, 7-4, 5-6

Beamer 2-9, 3-8, 6-4-1, 6-5

Mac 4-6-1, 2-9, 6-5, 6-5

Cutcliff 4-8, 5-7, 3-9, 3-9

Leach 3-9, 6-7, 3-9, 9-4

There are plenty more that fit this category.

So you’re saying we should have given GROB and Shafer more time?

 

[cuse309]

So you’re saying we should have given GROB and Shafer more time?

Man. There is always at least one person that misses the point when I post this.
What it means, is that through 2 years, and 2 4-8 records, that there is ZERO reason as of now to worry, and even if he wins 4 or 5 next year, although it will be a bit worrisome, it wouldn't be time to throw in the towel after year 3 either.
G-Rob and Shafer never showed signs of improving record wise, or statistically either. Although we won only 4 games this year, we scored more, surrendered less points on defense, and pulled off a win that no coach in the prior 33 years was able to do. There are signs of improvement.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Man. There is always at least one person that misses the point when I post this.
What it means, is that through 2 years, and 2 4-8 records, that there is ZERO reason as of now to worry, and even if he wins 4 or 5 next year, although it will be a bit worrisome, it wouldn't be time to throw in the towel after year 3 either.
G-Rob and Shafer never showed signs of improving record wise, or statistically either. Although we won only 4 games this year, we scored more, surrendered less points on defense, and pulled off a win that no coach in the prior 33 years was able to do. There are signs of improvement.

Just about every successful HCs have a year three bump. If Babers does not, history says he won’t be the guy.

 

[tep624]

He's going to get a minimum 4 years irrespective of any fan complaints so if you don't see improvement next year I guess you'll have plenty of time to rake leaves on Saturdays.

 

[SUbear]

Dino will get at least 4 years.

If he doesn’t make a Bowl next year questions about him being the guy or not are legit. One of the better qualities of Marrone was his willingness to make changes. Can Babers adjust his systems if he has a losing season in year 3? That is a concern.

My main concern about Babers is that so far he seems to stick to what he does, but I am not sure what he does works at this level.