How do we feel about the state of the program now?

[TheCusian]

Crusty I feel terrible about the State of the program. It's barely enjoyable. Last year was not at all. And the problem was widespread. There were 1000 posts on coaching v talent v scheme and in reality it's all of those things. The staff so far seems like the JV. At least with Doug I felt hopeful (and I don't think he did all that well). Talent wise there is some hope in the wrs. But the lines and qb have been awful and you have to have that at this level. And I don't get the scheme or playcalling at all. No setups, no direction, no mismatches. Just throwing darts. So yeah...***k it...I suppose I will have hope for a week or two this year.

How do you feel about the defense? Seems like all coaches get lumped in together...

 

[AZOrange]

How do you feel about the defense? Seems like all coaches get lumped in together...

I think the d was ok. I think the front 7 played pretty well, but I think the dbacks were just average. I'd expect the d to step back this year. But at least they generally played aggressively. That's a positive.

 

[Alsacs]

How do you feel about the defense? Seems like all coaches get lumped in together...

Our defense has been average. When teams are ahead they are a lot more conservative. How many times did we force FSU to punt last year? Everett Golson almost broke the NCAA record for consecutive completions because our D was so soft he took 4-5 yards minimum every play.

We aren't great at D we are slightly better than average.

 

[MSOrange]

I'm not so much in the 'we don't have money we'll never win again' camp, but I do think it adds a degree of difficulty. Not so much that we don't have money to spend, but we're a team playing in a small, really outdated stadium with a pretty thin fan base and a pretty bland game-day atmosphere. We will have an IPF, supposedly, but I'd guess not one to compete with the big boys. Meanwhile Alabama will probably spend $7M to dig up Vince Lombardi so recruits can take pics with a stuffed lombardi on the sidelines.

Not sure I understand your comments about the IPF as "supposedly". You know that is reality now - right? As in, it has been built and is actually pretty nice.

 

[TheCusian]

Our defense has been average. When teams are ahead they are a lot more conservative. How many times did we force FSU to punt last year? Everett Golson almost broke the NCAA record for consecutive completions because our D was so soft he took 4-5 yards minimum every play. We aren't great at D we are slightly better than average.

Fair take.

The game plan was to give them those short throws, I think. When we played in tight we got burned for that long pitch and catch.

We didn't give up many rushing yards, so that helps.

 

[Alsacs]

Fair take.

The game plan was to give them those short throws, I think. When we played in tight we got burned for that long pitch and catch.

We didn't give up many rushing yards, so that helps.

Our D is not top 25. We don't give up rushing yards because our pass D is bad.

Nova's QB killed us on the ground and their kicker missed 2 FGs,
D dominated CMU without its starting stud RB but still dominated so that was good.
Maryland scored practically the first half and then the second half ran the clock out.
ND had 5 TOs and still had destroyed our D. Golson almost broke the NCAA consecutive completions record.
Louisville was beyond conservative and didn't stop them much.
Florida State scored every drive except 1 before the end of the game.
Defense dominated both Wake and Clemson
D was better than average against NC State and Duke if we had an offense I think we win those.
D gave up against Pitt and BC.

Our D is not great. It is 55-60% percentile which is better than average. If we had a better offense the D would give up a lot more. SS is bring in better talent, but the coaches aren't great they are average.

 

[CuseOnly]

Here's an idea ... Ask the question you actually want answered. Don't be intellectually lazy.

The other side of that is posters should answer the question that was asked and not the one they are prepared to pontificate on. (Which is pretty much what they do on "Meet the Press".

You might well ask, "What does it matter?"

Well, if people drove people to ask the right kind of questions by answering what they asked, it would certainly improve the quality of some of these threads that splinter off in all sorts of direction such that there are two or three or four unrelated conversations going on. (Admittedly, that's exactly what I am doing with this nonsense I am spouting. I have zero expectations that my complaining will cause a single person on here to not talk about what they feel like talking about no matter how remotely connected it is to the thread title.)

And finally, comparing the answering tactics of posters on here to the pols on the Sunday talk shows and the structure of the State of the Union speech is a huge leap. It's like comparing a fist fight outside a bar on South Salina St with the Civil War. They are both conflicts, but the scale and importance are different.

No offense Townie but nobody here wants to read a 180 post thread that consists of 5 word magic 8 ball answers like. "I feel good about it", "I am disappointed", "I like our D", etc.

People come here for conversation, it has nothing to do with people being intellectually lazy when asking a question or answering one and expanding on why they feel a certain way.

If the OP wanted those types of answers, he could have just put up a poll that read. "Do you feel good about the state of the program?"

Yes or No, check the appropriate box.

 

[anomander]

Our D is not top 25. We don't give up rushing yards because our pass D is bad.

Nova's QB killed us on the ground and their kicker missed 2 FGs,
D dominated CMU without its starting stud RB but still dominated so that was good.
Maryland scored practically the first half and then the second half ran the clock out.
ND had 5 TOs and still had destroyed our D. Golson almost broke the NCAA consecutive completions record.
Louisville was beyond conservative and didn't stop them much.
Florida State scored every drive except 1 before the end of the game.
Defense dominated both Wake and Clemson
D was better than average against NC State and Duke if we had an offense I think we win those.
D gave up against Pitt and BC.

Our D is not great. It is 55-60% percentile which is better than average. If we had a better offense the D would give up a lot more. SS is bring in better talent, but the coaches aren't great they are average.

I agree. That is why I think this years defense has the potential to be better then last year. Again, the unit will be young, but higher potential. They should be able to do things that last years defense couldn't give you.

 

[billsin01]

Not sure I understand your comments about the IPF as "supposedly". You know that is reality now - right? As in, it has been built and is actually pretty nice.

I mean we have an IPF but is it an IPF in the way the big boys define an IPF? If it is then I'm thrilled and that's cool. My supposedly was confusing. I know we have it, but I just struggle sometimes to believe it is on par with the schools we need to compete with if we're truly going to be a relevant football program (again, depending on how you want to define 'relevant').

 

[TheCusian]

I mean we have an IPF but is it an IPF in the way the big boys define an IPF? If it is then I'm thrilled and that's cool. My supposedly was confusing. I know we have it, but I just struggle sometimes to believe it is on par with the schools we need to compete with if we're truly going to be a relevant football program (again, depending on how you want to define 'relevant').

Was called one of the best. No brick facade - but hey...

 

[xc84]

I mean we have an IPF but is it an IPF in the way the big boys define an IPF? If it is then I'm thrilled and that's cool. My supposedly was confusing. I know we have it, but I just struggle sometimes to believe it is on par with the schools we need to compete with if we're truly going to be a relevant football program (again, depending on how you want to define 'relevant').

Why would you just assume it is not "on par"?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2395191-8-best-indoor-facilities-in-college-football/page/7

 

[bcubs9497]

I mean we have an IPF but is it an IPF in the way the big boys define an IPF? If it is then I'm thrilled and that's cool. My supposedly was confusing. I know we have it, but I just struggle sometimes to believe it is on par with the schools we need to compete with if we're truly going to be a relevant football program (again, depending on how you want to define 'relevant').

It is.

 

[billsin01]

Why would you just assume it is not "on par"?

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2395191-8-best-indoor-facilities-in-college-football/page/7

I'm not sure a ranking on bleacher report convinces me of anything at all. However I will take th word of everyone here. It's all good. I know the players lounge everyone was excited about is awful compared to UMD and ND. it's fine with me b/c it's a total waste of money but it's not even close

 

[Townie72]

No offense Townie but nobody here wants to read a 180 post thread that consists of 5 word magic 8 ball answers like. "I feel good about it", "I am disappointed", "I like our D", etc.

People come here for conversation, it has nothing to do with people being intellectually lazy when asking a question or answering one and expanding on why they feel a certain way.

If the OP wanted those types of answers, he could have just put up a poll that read. "Do you feel good about the state of the program?"

Yes or No, check the appropriate box.

That's the point, Cuseonly. There wouldn't be 180 responses to a bad question.

When faced with no responses or very few responses, the OP might think through how to ask a question that didn't splinter off into three or four different sub-threads. And the result would be an actual conversation about a topic.

 

[xc84]

I'm not sure a ranking on bleacher report convinces me of anything at all. However I will take th word of everyone here. It's all good. I know the players lounge everyone was excited about is awful compared to UMD and ND. it's fine with me b/c it's a total waste of money but it's not even close

Ok. Then just ignore it and assume it is no good.

 

[billsin01]

Ok. Then just ignore it and assume it is no good.

Dude, take a breath for a minute and relax. I am not rooting against Syracuse's relevance or suggesting that the IPF is junk. I'm not saying that at all and even apologized for the poor articulation in my initial post relative to the IPF.

My points were these, neither of which I feel are all that antagonistic:

1) I don't really care about a bleacher report list. It's fine, it's good to get some good publicity. It's fun for us as fans. But seriously, this board just spent the last two weeks hammering a list of the top college towns in the ACC b/c they had the audacity to rank us last. It happens every year when Athlon or Sporting News football annuals come out. It happens any time there's any list we don't like -- everyone here hammers it. So when an equally subjective list actually gives us credit for something, it's fine but it needs to be taken with one massive lump of salt.

2) I was merely saying that this is a university that does not have a history of pouring gobs of money into it's football program. It led to issues with Marrone, it led to the hiring of Shafer, it led to hiring a line coach who we weren't 100% sure had actually coached the offensive line anywhere (exaggeration), and it led to the Dome being a pretty out-dated facility which, before Darryl Gross, literally had nothing in it other than the lovely concrete and orange decor.

So my point is that I'm skeptical of the university's willingness to jump in with both feet to support this program to the extent that many of these other schools will. Money isn't everything and maybe the IPF is the start of a new era, but I do think it's a factor and a concern.

 

[xc84]

Dude, take a breath for a minute and relax. I am not rooting against Syracuse's relevance or suggesting that the IPF is junk. I'm not saying that at all and even apologized for the poor articulation in my initial post relative to the IPF.

My points were these, neither of which I feel are all that antagonistic:

1) I don't really care about a bleacher report list. It's fine, it's good to get some good publicity. It's fun for us as fans. But seriously, this board just spent the last two weeks hammering a list of the top college towns in the ACC b/c they had the audacity to rank us last. It happens every year when Athlon or Sporting News football annuals come out. It happens any time there's any list we don't like -- everyone here hammers it. So when an equally subjective list actually gives us credit for something, it's fine but it needs to be taken with one massive lump of salt.

2) I was merely saying that this is a university that does not have a history of pouring gobs of money into it's football program. It led to issues with Marrone, it led to the hiring of Shafer, it led to hiring a line coach who we weren't 100% sure had actually coached the offensive line anywhere (exaggeration), and it led to the Dome being a pretty out-dated facility which, before Darryl Gross, literally had nothing in it other than the lovely concrete and orange decor.

So my point is that I'm skeptical of the university's willingness to jump in with both feet to support this program to the extent that many of these other schools will. Money isn't everything and maybe the IPF is the start of a new era, but I do think it's a factor and a concern.

I've just specifically responded to your comments about the IPF. It's built. It has had good reviews. It is not theoretical. It cost more than some at large schools and less than others.

I agree that SU does not spend what the really large programs do and never will but in some cases seems to get good bang for the buck. The Dome, Carmelo Center, Ensley Center are good examples of this.

It seems like some people just default to the stance that anything at SU can't possibly very good. Your initial post on the IPF tended toward that.

 

[billsin01]

I've just specifically responded to your comments about the IPF. It's built. It has had good reviews. It is not theoretical. It cost more than some at large schools and less than others.

I agree that SU does not spend what the really large programs do and never will but in some cases seems do get good bang for the buck. The Dome, Carmelo Center, Ensley Center are good examples of this.

It seems like some people just default to the stance that anything at SU can't possibly very good. Your initial post on the IPF tended toward that.

Fair enough. I admit I do tend to default to that b/c I do feel like there is a hesitancy to jump in with both feet financially up on the hill. I'm not really knocking that tendency, but noting it as a factor. Regardless, I'm thrilled that the IPF has good reviews. That is a really good thing.

 

[TheCusian]

Dude, take a breath for a minute and relax. I am not rooting against Syracuse's relevance or suggesting that the IPF is junk. I'm not saying that at all and even apologized for the poor articulation in my initial post relative to the IPF. My points were these, neither of which I feel are all that antagonistic: 1) I don't really care about a bleacher report list. It's fine, it's good to get some good publicity. It's fun for us as fans. But seriously, this board just spent the last two weeks hammering a list of the top college towns in the ACC b/c they had the audacity to rank us last. It happens every year when Athlon or Sporting News football annuals come out. It happens any time there's any list we don't like -- everyone here hammers it. So when an equally subjective list actually gives us credit for something, it's fine but it needs to be taken with one massive lump of salt. 2) I was merely saying that this is a university that does not have a history of pouring gobs of money into it's football program. It led to issues with Marrone, it led to the hiring of Shafer, it led to hiring a line coach who we weren't 100% sure had actually coached the offensive line anywhere (exaggeration), and it led to the Dome being a pretty out-dated facility which, before Darryl Gross, literally had nothing in it other than the lovely concrete and orange decor. So my point is that I'm skeptical of the university's willingness to jump in with both feet to support this program to the extent that many of these other schools will. Money isn't everything and maybe the IPF is the start of a new era, but I do think it's a factor and a concern.

Seeing how the IPF clearing the final hurdle after stalling for awhile was the result of a new Chancellor kicking some arse - I'm inclined to believe there are signs of hope. We'll see who the new AD is.

So - given the change of leadership - I don't think we know anything at all about the universities commitment to Football.

 

[billsin01]

Seeing how the IPF clearing the final hurdle after stalling for awhile was the result of a new Chancellor kicking some arse - I'm inclined to believe there are signs of hope. We'll see who the new AD is.

So - given the change of leadership - I don't think we know anything at all about the universities commitment to Football.

True ... but it's not like we're talking about the past five years. We're talking about ... forever. Remember it was just the Fall where there were stories about how the athletics department needed to tighten the reigns. So listen, I don't pretend to know, but it seems foolish to me to believe we're headed for an era of crazy athletics spending. If we are, that works for all of us (if not for the university's bottom line).

 

[TheCusian]

True ... but it's not like we're talking about the past five years. We're talking about ... forever. Remember it was just the Fall where there were stories about how the athletics department needed to tighten the reigns. So listen, I don't pretend to know, but it seems foolish to me to believe we're headed for an era of crazy athletics spending. If we are, that works for all of us (if not for the university's bottom line).

Yeah - lots of unknowns. But remember "tighten the reins" and budget doesn't always mean less money... Just more oversight. And if the new AD is any good at all - that can mean efficiency. Something tells me Gross wasn't an efficient, smart spender.