Hunt's Reaction To Decision

[OrangeTarheel]

As a positive, the coaching staff will learn a lot from this experience and apply that in the future. I'm still on board with the coaches being given a chance to find their way with this program. They thought they got an easy out-of-the-box solution with Allen but it turns out he's no Greg Paulus.

Ha!

 

[All4SU]

My money is that Allen was promised the position. And now the coaches are stuck between losing the team (that supports Hunt) and themselves over in the recruiting world (you make a promise, you keep it).

I think the coaches have to be very careful with how they proceed in this situation.

I don't believe anyone was promised anything more than..."You will have a chance to compete, and you will have a great chance to start."

 

[OrangePA]

Then he would have been the first back-up in any kind of competitive situation who was.

Not really.

When the starter demonstrates clear separation the reaction of the non-starter is different than what has been reported here.

Hunt's reaction was rather intense. He was more than disappointed - he thought he won the competition.

 

[OrangePA]

The real problem is T. Hunt has problems understanding concepts the coaches are trying to implement. It's easy to look good when you are playing with the ones against the other teams third string.

How do you know that?

 

[OrangePA]

There was an article, I think early last week, about Shafer having to tell Hunt and how disappointed he was. Shafer related to having to hear the same thing once when he was a player and how angry he was. Might have been a video instead of a link, can't remember.

I think OrangePA was referring to that. The timing of his post might have thrown that off, but I don't think there were any follow up articles about it.

There were a few references to Hunt being very upset - inconsolable.

And I recall his tweet which indicated that he was upset.

The tone of all of it was that Hunt thought he won the competition.

 

[MikeSU02]

I don't believe anyone was promised anything more than..."You will have a chance to compete, and you will have a great chance to start."

You can believe what you want. We can agree to disagree. I think he was promised the position.

 

[RMH44]

There were a few references to Hunt being very upset - inconsolable.

And I recall his tweet which indicated that he was upset.

The tone of all of it was that Hunt thought he won the competition.

Inconsolable? Did you get that from this board?

I'm not surprised that he'd be upset about losing the competition...any competitive person would be in any scenario. Hopefully he's mature enough to work his tail off and keep his mouth shut publicly and with team mates. The last thing we need is factions with separate agendas developing within the team.

 

[RMH44]

You can believe what you want. We can agree to disagree. I think he was promised the position.

I'm with All4 on this one. Why on earth would the staff promise a 5th yr senior anything other than a chance to compete? Especially a kid from a San Antonio, TX. Not exactly fertile recruiting grounds for SU.

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

 

[Millhouse]

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

Not wanting anyone to know that the starter didn't earn it!

 

[MikeSU02]

I'm with All4 on this one. Why on earth would the staff promise a 5th yr senior anything other than a chance to compete? Especially a kid from a San Antonio, TX. Not exactly fertile recruiting grounds for SU.

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

If you don't believe kids are promised positions, so be it. I can't tell you anything on this board that would change your mind.

I don't have a smoking gun, so I'm not implying that. But, from what I've known in the past up to this point with how this scenario played out, my contention is that he was promised the position.

The reasons for promising a position? To land a kid at an incredibly important position that you think can be the difference between a 4 win season and a bowl game at the end of the year.

They were already working with a poor WR group, they couldn't take a chance on only having Hunt and hoping he plays to an all ACC level to make the offense work. I think they got enamored with Allen's pedigree and arm. I think they saw him as the answer to having a "successful" season.

And regarding what is said publicly, they always lie. Do you really think the team didn't know who was going to be the starter until a day or so before the game?

 

[OrangePA]

Inconsolable? Did you get that from this board?

I'm not surprised that he'd be upset about losing the competition...any competitive person would be in any scenario. Hopefully he's mature enough to work his tail off and keep his mouth shut publicly and with team mates. The last thing we need is factions with separate agendas developing within the team.

No. Not from the board.

But from all that I read and heard, that was how I perceived his reaction.

I agree that competitors want to win. But there is a difference between being upset that you were not better than the other guy versus being upset because you thought that you outplayed the guy who was selected.

I admit. I have no special insight. Just my impression from all that I have read and heard.

 

[OrangePA]

If you don't believe kids are promised positions, so be it. I can't tell you anything on this board that would change your mind.

I don't have a smoking gun, so I'm not implying that. But, from what I've known in the past up to this point with how this scenario played out, my contention is that he was promised the position.

The reasons for promising a position? To land a kid at an incredibly important position that you think can be the difference between a 4 win season and a bowl game at the end of the year.

They were already working with a poor WR group, they couldn't take a chance on only having Hunt and hoping he plays to an all ACC level to make the offense work. I think they got enamored with Allen's pedigree and arm. I think they saw him as the answer to having a "successful" season.

And regarding what is said publicly, they always lie. Do you really think the team didn't know who was going to be the starter until a day or so before the game?

I have little doubt that promises are made quite often - I'm sure that the promises are implicit ones.

And I have little doubt that playing time is sometimes determined by such promises.

 

[OrangePA]

I'm with All4 on this one. Why on earth would the staff promise a 5th yr senior anything other than a chance to compete? Especially a kid from a San Antonio, TX. Not exactly fertile recruiting grounds for SU.

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

Perhaps because they really wanted to get the guy and were told that starting was a prerequisite for getting him.

 

[supp]

I'm with All4 on this one. Why on earth would the staff promise a 5th yr senior anything other than a chance to compete? Especially a kid from a San Antonio, TX. Not exactly fertile recruiting grounds for SU.

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

I don't believe anyone was promised anything but there are lots of reasons why the staff would go with the 5th-year senior rather than the younger guy that they inherited, even if the competition was close as the staff has claimed, without any promises being given out. They might not be good or wholly logical reasons from our perspective but who ever accused people of always being logical?

For one, I think when you have a new staff, there is a always a strong desire on their part to go with their own guy, to win or lose with the guy they brought in over what they inherited. It doesn't always work out that way (see Nassib) but there often does seem to be a house-cleaning stage in a coaching transition and the qbs on the roster are usually the ones who suffer most.

Second, when you bring in a fifth year guy, you don't bring him in with the intention of sitting him. They probably feel that they have an obligation to play him and may give him a bit more rope to fail than the other guys. BUT that's not necessarily out of any kind of obligation that they feel towards him. Rather, it's due more to the faith they place (and must place) in their own evaluations. They recruited him because they felt that on film he was a clear step up from what they already had on campus. The problem there was they didn't have much film to go on to make that evaluation and the only film they had of the qbs on roster were from practices. So, yes, you have to have faith in your evaluations but they should recognize that the situation here was different than with a HS qb with tons of game film from which you can project their future development or an experienced lower-level college qb who's looking to take a step up the ladder and transfer to a bigger program.

Third, I think playing the fifth year guy can from their perspective be helpful in recruiting. Now they can tell top QB recruits that the position is wide open next year. With Hunt, anyone coming in may be forced to wait behind a potential 3-year starter. The problem there is that if they keep losing with the fifth-year guy, then recruiting is generally not going to benefit from it.

So there may be other reasons for going with Allen that have nothing to do with a promise. They each have their own logic but some of it may not be well thought out. But who ever accused coaches of thinking things out clearly?

 

[Chip]

If you don't believe kids are promised positions, so be it. I can't tell you anything on this board that would change your mind.

I don't have a smoking gun, so I'm not implying that. But, from what I've known in the past up to this point with how this scenario played out, my contention is that he was promised the position.

I'm not sure what's worse. That a coach would promise any recruit a starting job. Or that the recruit would believe it.

 

[RMH44]

I don't believe anyone was promised anything but there are lots of reasons why the staff would go with the 5th-year senior rather than the younger guy that they inherited, even if the competition was close as the staff has claimed, without any promises being given out. They might not be good or wholly logical reasons from our perspective but who ever accused people of always being logical?

For one, I think when you have a new staff, there is a always a strong desire on their part to go with their own guy, to win or lose with the guy they brought in over what they inherited. It doesn't always work out that way (see Nassib) but there often does seem to be a house-cleaning stage in a coaching transition and the qbs on the roster are usually the ones who suffer most.

Second, when you bring in a fifth year guy, you don't bring him in with the intention of sitting him. They probably feel that they have an obligation to play him and may give him a bit more rope to fail than the other guys. BUT that's not necessarily out of any kind of obligation that they feel towards him. Rather, it's due more to the faith they place (and must place) in their own evaluations. They recruited him because they felt that on film he was a clear step up from what they already had on campus. The problem there was they didn't have much film to go on to make that evaluation and the only film they had of the qbs on roster were from practices. So, yes, you have to have faith in your evaluations but they should recognize that the situation here was different than with a HS qb with tons of game film from which you can project their future development or an experienced lower-level college qb who's looking to take a step up the ladder and transfer to a bigger program.

Third, I think playing the fifth year guy can from their perspective be helpful in recruiting. Now they can tell top QB recruits that the position is wide open next year. With Hunt, anyone coming in may be forced to wait behind a potential 3-year starter. The problem there is that if they keep losing with the fifth-year guy, then recruiting is generally not going to benefit from it.

So there may be other reasons for going with Allen that have nothing to do with a promise. They each have their own logic but some of it may not be well thought out. But who ever accused coaches of thinking things out clearly?

Good post. I completely agree with point number three, especially if the staff isn't enamored with the skill set of Hunt.

 

[bnoro]

Hey that pistol has the same release point as Drew Allen.

And Todd's pistol was just as accurate as Drew Allen...

 

[Pyle]

because professional coaches decided he wouldnt be the best QB to give Syracuse a chance to win either game.

he got beat out.

and until Allen cant do anything v talent on a level playing field...then personally, im not a chicken little.

and again, your TD came v the 4th team or whatever...queue DC...Whoop De Damn Do.

Oh Lord

Professional coaches aren't infallible. P and D had over a decade of experience and started Fields against Purdue. Coaches are still human and make mistakes. That is not to say me or anyone else on this board is more qualified but the error rate of coaches is pretty high or else we wouldn't be witness to the constant revolving door of coaches every year in the both the NCAA and NFL. Every coach alive believes his decisions are the right ones, it just doesn't necessarily make it so.

 

[OrangePA]

Professional coaches aren't infallible. P and D had over a decade of experience and started Fields against Purdue. Coaches are still human and make mistakes. That is not to say me or anyone else on this board is more qualified but the error rate of coaches is pretty high or else we wouldn't be witness to the constant revolving door of coaches every year in the both the NCAA and NFL. Every coach alive believes his decisions are the right ones, it just doesn't necessarily make it so.

I always suspected that the staff promised Joe Fields he would start.

I have mentioned this before - I recall watching Fields and Patterson in the summer - I wanted Joe to win the job, but I remember feeling that Patterson was playing much better in practice.

Who knows.

 

[Millhouse]

I always suspected that the staff promised Joe Fields he would start.

I have mentioned this before - I recall watching Fields and Patterson in the summer - I wanted Joe to win the job, but I remember feeling that Patterson was playing much better in practice.

Who knows.

i know it's basketball but why did rakim christmas start every game and get ranked 8 seconds into the game a couple years ago?

 

[CuseOnly]

JD said: ↑
The real problem is T. Hunt has problems understanding concepts the coaches are trying to implement. It's easy to look good when you are playing with the ones against the other teams third string.
I believe he was mostly playing w/ the backups and 3rd teamers, not the ones

JD needs to keep up and/or actually watch the game.

 

[ElwoodJBlues]

My issue with the QB competition is this:

Drew Allen is more talented than Terrell Hunt at this junctor. Allen has more big play potential.

Hunt has better command/communication with his offense. Hunt moves of routes too early and hits his checkdowns.

I think Allen displayed the skills necessary to win the job, but Hunt was the safer choice. Whether he will prove to be better, that remains to be seen.

 

[CuseOnly]

My issue with the QB competition is this:

Drew Allen is more talented than Terrell Hunt at this junctor. Allen has more big play potential.

Hunt has better command/communication with his offense. Hunt moves of routes too early and hits his checkdowns.

I think Allen displayed the skills necessary to win the job, but Hunt was the safer choice. Whether he will prove to be better, that remains to be seen.

I agree that Allen has more big play potential. The question is for which team...

 

[anomander]

I'm with All4 on this one. Why on earth would the staff promise a 5th yr senior anything other than a chance to compete? Especially a kid from a San Antonio, TX. Not exactly fertile recruiting grounds for SU.

Drew Allen and the staff all publicly stated that he was promised nothing. What would motivate them to lie about it?

Speaking of Mr. Ishaq, remember the old theory of the the local kid has an advantage staying home because when it comes to close call for playing time (just like this), the local guy usually gets the nod since the staff has to go back to that area to recruit every year. Well ya we just demolished that train of thought on the biggest level.

 

[anomander]

My issue with the QB competition is this:

Drew Allen is more talented than Terrell Hunt at this junctor. Allen has more big play potential.

Hunt has better command/communication with his offense. Hunt moves of routes too early and hits his checkdowns.

I think Allen displayed the skills necessary to win the job, but Hunt was the safer choice. Whether he will prove to be better, that remains to be seen.

I disagree