I thought a full night's sleep would have made me feel better...

[orangenirvana]

but nope.

Going into this game, I really felt this team could win the Big East and have (perhaps its last chance in a long, long time) an opportunity to play in a BCS bowl game.

We needed to beat a mediocre Cincinnati team with a horrible QB coming off two losses. That momentum would have led to a rocking Carrier Dome against an undefeated Louisville team ripe for a loss. Then all we would have needed was to beat Temple and for Rutgers to lose two or their final three games (Pitt, Cinci, Louisville).

It was very realistic.

And yet, they screwed it up. Like they tend to do.

We have a QB who, while flawed, will be chosen in the 3rd or 4th round of April's NFL Draft. The first time we've had a legit NFL QB since McNabb. Yet, after this loss, we may not even go to a bowl game.

How pathetic is that?

It's just very frustrating. We see flashes of very good play. But that always has to be accompanied by failure.

 

[OrangePA]

Your notion that we could win the Big East was hope - it was not at all realistic.

We were the underdog yesterday - we will be the underdog next week and the following week.

Winning three games as a dog - with two of those games on the road - is simply not realistic.

And trying to do that with a defense that at this point can't defend the run - we could not stop Cincy yesterday - only Cincy stopped Cincy yesterday.

Once again distorted expectations causes consternation.

On the other hand, I'm feel as upset as you do because our players make so many mistakes on the field and because our defense can't seem to stop the run.

 

[Cuseman78]

This has been an especially frustrating year because we seem to be right at the door of "Good team". We are in every game, there appears to be no significant talent difference with anyone on our schedule (save USC), we have one of the better QBs in our league, and yet we have continually found ways to lose.

I think we need to differentiate between the program, which I feel is trending up, and the season results, where he has done a sub-par job this year. I'm still pro-Marrone, but he's making it more difficult on his AD on what should be done regarding a contract extension. I would extend him a couple years, because I do want to see his offense with some mobility at the position.

 

[Cuseman78]

Your notion that we could win the Big East was hope - it was not at all realistic.

We were the underdog yesterday - we will be the underdog next week and the following week.

Winning three games as a dog - with two of those games on the road - is simply not realistic.

And trying to do that with a defense that at this point can't defend the run - we could not stop Cincy yesterday - only Cincy stopped Cincy yesterday.

Once again distorted expectations causes consternation.

On the other hand, I'm feel as upset as you do because our players make so many mistakes on the field and because our defense can't seem to stop the run.

Yea because being a 4 pt underdog on the road isn't overcomeable. Lost as usual.

 

[wfschrec]

Your notion that we could win the Big East was hope - it was not at all realistic.

We were the underdog yesterday - we will be the underdog next week and the following week.

Winning three games as a dog - with two of those games on the road - is simply not realistic.

And trying to do that with a defense that at this point can't defend the run - we could not stop Cincy yesterday - only Cincy stopped Cincy yesterday.

Once again distorted expectations causes consternation.

On the other hand, I'm feel as upset as you do because our players make so many mistakes on the field and because our defense can't seem to stop the run.

It was a very realistic scenario ... FWIW Cincy didn't stop us either we stopped ourselves ... either via penalty or turnover or what have you ... do you actually watch these games or do you just feel like an odds maker in Vegas is 100% accurate all of the time? We are as good ... frankly I feel we are more talented than Cincy and in many circumstances it was out there to see. They supposedly had a top 20 run defense ... we shredded that like a head of lettuce so lets not make it out to be that they were all that dominating. Then again you were the one that said your boy P had as much talent as we did ... nevermind I take it back you're delusional.

 

[OrangePA]

It was a very realistic scenario ... FWIW Cincy didn't stop us either we stopped ourselves ... either via penalty or turnover or what have you ... do you actually watch these games or do you just feel like an odds maker in Vegas is 100% accurate all of the time? We are as good ... frankly I feel we are more talented than Cincy and in many circumstances it was out there to see. They supposedly had a top 20 run defense ... we shredded that like a head of lettuce so lets not make it out to be that they were all that dominating. Then again you were the one that said your boy P had as much talent as we did ... nevermind I take it back you're delusional.

"Very realistic"?

Sorry but your definition of "realistic" is very different from my definition.

Winning three straight games as the underdog with two of those games on the road and while playing an undefeated team along the way is unrealistic or "delusional" using our language.

I gather that you believe that SU will defeat Mizzou and Louisville in the next two weeks? I suspect that most oddsmakers would not call your assessment "realistic."

Don't get me wrong. I hope you're right, of course, but the realistic view is that we will lose both games. If we do happen to win the two wins we will receive national attention for two big upset wins - we will get great PR for bringing about results that were not realistic or expected.

As far as UConn's talent level is concerned, I think you have misrepresented what I posted. I don't recall the specific discussion but I think I was talking about the talent level of our BE opponents on the whole and noted that all of our opponents this year have more talent than we do except for perhaps UConn - I suggested that we may very well have more talent than the Huskies.

And after the game I was very clear that the UConn offense does not have an effective QB - that the kid who played against us in the Dome was tough, but missed a bunch of open receivers and was no threat to run - and that that made our defense look better than it probably is.

So, once again I love your enthusiasm and optimism, but your view of what is "realistic" is a bit myopic.

 

[OrangePA]

"Very realistic"?

Sorry but your definition of "realistic" is very different from my definition.

First, the idea that we are more talented than Cincy is just plain wrong. We do not have an RB like Winn or a breakaway player like Abernathy. Our defense allowed the Bearcats to run up and down the field. We went 9-21 on third down while the Bearcats went 7-15 and held the ball for nearly 34 minutes. We were lucky that Cincy fumbled in the redzone as they were about to score. They also have a better punter - and that had impact yesterday.

Second, winning three straight games as the underdog with two of those games on the road and while playing an undefeated team along the way is simply not realistic - it is unrealistic.

I gather that you believe that SU will defeat Mizzou and Louisville in the next two weeks? Well, I suspect that most college football experts would not call your assessment "realistic."

Don't get me wrong. I hope you're right, of course, but the realistic view is that we will lose both games. If we do happen to win the two games we will receive national attention for two big upset wins - we will get great PR for bringing about results that were not realistic or expected.

As far as UConn's talent level is concerned, I think you have misrepresented what I posted. I don't recall the specific discussion but I think I was talking about the talent level of our BE opponents on the whole and noted that all of our opponents this year have more talent than we do except for perhaps UConn.

And after the game I observed that the UConn offense does not have an effective QB - that the kid who played against us in the Dome missed a bunch of open receivers - I was on the field for that game and saw exactly what he missed - and was no threat to run - and that that made our defense look better than it probably is.

So, once again I love your enthusiasm and optimism, but your view of what is "realistic" is a bit myopic.

 

[kingottoiii]

This has been an especially frustrating year because we seem to be right at the door of "Good team". We are in every game, there appears to be no significant talent difference with anyone on our schedule (save USC), we have one of the better QBs in our league, and yet we have continually found ways to lose.

I think we need to differentiate between the program, which I feel is trending up, and the season results, where he has done a sub-par job this year. I'm still pro-Marrone, but he's making it more difficult on his AD on what should be done regarding a contract extension. I would extend him a couple years, because I do want to see his offense with some mobility at the position.

If we didn't spot every team two scores we would have a winning record. We are certainly good enough to end up 5-2 in the Big East which may win a share of the league title. Unless we embarrass ourselves down the stretch, I think he will be back. Although 2-15 from Halloween on would be hard to defend. But I would not be surprised to see a lot of changes in the staff. IMO you need coaches at OC/DC/ST/OL the rest of the position coaches should be recruiters. So RB, WR, DL, LB, DB coaches should be more recruiters than coaches and should have ties somewhere along the Atlantic coast. And they shouldn't all be from the same areas. We don't need three of those guys to be from NYC/LI and certainly do not need guys from the MW.

I would not be surprised either to see Shafer move on and Henderson made DC. Our D the last 4 years has been either hit or miss. We either played really well or really poorly. There has been nothing in between. IMO there is nothing worse than watching poor D. We have had a lot of stinkers the last 4 years. We have played two Top 50 Os in our 9 games. It isn't like we play against B12 teams here. Six of the teams we played are in the bottom half of D1A and three are outside the Top 90 in total O. Missouri and Temple are both outside the Top 100 and Louisville is outside the Top 40. We need to see a strong finish by the D.

 

[wfschrec]

"Very realistic"?

Sorry but your definition of "realistic" is very different from my definition.

Winning three straight games as the underdog with two of those games on the road and while playing an undefeated team along the way is unrealistic or "delusional" using our language.

I gather that you believe that SU will defeat Mizzou and Louisville in the next two weeks? I suspect that most oddsmakers would not call your assessment "realistic."

Don't get me wrong. I hope you're right, of course, but the realistic view is that we will lose both games. If we do happen to win the two wins we will receive national attention for two big upset wins - we will get great PR for bringing about results that were not realistic or expected.

As far as UConn's talent level is concerned, I think you have misrepresented what I posted. I don't recall the specific discussion but I think I was talking about the talent level of our BE opponents on the whole and noted that all of our opponents this year have more talent than we do except for perhaps UConn - I suggested that we may very well have more talent than the Huskies.

And after the game I was very clear that the UConn offense does not have an effective QB - that the kid who played against us in the Dome was tough, but missed a bunch of open receivers and was no threat to run - and that that made our defense look better than it probably is.

So, once again I love your enthusiasm and optimism, but your view of what is "realistic" is a bit myopic.

Its convenient how you never recall what you post ... but SU winning each of the remaining three games is a realistic possibility .. not likely ... not guaranteed ... it is realistic and can happen so get over yourself. It has become completely obvious to me that you don't watch these games or any other college football for that matter because you are so far off base on many of your remarks. You insisted that we had less talent than any team on our schedule sans UConn who you insisted were our peers and would give us a tough game, you couldn't be anymore wrong about that or some of the other drivel you post.

Quite frankly sans USC we have been as talented as our opposition and have lost because of mental mistakes, penalties and in the Cincy game some terrible officiating. Obviously you haven't watched Mizzou play and while I think LVille is a good team they are not a top 10 squad and our game with them will be closer than the USC game which was only a two score ball game. Mizzou has played a mediocre schedule and done nothing and wouldn't even have an SEC victory had Franklin not returned to rally the troops against a pathetic Kentucky squad. Lets not make these teams out to be more than what they are .. you seem to love to do that for some reason.

 

[baggerbob]

For now we are an average team, maybe the young players will get better. But when your first 2 running backs are Smith and PTG you will have problems. In 1987 Johnson, Drummond,Owens, 1998 Konrad, McIntosh any of those players would get almost all the playing time on this team. Those players could run,catch, block and you could control the clock. That's not even counting the receivers on those teams, we still have a ways to go to get back to that talent level.