Impressed with the offensive performance

[GoSU96]

scoring issues aside that was the best all year, including Maryland. Two new QB's getting their first real time against the #1 team in the country. Great job of converting on 3rd down, 7 of 14, and driving the ball.

About the same number of long plays as the last three games, just seems like more because of the two TD's. Added the upfield passing with greater efficiency and it just looks better. Also they just looked crisper/cleaner, less fire drills on substitutions and lining up, better tempo and rhythm.

If the job on 3rd down is the standard going forward this offense isn't that far away.

Which of these is not like the others?

103 Hawaii
121 South Florida
118 Louisiana-Monroe
95 Penn State
81 San Jose State
106 Southern Mississippi
128 Wake Forest
94 Ohio
91 UNLV
115 Kansas
123 Kent State
70 Syracuse
125 Vanderbilt
126 Connecticut
127 SMU


That list is total offense rankings for the fifteen teams that take the most yards per offensive TD. SU has "needed" 206 yds per TD scored, that is ridiculous.

70 is no great shakes but it is much better than those other teams. For example SU is averaging 412 yds in total offense. Wake 212.

They get these redzone issues fixed, all things being equal given the number of chances they have consistently generated scoring should really jump. This team has moved the ball and given themselves chances in every game. This isn't a "bad" offense that struggles to get to the 50.

They get that one thing fixed, assuming the 3rd down performance holds, and the offense won't be the thing preventing this team from having team having a very good second half.

 

[retro44]

I noticed thy were snapping the ball with lots more time on the playclock which made it hard for FSU to sub.

 

[Millhouse]

scoring issues aside that was the best all year, including Maryland. Two new QB's getting their first real time against the #1 team in the country. Great job of converting on 3rd down, 7 of 14, and driving the ball.

About the same number of long plays as the last three games, just seems like more because of the two TD's. Added the upfield passing with greater efficiency and it just looks better. Also they just looked crisper/cleaner, less fire drills on substitutions and lining up, better tempo and rhythm.

If the job on 3rd down is the standard going forward this offense isn't that far away.

Which of these is not like the others?

103 Hawaii
121 South Florida
118 Louisiana-Monroe
95 Penn State
81 San Jose State
106 Southern Mississippi
128 Wake Forest
94 Ohio
91 UNLV
115 Kansas
123 Kent State
70 Syracuse
125 Vanderbilt
126 Connecticut
127 SMU


That list is total offense rankings for the fifteen teams that take the most yards per offensive TD. SU has "needed" 206 yds per TD scored, that is ridiculous.

70 is no great shakes but it is much better than those other teams. For example SU is averaging 412 yds in total offense. Wake 212.

They get these redzone issues fixed, all things being equal given the number of chances they have consistently generated scoring should really jump. This team has moved the ball and given themselves chances in every game. This isn't a "bad" offense that struggles to get to the 50.

They get that one thing fixed, assuming the 3rd down performance holds, and the offense won't be the thing preventing this team from having team having a very good second half.

that game was more proof that "playmakers" is not the problem

PTG and West, for supposedly not being playmakers, sure had some nice plays.

very optimistic for the rest of the year and especially the next couple
very optimistic for the rest of the year and following years

why did i say that twice? stupid refresh

 

[GoSU96]

that game was more proof that "playmakers" is not the problem

PTG and West, for supposedly not being playmakers, sure had some nice plays.

very optimistic for the rest of the year and especially the next couple
very optimistic for the rest of the year and following years

Yep.

And nice to see Ishmael targeted again after making his first catch.

Finally broke that tendency.

 

[PhatOrange]

I noticed thy were snapping the ball with lots more time on the playclock which made it hard for FSU to sub.

Lester said they didn't have any communication issues. Why was that I wonder?

I half wondered on Saturday if McDonald shouldve left the box and coached (as the OC) from the sideline. There's some P5 OC's out there on the sideline.

 

[Full_Rebar]

Lester said they didn't have any communication issues. Why was that I wonder?

I half wondered on Saturday if McDonald shouldve left the box and coached (as the OC) from the sideline. There's some P5 OC's out there on the sideline.

OC having the next play call ready right away, quicker signals, less substitutions. All could play a role.

As for the sidelines or not, I think it's personal preference for the OC, but maybe someone knows how many of those top 20 offenses have the OC on the sideline?

 

[javadoc]

OC having the next play call ready right away, quicker signals, less substitutions. All could play a role.

Yes, yes, and yes.

And #1 could have taken #3 into account during quick decision-making.

 

[RF2044]

that game was more proof that "playmakers" is not the problem

PTG and West, for supposedly not being playmakers, sure had some nice plays.

very optimistic for the rest of the year and especially the next couple
very optimistic for the rest of the year and following years

why did i say that twice? stupid refresh

I'm not sure why some of you seem so obsessed with finding one magic bullet for a root cause. Execution has been an issue. Play calling has been an issue.

And if you don't think this team lacks playmakers compared to even our peer programs, I invite you to watch more college football.

We've got some pretty good players. I'm not sure that Jarrod West compares to other teams' playmakers, despite the year he's having.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm not sure why some of you seem so obsessed with finding one magic bullet for a root cause. Execution has been an issue. Play calling has been an issue.

And if you don't think this team lacks playmakers compared to even our peer programs, I invite you to watch more college football.

We've got some pretty good players. I'm not sure that Jarrod West compares to other teams' playmakers, despite the year he's having.

people who talk about lack of playmakers are often the dunces looking for one magic bullet

 

[RF2044]

people who talk about lack of playmakers are often the dunces looking for one magic bullet

I see--so now I'm a dunce because I don't fully subscribe to your new agey oversimplification about what's bogged down the offense?

I think the problem is multi-dimensional. You've expressed repeatedly it is all about play calling.

You've consistently rationalized that recruiting / playmaking isn't an issue because it fits your narrative that the problem was only about George McDonald.

Again, I invite you to watch more college football to compare the skilled talent we have to other teams--even our peer programs.

Execution was the biggest thing holding this offense back. QB inaccuracy. Unfavorable play calling. Inability of WRs in general to create separation downfield [who would have thought going into this year that Jarrod West, who isn't the fleetest afoot, would be our big downfield weapon?]. Penalties. A tendency to shoot ourselves in the foot at key times. The OL being unable to get that one yard when we really need it inside the five.

All reasons for the subpar scoring. It isn't just about the playcalling. Or the QB.

It also doesn't mean that we can't field a competent offense without Marvin Harrison being on the team, but that doesn't change that compared to other teams, we lack playmakers.

 

[Millhouse]

I see--so now I'm a dunce?

I think the problem is multi-dimensional. You think it is all about play calling.

You've consistently rationalized that recruiting / playmaking isn't an issue because it fits your narrative that the problem was only about George McDonald.

Again, I invite you to watch more college football to compare the skilled talent we have to other teams--even our peer programs.

Execution was the biggest thing holding this offense back. QB inaccuracy. Unfavorable play calling. Inability of WRs in general to create separation downfield [who would have thought going into this year that Jarrod West, who isn't the fleetest afoot, would be our big downfield weapon?]. Penalties. A tendency to shoot ourselves in the foot at key times. The OL being unable to get that one yard when we really need it inside the five.

All reasons for the subpar scoring. It isn't just about the playcalling. Or the QB.

It also doesn't mean that we can't field a competent offense without Marvin Harrison being on the team, but that doesn't change that compared to other teams, we lack playmakers.

if i wanted to call you a dunce specifically, i would've. it's not all about you

i said playmaking isn't an issue because it's clearly not and the data supports that

i never said recruiting isn't an issue, i said it's such a crap shoot that I prefer to roll the dice on recruits rather than roll the dice on hoping a recruiter can learn to be a playcaller

 

[RF2044]

if i wanted to call you a dunce specifically, i would've. it's not all about you

i said playmaking isn't an issue because it's clearly not and the data supports that

i never said recruiting isn't an issue, i said it's such a crap shoot that I prefer to roll the dice on recruits rather than roll the dice on hoping a recruiter can learn to be a playcaller

I agree with your last line. We gambled, and it didn't work out. I tend to believe that most things being equal, you're better off having a former QB as an OC. Game one of Lester showed plenty of positives. I want to see more before I declare that many problems plaguing the offense have been solved.

Playmaking was an issue, prior to the last game. QB can be a playmaker, and Hunt was subpar all season long [excluding overmatched CMU]. Long and Wilson, comparatively, were like an infusion of competent passing. Even thought their performance wasn't "great," that it was a step forward from our veteran QB is a testimony to how badly off-target Hunt was most of the time.

Lastly, why don't you take the edge of your tone. When you respond 10 seconds after I post with a thinly veiled insult, how the am I supposed to interpret it? it--I'm comfortable agreeing to disagree on this topic--obviously, since we have been going back and forth on this topic for weeks.

 

[Millhouse]

I agree with your last line. We gambled, and it didn't work out. I tend to believe that most things being equal, you're better off having a former QB as an OC. Game one of Lester showed plenty of positives. I want to see more before I declare that many problems plaguing the offense have been solved.

Playmaking was an issue, prior to the last game. QB can be a playmaker, and Hunt was subpar all season long [excluding overmatched CMU]. Long and Wilson, comparatively, were like an infusion of competent passing. Even thought their performance wasn't "great," that it was a step forward from our veteran QB is a testimony to how badly off-target Hunt was most of the time.

Lastly, why don't you take the edge of your tone. When you respond 10 seconds after I post with a thinly veiled insult, how the am I supposed to interpret it? it--I'm comfortable agreeing to disagree on this topic--obviously, since we have been going back and forth on this topic for weeks.

there was no edge. lots of dumb posts over the years about playmakers. i think you're on edge

 

[RF2044]

there was no edge. lots of dumb posts over the years about playmakers. i think you're on edge

"Nuh uh." "Uh huh."

Pointless, given that you're not interested in discussing any points I've raised in the last couple of posts. That's fine--agree to disagree.

 

[Millhouse]

"Nuh uh." "Uh huh."

Pointless, given that you're not interested in discussing any points I've raised in the last couple of posts. That's fine--agree to disagree.

i agree that long is a better passer than hunt. that's not what people usually talk about with playmakers, not usually used to describe passers.

 

[RF2044]

i agree that long is a better passer than hunt. that's not what people usually talk about with playmakers, not usually used to describe passers.

QBs can absolutely be playmakers. Not just with their feet. But obviously, not looking to get into a splitting hairs definition debate about what constitutes playmaking to every different person on the board.

I'd rather focus on Lester / Long, and how both "inexperienced" newbies perform on the road this weekend. If they have a similar performance [Lester with effective play calling / tempo / rhythm, and Long with accurate passing / continued demonstration that he can run the playbook effectively], it is going to make the second half of the season really interesting.

 

[007]

people who talk about lack of playmakers are often the dunces looking for one magic bullet

Here's what some of the data suggests: Anyone who disagrees with your position or your interpretation of "data" is dunce, meathead, idiot, moron. Your wife must be a saint.

At no time have you come remotely close to proving your point. But, that is an opinion.

 

[Alsacs]

Yeah I concede I was wrong on the lack of playmakers on offense. We may not have an NFL playmakers on offense but we have above average college playmakers on offense. We need to improve in the last 30 yards on offense as we can move the ball 20 to the opponent's 30 pretty well. I don't know if we are just predictable down there or if we are not executing. We need better production in the passing game on the opponent's side of the field as the running game has been solid all year.

The positions we need better talent to compete with the elite teams are defensive line and defensive backs.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Here's what some of the data suggests: Anyone who disagrees with your position or your interpretation of "data" is dunce, meathead, idiot, moron. Your wife must be a saint.

At no time have you come remotely close to proving your point. But, that is an opinion.

May God have mercy on his soul

 

[Millhouse]

Here's what some of the data suggests: Anyone who disagrees with your position or your interpretation of "data" is dunce, meathead, idiot, moron. Your wife must be a saint.

At no time have you come remotely close to proving your point. But, that is an opinion.

there's nothing to interpret

we're 42nd in 20+ and 30+ yard plays

a team that is bad on offense but better than average at gaining 30+ yards probably has something else going on other than a lack of playmakers

 

[GoSU96]

Here's what some of the data suggests: Anyone who disagrees with your position or your interpretation of "data" is dunce, meathead, idiot, moron. Your wife must be a saint.

At no time have you come remotely close to proving your point. But, that is an opinion.

Actually the data does show that "talent"/"playmakers" isn't the issue. The ingredients are there, and they've been there right along.

 

[RF2044]

Actually the data does show that "talent"/"playmakers" isn't the issue. The ingredients are there, and they've been there right along.

It all depends on what you want the offense to be when it grows up. If your focus is merely on the team running a functional / competent offense--which I'll point out we haven't been all year until last game--then the ingredients are all there, we just need to execute better.

If the goal is taking the offense to another level, and making the offense more dynamic than functional / competent, then lacking "playmakers" absolutely is an issue. We need to recruit better, faster, more explosive skill players to take that next step. Because right now there isn't a single player on offense that scares the opposition or necessitates extra planning for defensive schemes.

That doesn't mean that we don't have some decent players at the skill positions now [PTG and West in particular have been very good this season]. We'll know we've arrived when we have three players in the rotation like Ishmael, and several guys with Estime-esque wheels.

This feels very much like a micro / macro discussion to me.

 

[Scooch]

FWIW, I vividly remember the talk here turning to the "lack of playmakers" a few games into the 2012 season. Then we started moving the ball and scoring and we had adequate playmakers, apparently.

We don't have top 25 talent, that's obvious. But we also don't have bottom 40 talent, which is where our offense has been ranked more often than not recently.

Always multiple factors at play.

 

[RF2044]

Always multiple factors at play.

Precisely.

 

[007]

there's nothing to interpret

we're 42nd in 20+ and 30+ yard plays

a team that is bad on offense but better than average at gaining 30+ yards probably has something else going on other than a lack of playmakers

Of course, there is "nothing to interpret," because YOU have unilaterally decided (based on nothing that) that counting the number of 20+ yard plays is both meaningful and conclusively supportive of your theory that there must therefor be playmakers.

If you complete discount efficiency and productively, how can you effective conclude anything from the data?

Look at every meaningful measure of offensive efficiency out there, and SU falls far below the norm.