Keeley Article on Marrone

[kingottoiii]

Hmm. That's fair. I'd still say that longevity is pretty unusual, and not something I'd want to bank on going forward.

Enh since 1974 our HCs have averaged a tenure of 7.8 years. I think your initial thought is right on the money. Hiring someone because they have a better shot at staying 20 years is defeatist IMO. Hire the best guy, that is the only way to achieve success. The length of their tenure is gravy. Sure we all want a lifer but that shouldn't be the #1 factor.

I want a HC who is never content and wants to be the best in his profession. Which means eventually they will out grow SU.

 

[xc84]

Enh since 1974 our HCs have averaged a tenure of 7.8 years. I think your initial thought is right on the money. Hiring someone because they have a better shot at staying 20 years is defeatist IMO. Hire the best guy, that is the only way to achieve success. The length of their tenure is gravy. Sure we all want a lifer but that shouldn't be the #1 factor.

I want a HC who is never content and wants to be the best in his profession. Which means eventually they will out grow SU.

I want both. A guy who will succeed and stay a long time. Some of you want guys who don't want to stay. That's fine...but not what I want.

 

[kingottoiii]

I want both. A guy who will succeed and stay a long time. Some of you want guys who don't want to stay. That's fine...but not what I want.

Ideally everyone wants a guy who can stay. But in this day in age that simply is not realistic. So putting that as a high factor in who you hire means you are cutting the pool of candidates and likely the caliber of your candidates. That IMO is not a sound hiring practice.

 

[billsin01]

give marrone what rutgers gave schiano (ie huge upgrades in EVERYTHING) and this would be a no brainer---nuff said

I agree with this and it's why I think it's funny that people blame Schiano for the state of NJ's budget or whatnot. He pushed for new facilities and upgrades and they gave it to him. I have no idea why he should have been concerned with NJ's bottom line. I hope Marrone is doing the same thing -- pushing for drastic upgrades, if that's what's needed. How the university pays for isn't his concern (outside of schmoozing with the right donors.)

 

[xc84]

Ideally everyone wants a guy who can stay. But in this day in age that simply is not realistic. So putting that as a high factor in who you hire means you are cutting the pool of candidates and likely the caliber of your candidates. That IMO is not a sound hiring practice.

You have a defeatist attitude about hiring a coach and seem to want to settle. Sure, let's just settle for a guy like Skippy who will skip town after 4 years of mediocrity.. and leave the program in disarray. I want both. Yes, I am more picky than you. I won't settle.

 

[kingottoiii]

You have a defeatist attitude about hiring a coach and seem to want to settle. Sure, let's just settle for a guy like Skippy who will skip town after 4 years of mediocrity.. and leave the program in disarray. I want both. Yes, I am more picky than you. I won't settle.

:rolling:

 

[SoBristol]

Why not the Coach Mac model? Build up the program, hire real good assistants, get to bowl games, be good enough to attract NFL offers, leave the program in much better shape than you found it.

Now, Mac would have been better off staying with SU and turning down the offer from New England. That is another story.

I like the model of a guy with the personality to lift a program, bring in better recruits, give the fans some excitement. Even if that means other programs or the NFL will see the success and come knocking. Because there is a good chance that the program will stay at a high plane -- as SU did in the first half of Coach P's tenure.

 

[All4SU]

This is why we need to give HCDM everything he needs to be successful. I think DG has done a good job of doing that. But we have to keep it going.

 

[OrangePA]

While I appreciate Sean's premise of the article, I have two big points of contention:

1. Comparing SU to RU. RU's situation when Schiano took over was MUCH, MUCH worse than SU was when HCDM took over. The place was an absolute mess. Little academic oversight of the program, bad kids that had tons of off the field issues, poor facilities and most notably decades and decades of previous bottom feeding. Sure GROB didn't win many games and put the program in a hole, but SU still had decades and decades of football prestige to fall back on.

2. Nobody wants the SU job. This is the biggest misnomer out there. Just because Darryl Gross' focus was Skip Holtz the first time around, doesn't mean there weren't others interested. I know for a fact that two current BCS head coaches were extremely interested in the job when he hired Marrone. They were not head guys at the time. I'm sure there were many more. Syracuse can be a very attractive place for Northeast kids with the right guy in charge and coaches across the country know this.

Actually, the Rutgers situation was probably better than the SU situation because Rutgers had made a huge financial committment to the program.

Recall that Doug Graber had Rutgers on the edge of success.

He probably should not have been fired.

Shea clearly messed things up - in a very similar way to Robinson - the comparisions are uncanny - but there was plenty of money there for Schiano to eventually succeed.

 

[OrangePA]

I didn't like the tone of the article. SU will always be a stepping stone job. And like you said all but maybe 8 jobs in CFB are stepping stone jobs. To not hire someone for fear of them leaving is silly.

I realize that SU isn't a great job but it is a Top 50 CFB job. If a coach wants to be in a big boy conference on a big boy stage there are not a whole lot of jobs to choose from.

It's probably true, that other than USC, Ohio State, Michigan, Florida, Texas, Alabama, and a few others most college jobs can be viewed as stepping stone positions.

 

[tipphill]

This is why we need to give HCDM everything he needs to be successful. I think DG has done a good job of doing that. But we have to keep it going.

i believe gross is doing everything he can,maybe the money isn't there and maybe it will not be. if not, then marrone will be unable to compete.

 

[tipphill]

Actually, the Rutgers situation was probably better than the SU situation because Rutgers had made a huge financial committment to the program.

Recall that Doug Graber had Rutgers on the edge of success.

He probably should not have been fired.

Shea clearly messed things up - in a very similar way to Robinson - the comparisions are uncanny - but there was plenty of money there for Schiano to eventually succeed.

mulcahy made rutgers facilities happen not schiano---schiano was a bust as a coach with all the talent and weak scheduling he had. i still am convinced that if mulcahy had been big east commisioner, it would have been an entirely different story.--the guy was a brilliant ceo, well connected and in the end took the fall.

 

[All4SU]

i believe gross is doing everything he can,maybe the money isn't there and maybe it will not be. if not, then marrone will be unable to compete.

I think good coaches in a position like HCDM get you to compete. I believe SU is competing. "Great" coaches find that extra edge -- usually in the form of one or two really talented players who make an instant impact, and then things start to build from there. (They are still the same coaches, just with an added weapon.) The last few years, SU has no had those players -- maybe with the exception of Delone Carter, but he really god set back by his injury. Maybe this is the year one of those players breaks out. Maybe not. I have a lot of faith in HCDM to get it done, and to get it done the right way. But we have to recruit.

 

[OrangePA]

quote="tipphill, post: 264873, member: 307"]mulcahy made rutgers facilities happen not schiano---schiano was a bust as a coach with all the talent and weak scheduling he had. i still am convinced that if mulcahy had been big east commisioner, it would have been an entirely different story.--the guy was a brilliant ceo, well connected and in the end took the fall.[/quote]


Right.

The infrastructure efforts at Rutgers started way before Schiano.

I can't call Schiano a "bust."

I think that's an inaccurate description.

I do think he underachieved to a certain degree, but he was hardly a bust.

 

[All4SU]

Schiano accomplished more at RU than anyone else there. Which isn't saying much. He took them from craptastic to mediocre -- and it took him a decade.

 

[tipphill]

quote="tipphill, post: 264873, member: 307"]mulcahy made rutgers facilities happen not schiano---schiano was a bust as a coach with all the talent and weak scheduling he had. i still am convinced that if mulcahy had been big east commisioner, it would have been an entirely different story.--the guy was a brilliant ceo, well connected and in the end took the fall.

Right.

The infrastructure efforts at Rutgers started way before Schiano.

I can't call Schiano a "bust."

I think that's an inaccurate description.

I do think he underachieved to a certain degree, but he was hardly a bust.[/quote]
sorry 2.2 mil year,800,000 thousand forgiven loan,hellicopter, among other perks and 1 game above 500 record with that scheduling----sorry i stand corrected , he was BIG BUST.

 

[SoBristol]

I think good coaches in a position like HCDM get you to compete. I believe SU is competing. "Great" coaches find that extra edge -- usually in the form of one or two really talented players who make an instant impact, and then things start to build from there. (They are still the same coaches, just with an added weapon.) The last few years, SU has no had those players -- maybe with the exception of Delone Carter, but he really god set back by his injury. Maybe this is the year one of those players breaks out. Maybe not. I have a lot of faith in HCDM to get it done, and to get it done the right way. But we have to recruit.

We have had a handful of those stand-out players -- Mike Williams, Arthur Jones, Deleone Carter, Doug Hogue, maybe Chandler Jones (but limited by injuries in 2011), maybe Pugh. Marrone hasn't recruited any gems of that quality -- the guys who draw extra attention, who make plays, or who get a couple of sacks or tackles for losses in each game. Maybe Broyld or Thompson or the juco DE from the West coast will be his impact recruits.

That is part of the malaise around the program. Spring practice -- no excitement about Marrone's recruits. Some solid players like Smith, Gulley, Foy, the young LBs who are growing up, but no young WR who is making plays or a promising young DE who creates problems. Big story of the Spring -- Nassib looking good passing to Sales.

 

[All4SU]

We have had a handful of those stand-out players -- Mike Williams, Arthur Jones, Deleone Carter, Doug Hogue, maybe Chandler Jones (but limited by injuries in 2011), maybe Pugh. Marrone hasn't recruited any gems of that quality -- the guys who draw extra attention, who make plays, or who get a couple of sacks or tackles for losses in each game. Maybe Broyld or Thompson or the juco DE from the West coast will be his impact recruits.

That is part of the malaise around the program. Spring practice -- no excitement about Marrone's recruits. Some solid players like Smith, Gulley, Foy, the young LBs who are growing up, but no young WR who is making plays or a promising young DE who creates problems. Big story of the Spring -- Nassib looking good passing to Sales.

Mike Williams WAS one of those players...for one year basically. And that seems like ages ago. I don't count A.Jones, C.Jones, or Hogue. All were very good college players. All helped SU win games. I don't think that they individually were game changers. Carter might have been. If he hadn't been sidetracked by the dislocated hip, and been able to build from one year to the next, perhaps. He certainly was very good regardless.

Agree with you about the general lack of a recruit who is going to get people talking. In the last decade, it seems like we've had many of them -- but they haven't panned out as anticipated -- or never played at all.

 

[Fjoinkay]

I think good coaches in a position like HCDM get you to compete. I believe SU is competing. "Great" coaches find that extra edge -- usually in the form of one or two really talented players who make an instant impact, and then things start to build from there. (They are still the same coaches, just with an added weapon.) The last few years, SU has no had those players -- maybe with the exception of Delone Carter, but he really god set back by his injury. Maybe this is the year one of those players breaks out. Maybe not. I have a lot of faith in HCDM to get it done, and to get it done the right way. But we have to recruit.

Reading your post Sammy Watkins comes to mind. As a freshman WR he is probably responsible for taking Clemson to another level...at least until they played WVU. Clemson has always recruited well, according to the ranking services, but they had underachieved on the field more or less for decades. I watched an interview where the Clemson coaches all said that what separated Watkins was his maturity, the way he approached practice and the video tape and his work ethic- it was all above his years. I think Watkins was a 5 star recruit, but his coaches said it was the intangibles that set him apart. And they would know because most years Clemson lands a 5 star or two.

That tells me that you never really know. SU could have a recruit in this year's class who shows up and has the intangibles and becomes a play maker right out of the gate, or possibly even someone who red-shirted last year or who saw limited run. Of course, any kid who is a legit play maker is going to need the body to pull it off, but it could happen any year at SU. McNabb happened. Mike Williams was a 2 star.

I think what's important is what Marrone and his staff are already doing: they are building the foundation and that takes time. GRob closed the deal with some impressive recruits while the foundation crumbled for all sorts of reasons and his coaching being at the top of the list. If the foundation is solid and the team is competing then a mature beyond his football years play maker can step in and truly excel straight away. I just hope the offense picks up because that will generate more interest for more play makers and increase the chances. And once it happens I trust that Marrone and his staff will capitalize on the success and we won't see a sharp decline the same year the first star play maker goes pro.

 

[44cuse]

its not we are boise 10 years ago and they were able to build a program

What does that mean?

44cuse

 

[SoBristol]

...

That tells me that you never really know. SU could have a recruit in this year's class who shows up and has the intangibles and becomes a play maker right out of the gate, or possibly even someone who red-shirted last year or who saw limited run. Of course, any kid who is a legit play maker is going to need the body to pull it off, but it could happen any year at SU. McNabb happened. Mike Williams was a 2 star.

I think what's important is what Marrone and his staff are already doing: they are building the foundation and that takes time. GRob closed the deal with some impressive recruits while the foundation crumbled for all sorts of reasons and his coaching being at the top of the list. ...

McNabb was the top (or #2) dual threat QB when he was recruited. Mike Williams committed to SU in early June -- the first commit in one of GROB's classes. It was no surprise to coaches that Mike was a gifted two-sport athlete with size and speed. When the staff lands guys like that (or Hogue, or Carter), the buzz starts early.

Marrone is building up the foundation, but not with play-making skill guys. The best guys on offense this season are Pugh, Nassib, Lemon & Sales --notably, all GROB recruits. The first exception will be Smith, the RB. Doug's juco recruits are all linemen, except for Diabate. I am not knocking this -- we need guys like Alexander, Goggins, and the two new DL jucos, to add size in the trenches. We need some bigger WRs (guys like West); TEs; and a tough running threat like Broyld.

Fans looking for an offense that can strike quickly, or carry the team, will have to be very patient.

 

[cusestudent]

McNabb was the top (or #2) dual threat QB when he was recruited. Mike Williams committed to SU in early June -- the first commit in one of GROB's classes. It was no surprise to coaches that Mike was a gifted two-sport athlete with size and speed. When the staff lands guys like that (or Hogue, or Carter), the buzz starts early.

Marrone is building up the foundation, but not with play-making skill guys. The best guys on offense this season are Pugh, Nassib, Lemon & Sales --notably, all GROB recruits. The first exception will be Smith, the RB. Doug's juco recruits are all linemen, except for Diabate. I am not knocking this -- we need guys like Alexander, Goggins, and the two new DL jucos, to add size in the trenches. We need some bigger WRs (guys like West); TEs; and a tough running threat like Broyld.

Fans looking for an offense that can strike quickly, or carry the team, will have to be very patient.

I'm just hoping that we can consistently bring in good O-linemen and D-linemen. I could care less if we bring in lower rated skill guys; one wrong twist or turn in practice and they're done for the year.

 

[SmilinBob]

This team reminds me of the BC type teams in the past, nothing exciting but hopefully solid. I'd love to have a guy that could outrun coverage and catch a well thrown pass for a td or a rb that could brake a tackle and take it to the zone.

What I'm hoping for at this stage is a team that can block and tackle and can execute with as few mistakes as possible because I don't think we have the talent to skirt fundamentals and get by by just talent. SU is getting faster on D though which is good.

 

[kingottoiii]

This team reminds me of the BC type teams in the past, nothing exciting but hopefully solid. I'd love to have a guy that could outrun coverage and catch a well thrown pass for a td or a rb that could brake a tackle and take it to the zone.

What I'm hoping for at this stage is a team that can block and tackle and can execute with as few mistakes as possible because I don't think we have the talent to skirt fundamentals and get by by just talent. SU is getting faster on D though which is good.

Yeah and those BC teams were always stuck being 5th in the BE. IMO SU will never be able to get by on talent. What made SU good in the 80s and 90s was our system. That is what IMO we need to be successful. We need a system that will mask where we are deficient in talent and accentuate the talent we do have. That is how Mac built SU. That is how P kept SU going. That is what I worry Marrone does not get. I guess we will see this year the answer.

 

[SmilinBob]

My feeling about Marrone is that he's young and learning thus isn't really to the point he knows what exactly he wants to do, has a good idea but has tinkered around trying to figure it out. I'm hoping SU becomes a Stanford east type of team, not exactly but the basic premise of what they do.