Lester on his Offense

[Alsacs]

8 of those wins, Akron-2, Maine-2, Colgate-1, Rhode Island-1, Stony Brook-1, Toledo-1, an officials gift, and Tulane a ninth win. Big East record was 11-17 with a 5-2 the last year. People need to look at the total 4 year record, not just the last year, we were a long way from being good, when Doug Left. I'm glad Doug came, but in reality there was still a lot of work to do when he left, one good year isn't a turnaround.

If your going to play that game SS's wins Wagner, Tulane, Villanova, Central Michigan, Wake Forest-2, Maryland-with their QBs hurt.
He has had good wins over NC State, Boston College, Minnesota though to his credit.

 

[Fjoinkay]

This thread is classic in several ways, but mostly the wrong ways (that is in no way a prediction). I'm curious beyond all get-out to see this offense, and I have no idea how it will perform. I'd prefer the coaches keep the lid on it the way they have rather than try to appease a small but fervent group of negativity dwellers.

I believe Lester has said all along that this offense is simple compared to what was being run. It is based more on concepts to apply than quantity of plays in the book. I like that concept. I think many of the best college offenses operate on that concept.

I hope soon we can all stop the re-analysis of what happened last season. What happened was beyond unusual which is not an excuse but simply a fact. Soon the 2015 facts will begin to roll in, and I hope they are positive. I like our kids, and I like our coaches.

Happy July 4th. Go Cuse!!

 

[Alsacs]

Look man you're simply dead wrong on this topic. There is absolutely do doubt whatsoever that the defense was much better than the offense during almost the entire Marrone era You nit picking a few games where the offense was good just isn't working for you. The defense was good the entire Marrone era and the offense wasn't. That's fact man undeniable fact. It was Shafer coaching that defense. Maybe you just don't want to acknowledged because you've decided you don't like him. I think you need to deal with reality not the way you want things to be

The reality of the situation right now is Marrone is a position coach in the NFL right where he started. Deal with it.

What are you talking about? I have never said the D wasn't better. My point is the D wasn't that good it appears good because the offense sucked. We did not play elite defense in context to the rest of the nation. I like Scott Shafer, but the man hasn't proven he can put an offense on the field and his 2 years have not moved forward from DM.

If our defense from 2009 till 2012 is even in the ACC do we actually think it puts up better numbers, worse numbers, or the similar numbers? I think our defensive numbers are worse. I think they wouldn't be terrible or much worse. The defense was not good during the entire Marrone era. It just wasn't awfull and that is why the freaking bar is so low on our program.
Using the numbers from TheCusian

Using points instead of overall d/0
2009: 74/99
2010: 17/93
2011: 73/83
2012: 46/55*
2013: 56/99
2014: 37/115

The D has been good, the last 3 year average has been 46th points allowed. That is good not great. I give the man credit for running a good defense.

 

[anglerman]

What are you talking about? I have never said the D wasn't better. My point is the D wasn't that good it appears good because the offense sucked. We did not play elite defense in context to the rest of the nation. I like Scott Shafer, but the man hasn't proven he can put an offense on the field and his 2 years have not moved forward from DM.

If our defense from 2009 till 2012 is even in the ACC do we actually think it puts up better numbers, worse numbers, or the similar numbers? I think our defensive numbers are worse. I think they wouldn't be terrible or much worse. The defense was not good during the entire Marrone era. It just wasn't awfull and that is why the freaking bar is so low on our program.
Using the numbers from TheCusian

Using points instead of overall d/0
2009: 74/99
2010: 17/93
2011: 73/83
2012: 46/55*
2013: 56/99
2014: 37/115

The D has been good, the last 3 year average has been 46th points allowed. That is good not great. I give the man credit for running a good defense.

 

[rrlbees]

Shafer was also a very successful defensive coordinator with Stanford under JH. He got shafted at Michigan because he was forced to run a system that wasn't his and they had to use some one as scape goat at that time. Then Michigan had the audacity to hire GERG and the look what happened to their defense There's no question he's an excellent defensive coach. His career will come down to who he hires an OC. Obviously MacDonald was a disaster. Lester seems to hold a bit more promise but we will see on the field. In the meantime all any of you are doing is guessing and trying to predict the future So I suggest being excited about the upcoming season and stop reliving last year

You do know Grob had to use the same 3-5 scheme and with less talent right?

 

[Madsoph44]

hcss said all the same things about mcdonalds offense when he was hired

its all a crapshoot at best -my biggest issue is lester showed less than zero last year- find all the excuses you want and there are almost 100000 with you guys- but the fact is he did nothing last year at all- actually less than nothing-anyone who has faith in him other than hcss is a idiot-

i would love for him to make me the idiot- but i just cant see it

I think you put way too much weight on his roll as OC last year. As you can see with HCSS at Michigan, a coordinator running someone else's system is not a good representation of there coaching ability. Many people would like to fire the staff and start over. Same thing we have been doing the last 15 years with poor results. The one thing we have not tried is coaching stability/continuity. I don't think we should stick with a losing coach just for the sake of stability, but we could give a coach more than 2 years before lighting the torches.

 

[wfschrec]

You do know Grob had to use the same 3-5 scheme and with less talent right?

So you expect better results from a roster loaded with guys not even recruited for that scheme that he inherited to out perform a roster that had given Rich Rod at least a couple seasons to stockpile guys designed to fit a 3-5 ... ok got it .. sure thats fair.

 

[wfschrec]

What are you talking about? I have never said the D wasn't better. My point is the D wasn't that good it appears good because the offense sucked. We did not play elite defense in context to the rest of the nation. I like Scott Shafer, but the man hasn't proven he can put an offense on the field and his 2 years have not moved forward from DM.

If our defense from 2009 till 2012 is even in the ACC do we actually think it puts up better numbers, worse numbers, or the similar numbers? I think our defensive numbers are worse. I think they wouldn't be terrible or much worse. The defense was not good during the entire Marrone era. It just wasn't awfull and that is why the freaking bar is so low on our program.
Using the numbers from TheCusian

Using points instead of overall d/0
2009: 74/99
2010: 17/93
2011: 73/83
2012: 46/55*
2013: 56/99
2014: 37/115

The D has been good, the last 3 year average has been 46th points allowed. That is good not great. I give the man credit for running a good defense.

You are crazy ... the defense would have been better if not working with a short field ... games where punters averaged 30 yards a punt or turnover prone offenses ... I really want to believe you are smarter than that.

 

[wfschrec]

This thread is classic in several ways, but mostly the wrong ways (that is in no way a prediction). I'm curious beyond all get-out to see this offense, and I have no idea how it will perform. I'd prefer the coaches keep the lid on it the way they have rather than try to appease a small but fervent group of negativity dwellers.

I believe Lester has said all along that this offense is simple compared to what was being run. It is based more on concepts to apply than quantity of plays in the book. I like that concept. I think many of the best college offenses operate on that concept.

I hope soon we can all stop the re-analysis of what happened last season. What happened was beyond unusual which is not an excuse but simply a fact. Soon the 2015 facts will begin to roll in, and I hope they are positive. I like our kids, and I like our coaches.

Happy July 4th. Go Cuse!!

College offenses are very much like that, people just feel the need to complain and dissect every word. I am by no means happy with last season but I don't take every sound bite and beat it to death and look for ways to crucify someone either that is what we get here.

 

[Scooch]

So many words in this thread.

So little said.

 

[rosconey]

Yeah - you've stated your point. I'm not sure anyone agrees with how far you're taking it though.

If you can't see the gap between last seasons clusterf and the new offense installed this season - I'd just stop posting in this thread. Even people who are down on Lester at least acknowledge the circumstances he was dealt last year.

omfg - if you can see a gap between this years offense that hasnt even been played and last years - you are no doubt the love child of the amazing kreskin

only true facts are he showed nada zip zilch goose eggs last year

 

[TheCusian]

omfg - if you can see a gap between this years offense that hasnt even been played and last years - you are no doubt the love child of the amazing kreskin only true facts are he showed nada zip zilch goose eggs last year

Yep - that's why I am in the "lets see what happens" camp and not in the "he's going to suck" camp.

My position is not extreme ... Yours is.

 

[Alsacs]

So many words in this thread.

So little said.

Honestly I respect your opinion, but posts like this are nothing more than posts to get likes. Absolutely nothing is said.
People can disagree with me all they want, but my opinions are not crazy undefinable positions. The fact that the bar is so damn low is a problem.

 

[Alsacs]

You are crazy ... the defense would have been better if not working with a short field ... games where punters averaged 30 yards a punt or turnover prone offenses ... I really want to believe you are smarter than that.

Again this is your opinion and its a fine opinion. It doesn't mean its right just like it doesn't mean mine is right. Our defense has not been elite from 2009 till present under SS.
It has been top 50 overall in the nation which is good but not great. It is grading on a curve to say our D is good because our O has been so bad. Our D has never been elite and it is okay to say that. Scott Shafer has a done a good job with the unit.

I hate how the bar is so freaking low people can't be objective.

 

[kcsu]

I like the KISS rule when it comes to this O. I do think that Lester is going to put the kids in a position to excel. JB pretty much runs a "concept" O and for the most part it works well. Simple is better.

Other than the fact that McDonald was the second worst OC this school has ever seen the fact that the kids were confused led to them having to play slow as they simply didnt know the plays and what they were supposed to do in each situation. Forget about making the right read they were flat out lost. Kinda like George. Lester should have them playing fast and with confidence which is half the battle. If Hunt can make the proper reads we should have a servicable O possibly one that can actually get us to a bowl.

 

[TheCusian]

Again this is your opinion and its a fine opinion. It doesn't mean its right just like it doesn't mean mine is right. Our defense has not been elite from 2009 till present under SS. It has been top 50 overall in the nation which is good but not great. It is grading on a curve to say our D is good because our O has been so bad. Our D has never been elite and it is okay to say that. Scott Shafer has a done a good job with the unit. I hate how the bar is so freaking low people can't be objective.

This all started because I said the defense carried Marrone through 3 of his 4 years. Which is basically true. I've also said that Shafer was a better DC than Hackett was an OC - also true. I've also said if we could muster a top 50-60 offense to go with any of our Shafer or Bullough years we'd be on our way. Opinion - but an attainable goal for this season. Low bar? Sure. But we need to momentum, for perception and recruiting - and stability. I trust the DC and the coaches on that side of the bar. Good track record. Better recruits = top 15 D. We need Lester to get us into the 50's. I have hope he will.

Tell me what is unreasonable or not objective about that take?

 

[Alsacs]

This all started because I said the defense carried Marrone through 3 of his 4 years. Which is basically true. I've also said that Shafer was a better DC than Hackett was an OC - also true. I've also said if we could muster a top 50-60 offense to go with any of our Shafer or Bullough years we'd be on our way. Opinion - but an attainable goal for this season. Low bar? Sure. But we need to momentum, for perception and recruiting - and stability. I trust the DC and the coaches on that side of the bar. Good track record. Better recruits = top 15 D. We need Lester to get us into the 50's. I have hope he will.

Tell me what is unreasonable or not objective about that take?

The D was better than the O. Your analysis is fine, but I only made the point that the D was not great in context of nationally. It was good, but because it carried the team I was responding to the poster who was trying to make the narrative the defense was really good. When our D looks really good when you compare it to a poor offense.


I freaking hope the offense lights it up and I am a moron for doubting. I am just being a realist and not an idealist. I said 35 offensive TDs would be great and Crusty said that would still be bottom 1/3 in the ACC. However, atleast they would be almost doubling what we scored last year I would consider that successful.

As I said before Las Vegas has our O/U at 4.5 wins. They are saying we are a 4-8 or 5-7 team depending on 1 game in their analysis. I want to be optimistic but I trust Vegas opinion. I hope we win 6 games. I said in other threads I would give SS a 2 year extension with low guaranteed money.

However, if the narrative becomes anything beyond SS did a good job as DC I will call it out. As I said his job as DC was not going to get him a P5 HC job. He was hired to continue the momentum from the DM era and not to take 1 step back to take 2 steps forward.

 

[TheCusian]

The D was better than the O. Your analysis is fine, but I only made the point that the D was not great in context of nationally. It was good, but because it carried the team I was responding to the poster who was trying to make the narrative the defense was really good. When our D looks really good when you compare it to a poor offense. I freaking hope the offense lights it up and I am a moron for doubting. I am just being a realist and not an idealist. I said 35 offensive TDs would be great and Crusty said that would still be bottom 1/3 in the ACC. However, atleast they would be almost doubling what we scored last year I would consider that successful. As I said before Las Vegas has our O/U at 4.5 wins. They are saying we are a 4-8 or 5-7 team depending on 1 game in their analysis. I want to be optimistic but I trust Vegas opinion. I hope we win 6 games. I said in other threads I would give SS a 2 year extension with low guaranteed money. However, if the narrative becomes anything beyond SS did a good job as DC I will call it out. As I said his job as DC was not going to get him a P5 HC job. He was hired to continue the momentum from the DM era and not to take 1 step back to take 2 steps forward.

That's all fair. As you know my biggest issue is with negativity about the future. The problem with being a realist about the future is that objectivity is colored by opinion. So many here would claim to be realists - but then say "Lester mentioned the Broncos, we're doomed. I'm just being a realist."

It's all good, man. I hope we are both understating how good we'll be and we have a season for the ages. Followed by the return of 44. And an AD who gets it.

 

[Alsacs]

That's all fair. As you know my biggest issue is with negativity about the future. The problem with being a realist about the future is that objectivity is colored by opinion. So many here would claim to be realists - but then say "Lester mentioned the Broncos, we're doomed. I'm just being a realist."

It's all good, man. I hope we are both understating how good we'll be and we have a season for the ages. Followed by the return of 44. And an AD who gets it.

I am not a say negative things because I want to troll or act like Skip Bayless type of person. I am being honest and wish I didn't think oh damn this is scary when I hear Lester speak about this offense.

Lester has not shown any reason for me to believe it will get better. I consider myself from Missouri and until he shows me I am going to be skeptical. However, I am not being skeptical for no reason. Again 2014 doesn't wash off his hands completely. He is NOT 100% or even 51% of the blame for that offense, but he has to own a portion of it. For that reason I can't give the benefit of the doubt till he shows he knows what the hell he is doing.

 

[rrlbees]

So you expect better results from a roster loaded with guys not even recruited for that scheme that he inherited to out perform a roster that had given Rich Rod at least a couple seasons to stockpile guys designed to fit a 3-5 ... ok got it .. sure thats fair.

Check the roster. There were no defensive recruits and those that were were frosh. Their one too end defender that year, Woolfolk, went out for the year with a preseason injury. Stockpiled?

 

[wfschrec]

Check the roster. There were no defensive recruits and those that were were frosh. Their one too end defender that year, Woolfolk, went out for the year with a preseason injury. Stockpiled?

Were they or were they not recruited for the 3-5 vs the guys Shafer inherited who were not? It is pretty much that simple.

 

[wfschrec]

Again this is your opinion and its a fine opinion. It doesn't mean its right just like it doesn't mean mine is right. Our defense has not been elite from 2009 till present under SS.
It has been top 50 overall in the nation which is good but not great. It is grading on a curve to say our D is good because our O has been so bad. Our D has never been elite and it is okay to say that. Scott Shafer has a done a good job with the unit.

I hate how the bar is so freaking low people can't be objective.

Tell me where I said elite and tell me where I said it was amazing. I said it carried them to a 2010 bowl ... and the D was a helluva lot better than it was before he got there ... again where did I say elite? I did assert that the D stats would have been better had our offense not sucked ... that is also easy to show. What you are doing is taking what I said to an extreme for what purpose I know not but you obviously aren't reading what I am writing.

 

[wfschrec]

Check the roster. There were no defensive recruits and those that were were frosh. Their one too end defender that year, Woolfolk, went out for the year with a preseason injury. Stockpiled?

Um bees the year Shafer coached you had 2 juniors and 2 soph starters the rest were seniors that spent 3-4 years in another system recruited for that system, and none were recruited by Rich Rod's staff. When Gerg took over they had 2 sophs and 2 frosh starting that were actually recruited for that system. In Gerg's second season 8 were either juniors, sophs or frosh starting that were recruited for that particular system vs the 0 Shafer had to work with ... again apples to oranges.

 

[rrlbees]

Um bees the year Shafer coached you had 2 juniors and 2 soph starters the rest were seniors that spent 3-4 years in another system recruited for that system, and none were recruited by Rich Rod's staff. When Gerg took over they had 2 sophs and 2 frosh starting that were actually recruited for that system. In Gerg's second season 8 were either juniors, sophs or frosh starting that were recruited for that particular system vs the 0 Shafer had to work with ... again apples to oranges.

Rrod doesn't exactly recruit defense and saying kids were recruited specifically for the 3-5 is a reach. Their defensive classes weren't anything to write home about either. But talent aside, the big problem for both of them is that the 3-5 does not work in the B10. And neither had ever coached it. My original point was the poster making an excuse for Shafer cause he had to coach the 3-5 then said the opposite for Grob. It's apples to apples.

 

[wfschrec]

Rrod doesn't exactly recruit defense and saying kids were recruited specifically for the 3-5 is a reach. Their defensive classes weren't anything to write home about either. But talent aside, the big problem for both of them is that the 3-5 does not work in the B10. And neither had ever coached it. My original point was the poster making an excuse for Shafer cause he had to coach the 3-5 then said the opposite for Grob. It's apples to apples.

I get what you are saying and the 3-5 doesn't really work anywhere the way he runs it. Didn't see the part about it being the opposite for GRob missed that. However to say the kids they recruit weren't recruited with a specific system in mind goes against recruiting philosophies in general ... don't know many coaches who just recruit kids and don't consider what they wish to run as part of that process.