Let’s put away all the “fire everybody” and “hire Tressel” posts for a moment...

[SUskibum]

Spot on... Especially since, we now have league stability, a new indoor practice facility, etc. to sell. If we can't bring in kids now, as a result of us losing games 56-0, thats on the coaches. I don't buy the attendence thing hurting moreso than the issues presented and nearly all of them have been addressed. If we win, people will come. We simply can't get beat that badly and expect fair weather fans to ever come back... Stinks, but it's reality.

And we can always say, "if we do our part as a football team they will come" and point to the Bball crowds. Its not a school/town thing with attendance, its a product thing

 

[Chris02M]

You can never fire a coach after 7 games unless your an icon school like USC. And in a developmental school like SU HCSS has 3 1/2 years to prove himself.

He did make a strategic mistake by hiring friends over finding really experienced OC & DC with major experience at those positions. It will make his length of stay more difficult.

usc fired a guy who had been there a while who wasn't well liked

 

[SWC75]

texas did

also clemson isnt 3-4 with 3 blowouts

next someone will post about how mac did his first year so shafer gets a free pass

As well they should. It took Mac 7 years to get it going with a brand new carrier Dome and a weaker schedule. it took Ben 8 years against even weaker competition. And they didn't leave for the NFL and take their staffs with them in the middle of it.

 

[Chris02M]

Right now the program needs stability changing coaches will set the program back to Grob levels. The Northwestern and Clemson blow outs were not that unexpected and the Clemson game wasn't as much a blowout as the Northwestern one as in the Clemson game we had ample opportunities to get back in the game in the 3rd quarter but we didn't make the plays. The Georgia Tech game was very concerning but i'm not jumping to conclusions about the staff based on 1 game where we are playing against the triple option for the 1st time as a staff. As long as were are competitive(and hopefully winning at least 2) against Wake Forest, Maryland, Pittsburgh and Boston College I am willing to give the staff another year. The only position coaches I think could be in trouble are Rob Moore and Fred Reed but it could just be that the talent there isn't up to ACC levels.

 

[SUskibum]

[Bullough won’t be able to survive another massacre. He has not shown much to have anyone overlook the bad games.[/quote]

The thing that really cements to me that DCCB probably will have to go is the blowouts seems to have a commonality that nobody knows their assignments. Obviously the 3/4 was a huge change for one game and after the clemson game there were many quotes about how they "added a few things" during the week to prepare for the new offense. stop with the scheme so much every week that nobody knows what their doing!

if the team is already learning a newish defensive scheme (HCSS keeps saying he wont coordiate the defense, that its chucks) then shouldnt we focus on learning the base defense so we can play super fast, super aggressive football because everyone is 100% certain of their assignments? A 4.4 forty kid can look like a 4.8 forty kid really easy when hes confused[/quote]

 

[Crusty]

I think you hit the nail on the head skibum. Penalties and missed assignments are a hallmark of poor coaching. Used to drive me nuts that DM was such a disciplinarian and his teams were so undisciplined almost everywhere but especially on ST.

 

[timkay99]

1. We have only one receiver – Broyld – that gets open consistently. In other words only one ACC caliber receiver.
2. We have a competitive O Line – certainly not dominant but competitive.
3. We have a good stable of running backs – probably all ACC quality.
4. We have a good quality D Line probably at least average for the ACC.
5. We have good Line Backers – can play in the ACC
6. The secondary may have two players that are ACC quality, the rest are probably not.
7. Special Teams – spotty. No FG kicker, pretty good punter, lousy kick blocking, average kick coverage, pretty good kick return.

Recruiting
Last year’s class imploded and we had to scramble to fill the class. Got some good ones – lost some better ones. This year the coaches have done a good job of getting commits from skill players. No complaints there. They are working hard on D backs so they are trying hard to fix that problem.

I don’t see how we can complain about the effort here and we are finally getting some interesting skill players. Recruiting is a bright spot.

Good post, but I disagree about only 2 players that are ACC quality in the secondary. As much as I hate Anderson and Wilkes, they were starters for a team many think was the best team in the Big East (at least on this board). So, you have Anderson, Reddish, Morgan, Eskridge, Wilkes and that doesn't even get into players like Whigham. Those guys are all ACC quality players, but are not being used in an ACC quality way.

I also don't think our DL is average for the ACC. I think our D-tackles are avg for the ACC and our D-Ends are the worst in the conference. The move to a 3-4 kind of exasperated that problem for me.

Recruiting wise, I don't see a step up. The same positions we know we need to improve our skill level (OL - mostly OT and DL) have seen struggles bringing kids in again. We need defensive ends so badly. I am curious to see what happens as the class finalizes.

For me, I think Moore may have to go. We talk about how great of a WR coach he is, but in reality, he improved a guy in Lemon who contributed as a true frosh and a guy in Sales who they couldn't even get on the field b/c of how he practiced. I personally think he has been given a lot of guys with raw tools, but hasn't been able to make them serviceable WR's (I disagree Broyld is an ACC caliber WR at this stage as well, hands are too inconsistent).

Outside of Moore (and that is more to get a premium recruiter in), I don't know who else goes. Bullough is the big name, but who do you get? You want experience or you want another guy like McDonald? I think as you look back at the hiring decisions, you saw Shafer go the opposite way that I would have preferred. He ended up hiring a DC with experience even though that is his side of the ball and then hired an OC with no previous play calling experience.

Will be interesting to see how we play after a bye week.

 

[Chris02M]

Good post, but I disagree about only 2 players that are ACC quality in the secondary. As much as I hate Anderson and Wilkes, they were starters for a team many think was the best team in the Big East (at least on this board). So, you have Anderson, Reddish, Morgan, Eskridge, Wilkes and that doesn't even get into players like Whigham. Those guys are all ACC quality players, but are not being used in an ACC quality way.

I also don't think our DL is average for the ACC. I think our D-tackles are avg for the ACC and our D-Ends are the worst in the conference. The move to a 3-4 kind of exasperated that problem for me.

Recruiting wise, I don't see a step up. The same positions we know we need to improve our skill level (OL - mostly OT and DL) have seen struggles bringing kids in again. We need defensive ends so badly. I am curious to see what happens as the class finalizes.

For me, I think Moore may have to go. We talk about how great of a WR coach he is, but in reality, he improved a guy in Lemon who contributed as a true frosh and a guy in Sales who they couldn't even get on the field b/c of how he practiced. I personally think he has been given a lot of guys with raw tools, but hasn't been able to make them serviceable WR's (I disagree Broyld is an ACC caliber WR at this stage as well, hands are too inconsistent).

Outside of Moore (and that is more to get a premium recruiter in), I don't know who else goes. Bullough is the big name, but who do you get? You want experience or you want another guy like McDonald? I think as you look back at the hiring decisions, you saw Shafer go the opposite way that I would have preferred. He ended up hiring a DC with experience even though that is his side of the ball and then hired an OC with no previous play calling experience.

Will be interesting to see how we play after a bye week.

recruiting if you trust the recruiting services is definitely better for this staff than the prior one

 

[timkay99]

recruiting if you trust the recruiting services is definitely better for this staff than the prior one

More about the recruiting at those 2 positions worries me (OL and DL). Problem under old regime and I am still not a big fan of the numbers with this unfinished class right now.

Recruiting at skill positions (QB/WR) appears to be better. RB, LB and DB recruiting has always been pretty good while Shafer has been at Syracuse.

I also expected a little better of a push with the ability to pitch the ACC. I am curious to see how the class finishes.

 

[Crusty]

recruiting if you trust the recruiting services is definitely better for this staff than the prior one

Hey Tim,
I said only two guys in the secondary because only two are proven in my my view. Anderson cannot IMO be considered ACC quality as he is very weak in pass coverage. We see the back of number nine far too often. If all these guys were ACC quality why are we so bad in pass defense? Certainly the younger guys may improve but as of this writing I don't think they would start anywhere.

For years this board (including you and me as I remember) have been saying that our biggest need was play makers and I think that was undoubtedly correct. As you point out, that has been addressed and we have the most interesting class of play makers in many a moon. Yes, we need lineman but I don't think that it is fair to say recruiting hasn't improved because we have not yet addressed all areas.

I don't know what to make of Moore. I guess next year will tell the story.

We will just have to disagree about Broyld and take it up again at the end of the season.

I m surprised you did not mention Reed. If you think the secondary is ACC quality but not properly used isn't that on him?

 

[Guinness]

Here are my issues,

1- Although I agree that a head coach really needs to be given 3-4 years to recruit his players and the such, we cant have another 3-4 year period of GROB. If that happens, it is entirely possible we will never come back from that (okay, maybe I'm going overboard with that assessment, but I just cant go through another 3-4 year period of the GROB years.)

2- Good coaches make adjustments and schemes that fit players to compete. Yesterday, we did not compete. (I think GT just gained another 15 yards on the ground). I would agree that our skill level is not up to par, but as I said, good coaches find a way to win or at least compete with less skilled players. We constantly have breakdowns on offense and defense, that is a huge cause for concern. We have been blown out with no shot to win in 3 games now. This is totally inexcusable. I could possible see 1, maybe 2 blow outs, it happens. Sometimes things just don't go your way, but for it to happen 3 times? This is becoming a trend, and less of a anomaly. I think it says something about the staff.

You are not going overboard imo. We have yet to recover from GROB and another coach of that caliber would quite possibly sink this program for good.

I want Shafer to be the guy but as of right now other than the State game we have been out coached in every other game. To make matters worse we look unprepared and it has been a total amateur hour. I get that Shafer and company are learning on the job but up until this point they don't seem to be getting any better.

I expect Shafer will keep his job next year regardless but can only hope that the rest of the staff sees major turnover. Both the DC and OC as of right now should be replaced.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

If things don't work out with Bullough, would Jeff Hafley be a viable candidate as D-coordinator? Without doing any research I don't think he's ever held the title of coordinator. He was one hell of a recruiter though for RU and I believe Pitt before that. As a previous poster said, let him name his price-if he's qualified in terms of the Xs and Os. Hafley working NJ and McDonald working Florida- especially with the new IPF- could be a potent combo.

 

[timkay99]

Hey Tim,
I said only two guys in the secondary because only two are proven in my my view. Anderson cannot IMO be considered ACC quality as he is very weak in pass coverage. We see the back of number nine far too often. If all these guys were ACC quality why are we so bad in pass defense? Certainly the younger guys may improve but as of this writing I don't think they would start anywhere.

For years this board (including you and me as I remember) have been saying that our biggest need was play makers and I think that was undoubtedly correct. As you point out, that has been addressed and we have the most interesting class of play makers in many a moon. Yes, we need lineman but I don't think that it is fair to say recruiting hasn't improved because we have not yet addressed all areas.

I don't know what to make of Moore. I guess next year will tell the story.

We will just have to disagree about Broyld and take it up again at the end of the season.

I m surprised you did not mention Reed. If you think the secondary is ACC quality but not properly used isn't that on him?

I believe strongly it is the scheme for why the DB's aren't better. I just think we don't put them in a position to succeed and either isolate them on an island or ask them to tackle 1 on 1. They also give pretty big cushions when the zone blitzes occur that there isn't much they can do. I think part of the problem is Syracuse (due to a weak front line) has to blitz to bring pressure, which puts a lot of pressure on the secondary to cover long or cover on an island. I really feel like the blitz style is much different under Bullough then Shafer.

I don't like Anderson, but he has been playing a lot, has been a 3-year starter I think and is the best tackler amongst the CB's (maybe b/c he gets so many chances, who knows?). I personally think Eskridge, Anderson and Reddish (and Lyn when healthy) could all start for ACC teams. I think most of our defenders not on the front 4 could start for most every other ACC team not named Clemson or Florida State.

Well, we don't know yet that it has been addressed. We think we are bringing in better playmakers at QB and WR. It is hard to evaluate recruiting (especially with an unfinished class), but I was expecting it to take a bigger jump then what we are seeing with the move to the ACC. Honestly, my insight on the recruiting is definitely unfair since the class isn't finished and I can understand that. Heck, we can go back 2 years and still have unfair opinions on that recruiting class!

Only reason I didn't mention Reed is he is a first year position coach. I will be surprised if he is let go. I think he was one of the last (if not THE last) hire, so maybe they will try and find someone early on and it is his fault.

 

[im4cuse]

Sample size still a bit small. There are winnable games ahead. Hold serve at home and nose out Maryland and this thread answers itself.

 

[Crusty]

If things don't work out with Bullough, would Jeff Hafley be a viable candidate as D-coordinator? Without doing any research I don't think he's ever held the title of coordinator. He was one hell of a recruiter though for RU and I believe Pitt before that. As a previous poster said, let him name his price-if he's qualified in terms of the Xs and Os. Hafley working NJ and McDonald working Florida- especially with the new IPF- could be a potent combo.

Interesting but a real Jersey guy - would be a tough get. Not sure if he has the experience to be a DC.

 

[Chris02M]

Hey Tim,
I said only two guys in the secondary because only two are proven in my my view. Anderson cannot IMO be considered ACC quality as he is very weak in pass coverage. We see the back of number nine far too often. If all these guys were ACC quality why are we so bad in pass defense? Certainly the younger guys may improve but as of this writing I don't think they would start anywhere.

For years this board (including you and me as I remember) have been saying that our biggest need was play makers and I think that was undoubtedly correct. As you point out, that has been addressed and we have the most interesting class of play makers in many a moon. Yes, we need lineman but I don't think that it is fair to say recruiting hasn't improved because we have not yet addressed all areas.

I don't know what to make of Moore. I guess next year will tell the story.

We will just have to disagree about Broyld and take it up again at the end of the season.

I m surprised you did not mention Reed. If you think the secondary is ACC quality but not properly used isn't that on him?

I think you quoted the wrong post as im not Tim LOL

 

[Crusty]

I think you quoted the wrong post as im not Tim LOL

Ooops!

 

[Crusty]

In Paul Johnson's presser he said they only ran 6 or 7 plays - obviously executed them well. GM should pay attention to that. He also said that Hunt starred down his first option and when that was covered he took off. That is a RS Sophomore problem so I we may get some improvement out of Hunt this year.

Bullough gave up 56 to a team that only ran 6-7 plays - ugh. He needs to figure out how to deal with the rest of the ACC. His job may depend on it.

GM gets another commit, Obviously, he has sold these kids on playing time and himself. Turning a negative into a recruiting positive is really quite a feat. I think this guy is going to be a keeper.

 

[BlackKnight76]

In Paul Johnson's presser he said they only ran 6 or 7 plays - obviously executed them well. GM should pay attention to that. He also said that Hunt starred down his first option and when that was covered he took off. That is a RS Sophomore problem so I we may get some improvement out of Hunt this year.

Bullough gave up 56 to a team that only ran 6-7 plays - ugh. He needs to figure out how to deal with the rest of the ACC. His job may depend on it.

GM gets another commit, Obviously, he has sold these kids on playing time and himself. Turning a negative into a recruiting positive is really quite a feat. I think this guy is going to be a keeper.

Who knows how many plays GT runs normally though, probably not many more than 6-7 in that scheme.

 

[Crusty]

Who knows how many plays GT runs normally though, probably not many more than 6-7 in that scheme.

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. They probably have 3 or 4 variations in blocking schemes off of each play. So it might not look like the same play down in the trenches.

I never paid much attention to triple option teams but I am starting to think these cut blocks are too dangerous.

 

[BlackKnight76]

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. They probably have 3 or 4 variations in blocking schemes off of each play. So it might not look like the same play down in the trenches.

I never paid much attention to triple option teams but I am starting to think these cut blocks are too dangerous.

Mhm...if you add up all the reads they make, plus any passing options, they may have 4 or so plays built in to each look.

 

[Orangepace]

Good post. A couple comments

-I disagree about our current recruiting. it needs to be stepped up. When you see schools like BC, who also has a new HC, and imo far less talent succeeding both on the field and on the recruiting trail it makes you wonder. While I agree HCSS needs at least 2 years, our recruiting needs to be stepped up. There are some red flags in that area that are really worrisome. Not only are we going away from what has worked here in the past, but it doesn't look like we are adapting well to what the recruiting process has become, but that's another topic for another day.

As for staff
-Daoust does an excellent job and is a very strong recruiter. Definitely a keeper
-Perles has done a good job. Keeper
-Lea came in with a great reputation (believe he was LB coach of year last season?) Definitely keeper
-Lester has shown to be a good recruiter and arguably doesn't have much to work with. Plus he is our connection to Illinois. Keeper
-Moore - Hate to say it, but this needs to be a position coach who is one of your strongest recruiter and he has shown he can't get the job done. Throw in the horrid performance from our wr's this year and it may be time to part ways. We desperately need a downstate/NJ guy. IMO Moore is a good WR coach, but is probably better suited for the NFL.
-Reed, never knew much about him, but with the talent we have in the secondary we should be performing far better. Could be replaced
-Smith seems like a strong recruiter and another Illiinois connection. Keeper

-McDonald i am giving a pass. Other then RB, and some OL talent we have a glaring talent deficiency on that side of the ball. He is bringing in some weapons next season, and is a strong recruiter with ties to So Florida that we desperately need. I'd like to see him offense once we have some playmakers. Keeper
-Bullough not sure how he was qualified in first place. Even with good talent we are performing at an almost embarrassing level. Even with better talent I still can't seem him ever succeeding. Needs to go at the end of the season

Like you said 90% of coaching is recruiting so we need to have as many strong recruiters as assistants as possible. Also if it's possible to add to your support staff that could help in that area. Eric White does a great job at his position, but we need a couple more of him. I am sure he's not making a killing, and his cost is well worth it to the program. If we can afford to pay our winter sports so much maybe we can find a way to free up some money to help the support staff?
-

Spot on with most you said.. Everyone is quick to credit Moore with Alec and Marcus's improvements, but West and Kobena have been under his tuteledge for 3 years... He doesn't add value at all on the recruiting trail. Just need to part ways because although he was a great WR, he's not great at imparting that knowledge.

- McDonald - I swear to god, if we part ways with McDonald, I'm parting ways with my season ticket subscription. He has no talent and is trying to piece together something every week against much more talented defenses. Our 4 best players on offense last year are all in the league or on a practice squad for the league.. He's a solid recruiter and will get SU back on track.

- Bullough - which train do you prefer out of here? Flight? Not worth the expense. thanks for playing.

 

[Hoov50]

The thing that frustrated me was the complete lack of a anything resembling a gameplay in regards to stopping the triple option. Even if you don't have a clue at least be aggressive and force the QB to make quick reads. We appeared to be sitting and watching. On the other hand having a scout team run the triple option and having it look anything like the real deal is also a heck of a challenge. I don't think it's uncommon for a few series or even a quarter to go by before the defense gets it, but we never got it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - http://tapatalk.com/m?id=1

 

[Chip]

I know I took a few turns on the ledge after this weekend, but didn't jump. I think everyone else needs to come back in as well.

If we beat Wake, we're 4-4 with another crucial road game at Maryland. A game that should be much more similar to NC State than GT. They're better than NC State, but it's not going to approach the mess we just saw. Unless Clemson has a Vegas like hangover this weekend, then Maryland will be coming into our game losers of 3 out of 4. With 2 likely blowouts, a 3 TD loss to Wake, and a home win over a very bad UVA team which UVA missed a 42 yard FG to win at the end.

If we lose to Wake, I won't try to talk anyone back off the ledge. And even if we do lose that, the new coach talk is way too premature, would do much more damage. But I'll at least understand that it's going to be hard to get some people back. Would basically guarantee a bowl free season.

Forget the GT debacle, the team will. Look who's left on the schedule. Yes, it's possible we lose all of them. But it's possible we win 3 of them. And that should earn us a 13th game. Anyone who wants to fire him after going 6-6 this season needs to see a doctor.

 

[syr02esq]

Why do you think Rob Moore is a keeper?