Marrone and Rahme are just plain wrong | Page 9 | Syracusefan.com

Marrone and Rahme are just plain wrong

I think we actually see this fairly similarly, RF. I guess the quote I was responding to in your previous post as more the one that said we don't have any players on offense and the OL sucks. My thought was that you were defending the system based on skill position personnel and poor line play. I agree you need line play to be successful. All I was trying to point out was that an offense shouldn't have to "out-talent" an opponent to move the ball. The second point was that if OL play sucks, that's still something that comes back on Marrone and Adkins to some extent. I think we actually agree on most, if not all of that.

Where we may differ is that, to me, you have to start running your offense and calling the plays you want to call at some point or you'll never start doing it. Marrone talks about this New Orleans Saints offense but if he has to have the perfect personnel to deploy it, we could be waiting a long, long time. I'm just not sure I buy the line that the offense as currently constituted will look drastically different in 2013 simply because of some turnover in personnel.

Started writing a more detailed response, but my computer froze.

Bills, there is very little in your post that I disagree with--I think we are pretty much on the same page.

The one thing I want to be clear about is that I am NOT defending the system--in large part because I don't think what we're seeing IS the system [at least, I hope not]. That's why I view some of the criticism about the product we're seeing now on offense is misguided. CIL's post on page one [or whatever] makes perfect sense to me--the coaches recognize the importance of winning in the short term, and they're doing what they think is the best approach to winning games now with the hand they have at their disposal.

I agree that it makes sense to start running the offense, if for no other reason than to establish the footprint / baseline, and to get personnel acclimated to it. And we need to get better talent in the pipeline at every positional unit, so that in two years we've got SIX competent WRs instead of 3, and so that our OL rotation isn't comprised of 6 marginal players, but rather 10 upgraded ones. Etc. And improved QB recruiting is a big part of that transformation, as well. Right now, I don't have a clue whether Kinder, Hunt, Broyld are going to solve what's been an ongoing problem since McNabb's graduation.
 
I'm not so sure the OL is as bad as some here are making it out to be, although I don't believe this current group is a bunch of world beaters either.

The discussion we are having with the OL, or offense in general is a typical "chicken or egg" debate. I firmly believe that the current skill group on the field from QB to WR does not instill andy fear in opposing defensive coordinators. JerseyOrange said as much last week.

It is no secret on this board that the team struggles with the vertical passing game. Nassib has a strong arm, but it is apparent that he is struggling with touch on the deep balls. That's not to say he cannot hit an open deep receiver, however, he struggles to hit a receiver when they have only a stride or two on the defender -- the missed deep ball to Chew against Rutgers when he had split the safeties is an example of this. That floater he threw to Graham against Tulane which was completed, but it allowed the safety to close the field and make the tackle on what should have been a sure touchdown.

Since we have yet to prove we can attack the coverage vertically, it allows the opposing defensive coordinators to play press coverage and make our underneath routes much more difficult (slants, hitches, etc). It is up to our wide receivers towin those battles at the line of scrimmage, and right now they aren't winning them.

This trend really started the second or third possession against USC, where Kiffen abandoned his Tampa 2 defense (safeties taking the deep halfs with a deeper Mike zone than usual)
tampa2.gif


to a more aggressive man press with single high safety look (hence our moderate success to Provo mathced up on a backer at times) This is against an empty look.

pow%20-%20cover1.jpgx


In summary, the defenses have now made up on dimensional -- they do not fear the pass, and can load up on the run. We are seeing 8 in the box a mjaority of the time, making it much more difficult to run against. On passing downs, defenses are sending one or two more than we can block. For us to successfully combat this, four things have to happen on the offense: ID the blitz, ID the hot receiver, beat the defender, deliver the accurate throw. We aren't doing that at all right now.

Typically the center and QB try to ID the blitzing player -- we are starting a first year center and Nassib has historically struggled in this area. It's tough to ID the hot route if you don't know where the blitz is coming from, and if the WR is losing that battle forget it -- and we need to deliver astrike to the WR. This is what marrone is referring to when saying we aren't executing properly. We're not.

How should Hackett try to counter this with the talent given on the field?

1.) Screen pass opposing defenses to death.
2.) Run away from the blitz -- allow nassib to check to a run opposite the side of the blitz
3.) Give Nassib the green light to run, even designed draws. It doesn't have to come ou tof the "spread" formation. What this does is counter the man press coverage if successful and force the defense to consider zone coverage or spy Nassib (allowing one less potential blitzer or potential missmatch on a backer on TE or RB). It's difficult to defenders to keep and eye on a running QB if theit backs are to the play due to playing man.

We'll see if those happen this week, although WV is more of a zone blitz scheme. We'll also see if WVU uses the USC, RU, Tulane blue print or stays in their scheme.
 
who cares about 2002?

we are all well aware that rich rodriguez's teams were much better than Robinsons. quite the newsflash there

why did you start at 2002? anything special about that year besides it being after our 10 win season?

no one is claiming that SU would be as good or better than WVU with the same system. the claim is that SU would be better than SU is
yes, i picked 02 because that was a good starting point for SU decline and wv rise and its 10 seasons.

my point basically is that talent gets more talent to come. SU sucked for 8 years and now is on way up, but talent may still not want to go there. wv had talent and was winning for years so talent was on the roster. when the genious that is holgorsen came, he talent. marrone had none.

as SU keeps winning, they will have more talent, some on the bench ready to take over...which is not there now.
 
I'm sure off the record, he'd be pretty blunt about the talent level on this team,

And that...imo...is the point. We are still much farther down on the talent chart than people really want to believe. That said:

is Marrone doing a good enough job with this offense?

This is a very fair question. I personally believe that we could be doing much better on O with a different system. But I also think Marrone knows what he has and he believes as I do that our talent is pretty low.

That is why I see these next 2 recruiting classes as pretty important because the talent coming HAS to improve. If it doesn't, the results likely won't either.

44cuse
 
I think that the WV os so cocky that he will just worry about our scoring SU since he knows he can and stay in scheme.. it expects to score 50 so why worry that we get our normal 20..
 
the only thing that we really need to criticize is the play of the oline as that is probably more the issue than any play calling discussion.. the coaches need to fix that

Ding! Football is won at the LOS. Our OL has been terrible for years. Yes...terrible. Seems like people are continuing to miss this because it has been so bad for so long.

44cuse
 
I am sure that everyone discussing the statistically proven lousyness of the O, a lousyness confirmed by the head coach, will not be rooting for the Orange tommorow night.

Yeesh.

Please direct me to where I said anyone on here would not be rooting for the Orange.

That said, there are a lot of people in the world who tend to be more comfortable in misery than in happiness because they feel unworthy of feeling good. Anyone who has been on this earth for 30 or more years has run into people like this. I wouldn't be surprised at all if there are several people on this site who fit that description. So, while they root for SU, they are uncomfortable with acknowledging success.

Of course I would like to see SU average 400 yards per game and 40 points. But, I enjoyed last year a LOT more than 2009 when we had 4 games of 400+ yards of offense. And I am enjoying this season a lot more than the GROB years when we averaged more ypg.

As Al Davis said, "Just win Baby."
 
This is a very fair question. I personally believe that we could be doing much better on O with a different system. But I also think Marrone knows what he has and he believes as I do that our talent is pretty low.

That is why I see these next 2 recruiting classes as pretty important because the talent coming HAS to improve. If it doesn't, the results likely won't either.

44cuse

Agreed. Which is why winning games / getting to a bowl last year [and possibly this year] are so important. The offensive play has been UGLY--no question. I just believe that it's due to the coaching staff doing what they have to do [precisely becaue of what you suggest--that Marrone knows what he has] to maximize wins in the short term to improve the perception of SU on the recruiting trail.

The value of going to a bowl last year wasn't that it helped the coaches "close" strong on the class of 2011--the real value was that it enabled them to "sell" the program being on the right track in the off-season, laying the foundation for what is shaping up as a very solid class of 2012. That success we had in June / July lining up all those commits wouldn't have been possible [or probably wouldn't] without being able to sell the program as being on the way up.
 
i'm not intentionally trying to be contrarian but i don't think the OL is a relatively big problem. i think it's just what people point to when an offense stinks rather than the more obvious and boring observation that our WR aren't open enough and when they do get open deep, our QB misses. also we're getting nothing from backup RBs. but i think that would improve if we could throw the ball.

we're doing fine on tackles for loss. granted, we play a hot potato offense. middle of the road on sacks allowed.
I think this is a touch off Milly. The OL is bad. Look at how far 2...not 1...2 guys are often pushed into the backfield. It's awful. I hear the "Mackey gets too much crap" crowd. But I don't buy it. I respect the legacy and love that he wanted to be here...but that dude gets blown up...a lot.

Where you are right is with the WR's. They do not do a good job of getting off the jam and too often get bumped off their routes on press coverage.

Can't pound the ball+Can't get off jam/press coverage+Deep Ball inaccuracy=Very bad combination.

No way around it.

44cuse
 
Agreed. Which is why winning games / getting to a bowl last year [and possibly this year] are so important. The offensive play has been UGLY--no question. I just believe that it's due to the coaching staff doing what they have to do [precisely becaue of what you suggest--that Marrone knows what he has] to maximize wins in the short term to improve the perception of SU on the recruiting trail.

The value of going to a bowl last year wasn't that it helped the coaches "close" strong on the class of 2011--the real value was that it enabled them to "sell" the program being on the right track in the off-season, laying the foundation for what is shaping up as a very solid class of 2012. That success we had in June / July lining up all those commits wouldn't have been possible [or probably wouldn't] without being able to sell the program as being on the way up.

Please, someone, anyone, explain to me how being lousy on offense has made us more likely to win?

Sincerely, I don't understand this point.

I totally get that we might choose to play a certain style (e.g. pound the run game with a bruising TB to control clock) that we think maximizes our chance to win, because the personnel suits it. But it's almost like people are arguing that Marrone is choosing to have a crappy offense this year because it makes us more likely to win? That can't be what you're saying, right?
 
Let's say that we could only improve half as much as they did.
There we differ. I think that we might have produced about the same number of yards and points, but we would also have had many more 3-and-outs, less TOP, and we would have lost more games. Just my gut feeling, no numbers to back it up. No matter who was calling plays and designing the playbook.

Too many dropped passes, missed passes, short gains with no YAC. Too many sacks, QB running for his life. At this point, I really believe that trying to run a spread would have lost games for us.
 
There we differ. I think that we might have produced about the same number of yards and points, but we would also have had many more 3-and-outs, less TOP, and we would have lost more games. Just my gut feeling, no numbers to back it up. No matter who was calling plays and designing the playbook.

Too many dropped passes, missed passes, short gains with no YAC. Too many sacks, QB running for his life. At this point, I really believe that trying to run a spread would have lost games for us.
we're 110th in TOP as it is
 
He is starting to remind me more and more of Coach P... scary. I guess his O will be ready to produce in 2018 when he has time to implement it.. What

Oh, stop already. You have been more and more anti-Marrone as time has gone on. Casullo's gone. Get over it.
 
we're 110th in TOP as it is

This is also misleading, as we are 84th in 3rd down defense and 103 in first downs allowed per game. I don't believe the NCAA keeps track of offensive possessions per game, but I bet we'd be way down that list too.

A lot of TOP also has to do with the defense not getting off the field when they should.

EDIT: We are 84th in yards per play, however, we are two tenths a yard per play away from 50th percentile. My gut tells me we are down the list on explosive plays, which usually has to do with talent at the team's disposal.
 
This is also misleading, as we are 84th in 3rd down defense and 103 in first downs allowed per game. I don't believe the NCAA keeps track of offensive possessions per game, but I bet we'd be way down that list too.

A lot of TOP also has to do with the defense not getting off the field when they should.

This is a big factor in number of plays run on offense and overall yards per game. Toledo's first possession was over 9 minutes long. That's 15% of regulation time right there. I believe they had another really long possession later in the game.
 
This is also misleading, as we are 84th in 3rd down defense and 103 in first downs allowed per game. I don't believe the NCAA keeps track of offensive possessions per game, but I bet we'd be way down that list too.

A lot of TOP also has to do with the defense not getting off the field when they should.
this is partially offset by the lack of big plays. can't blame TOP on scoring too fast, that's for sure

we're 71st in defense and 96th in offense. if our defense really were so bad at getting off the field, we'd be much lower on defense.

seriously where's that gif of someone throwing against the wall seeing what sticks...
 
I think Nassib is 100% on deep passes from a flea flicker. So maybe we should flea flicker all our deep balls.

That's on my list with reverses and other assorted "trick plays" that teams should run more often. It's not against the rules of football to fool a corner and safety twice in one game. Unless there's a personal foul, misleading the defensive back penalty that I'm not aware of.
 
... laying the foundation for what is shaping up as a very solid class of 2012

Without a few bonafide stars, it's hard for me to say the 2012 class is turning the corner. We won't ever get over the hump until we find a way to bring in better skill position talent. I caught some highlights of the SU-Tenn 1998 game on youtube recently... it's amazing what just a few playmakers can do on offense even with very mediocre line play. McNabb was scrambling for his life on many 3rd and longs. We need either the players or a system that can mitigate our deficiencies. We don't have the former, and we're not using the latter.

You can't run a pro-style unless you have Alabama talent. But if you have no talent, you run a pro-style because it gives you the best chance to win games.

Makes no sense.
 
this is partially offset by the lack of big plays. can't blame TOP on scoring too fast, that's for sure

we're 71st in defense and 96th in offense. if our defense really were so bad at getting off the field, we'd be much lower on defense.

seriously where's that gif of someone throwing against the wall seeing what sticks...

Statistics are the that you speak of. Statistics without context are relatively meaningless. You could also say that our defense would be better, our offensive statistics would be better too. That gif you're looking for might very well be a picture of you with a handful of statistics.
 
Please, someone, anyone, explain to me how being lousy on offense has made us more likely to win?

Sincerely, I don't understand this point.

I totally get that we might choose to play a certain style (e.g. pound the run game with a bruising TB to control clock) that we think maximizes our chance to win, because the personnel suits it. But it's almost like people are arguing that Marrone is choosing to have a crappy offense this year because it makes us more likely to win? That can't be what you're saying, right?

I have no idea how you came up with that interpretation based upon what I wrote. What I'm saying is that the coaching staff are calling a limited subset of plays that they believe the offense can execute [i.e., "doing what they have to do"], because our OL is a sieve. Teams are cheating defensively against us because they [correctly] gamble against us being unable to burn them with deep passes when they bring the kitchen sink. If our pass protection were better, we'd be able to make teams pay for overplaying the run / overcommiting on blitzes. But it isn't, so we aren't able to exploit it.

Secondly, last year and this year need to be discussed separately. Last year, we had a bruising back who could make positive yardage despite being hit consistently at the LOS. We also had a better defense. So playing ball control to shorten the game made sense. We don't win games against WVU and South Florida otherwise. Ugly, sure. Frustrating, sure. But I don't see how it can be argued intelligently that this approach wasn't the "right" strategic approach, given that we got to a bowl in 2010.

This year's team doesn't have the same personnel or defense, so playing ball control might not be the "right" strategy to get to a bowl. Nobody wants the offense to be crappy. I just don't think that playcalling is the primary issue--I think it is a combination of factors: poor OL / talent / lack of playmakers / etc. that have limited the coaching staff's options to a certain extent, and resulted in the playcalling being what it is--which is why I think that some of the griping about the "system" is off-target.

I'm optimistic about the prediction [please note that I'm not suggesting that I know for sure, or that this will definitely happen] that better players / athletes / speed + improved OL play is going to translate into more wide open playcalling and wide open offense. I feel like we're a year or two away, but trending in the right direction with recruiting.
 
this is partially offset by the lack of big plays. can't blame TOP on scoring too fast, that's for sure

we're 71st in defense and 96th in offense. if our defense really were so bad at getting off the field, we'd be much lower on defense.

seriously where's that gif of someone throwing against the wall seeing what sticks...

Probably your facebook profile pic?

In all seriousness, I found a decent site that explains everything:
http://www.teamrankings.com/ncf/stats/
This site also kicks out games vs FBS by the way

OFFENSE
- We are 39th in points per play on offense.
- 84th in yards per play, although we are alot closer to 50th than 120th (half a yard vs a yard)
- 104 in plays per game
- If we were just average in plays per game, we'd increase offense out put by 35 yards a game, which isn't great shakes, but moves us from 98th to 70th in offense against FBS teams.

I agree with you about the lack of explosive plays, can't find it anywhere, but in my experience explose plays are usually created by explosive athletes ala Mike Williams. More athletes, more plays.

DEFENSE
- 110 in opponents plays per game.
- 112 in 3rd downs converted per game at a whopping 7.6
- 89th in 3rd down coversion percentage

All of this suggests our defense is just as responsible for the offenses poor performance by not getting off the field.
 
Statistics are the that you speak of. Statistics without context are relatively meaningless. You could also say that our defense would be better, our offensive statistics would be better too. That gif you're looking for might very well be a picture of you with a handful of statistics.
for the second time in this megathread, i ask how i'm screwing up the context.

the defense is better than the offense, but the defense is more to blame for TOP than the offense?
 
Probably your facebook profile pic?

In all seriousness, I found a decent site that explains everything:
http://www.teamrankings.com/ncf/stats/
This site also kicks out games vs FBS by the way

OFFENSE
- We are 39th in points per play on offense.
- 84th in yards per play, although we are alot closer to 50th than 120th (half a yard vs a yard)
- 104 in plays per game
- If we were just average in plays per game, we'd increase offense out put by 35 yards a game, which isn't great shakes, but moves us from 98th to 70th in offense against FBS teams.

I agree with you about the lack of explosive plays, can't find it anywhere, but in my experience explose plays are usually created by explosive athletes ala Mike Williams. More athletes, more plays.

DEFENSE
- 110 in opponents plays per game.
- 112 in 3rd downs converted per game at a whopping 7.6
- 89th in 3rd down coversion percentage

All of this suggests our defense is just as responsible for the offenses poor performance by not getting off the field.
how are we in defense yards per play?

TOP is totally overrated. who cares. my point is that in now way can a 110th ranked TOP team be an effective ball control offense.

for this you don't need to kickout FCS teams. you kick them out when you're concerned that you're feasting on cupcakes. if cupcakes are ruining your TOP that's probably useful info
 
One thing I have to say--this thread is awesome.

225 responses, and people are still posting / expressing fire about their viewpoints.

Intentionally or unintentionally, Rahme's article generated a LOT of discussion!
 

Forum statistics

Threads
169,425
Messages
4,831,380
Members
5,977
Latest member
newmom4503

Online statistics

Members online
174
Guests online
825
Total visitors
999


...
Top Bottom