Marrone's Comments re SU's NFL Offense (or Lack Thereof)

[OrangeinBoston]

NFL offenses depend on precise execution for success. Breaking news! SU are not the New England Patriots. SU is not going to dink and dunk their way down the field on 5 yard slants. Not going to happen. Inevitably, they will gain 1 yard on 1st down, miss the pass and then be in 3rd and long. So, predictable. The system actually gets in the way of success.

Watching Oregon last night. Their system helps them win. The Cal defense had to have no idea what was coming next.

Yes, a play making WR would certainly help. But, since there is no evidence that such an animal exists, I would think it would make sense to alter the system so it's not so easy for defenses.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

He indicated that college offenses require the defense to execute... but the NFL offense requires the offense to execute.. Unbelievable. The NFL offense requires people who work at it for a living... the college offense requires college athletes to go to practice, absorb it and get it done.. Crazy, classic NFL steakhead coach speak.

 

[dollarbill44]

I don't get how it's so easy to be a good head coach that everyone on the internet knows how to be one, yet so many making a living doing it are so bad at it.:noidea:

 

[Millhouse]

He indicated that college offenses require the defense to execute... but the NFL offense requires the offense to execute.. Unbelievable. The NFL offense requires people who work at it for a living... the college offense requires college athletes to go to practice, absorb it and get it done.. Crazy, classic NFL steakhead coach speak.

i don't know what the f he's talking about. that's pretty scary. college kids make mistakes. give me the offense that capitalizes on defenses not executing over the one that depends on the offense to be some well oiled machine.

however you look at it, his philosophical premise is stupid.

and Rahme, seriously come on with this

Rutgers played press-man coverage on SU’s wideouts and dared them to get open deep. They failed.

Chew was wide open deep and Nassib missed him by 15 yards.

Even if he underthrew that ball, it would've been a TD. when guys get that open, you have to score. you just have to. and that's on Nassib. It's not like any offense depends on WR getting that wide open downfield 5 times a game

 

[OrangeinBoston]

I don't get how it's so easy to be a good head coach that everyone on the internet knows how to be one, yet so many making a living doing it are so bad at it.:noidea:

Because accepting what the so-called "experts" say in any field of endeavor without questioning it is always dangerous. Could any of us coach? Of course not. But we can certainly ferret out dumb ideas.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

i don't know what the f he's talking about. that's pretty scary. college kids make mistakes. give me the offense that capitalizes on defenses not executing over the one that depends on the offense to be some well oiled machine.

however you look at it, his philosophical premise is stupid.

and Rahme, seriously come on with this

Rutgers played press-man coverage on SU’s wideouts and dared them to get open deep. They failed.

Chew was wide open deep and Nassib missed him by 15 yards.

Even if he underthrew that ball, it would've been a TD. when guys get that open, you have to score. you just have to. and that's on Nassib. It's not like any offense depends on WR getting that wide open downfield 5 times a game

Marrone has no answer at this point other than to play everybody and hopefully somebody turns into TO out there, "who can make a play? I can" I always got such a kick out of that jackass. That said, what good is running kids deep if your QB can't hit a bull in the ass with barn shovel from outside 15 yards. As I have said for over a year now, there have been plays for the wr's they have been open at times not always but Nassib has failed to deliver a strike

That said, he may need to do the same thing at QB and put Kinder in for some and run or a series or two one of those god forbid, "College offenses" he says their multiple

 

[Chip]

i don't know what the f he's talking about. that's pretty scary. college kids make mistakes. give me the offense that capitalizes on defenses not executing over the one that depends on the offense to be some well oiled machine.

however you look at it, his philosophical premise is stupid.

and Rahme, seriously come on with this

Rutgers played press-man coverage on SU’s wideouts and dared them to get open deep. They failed.

Chew was wide open deep and Nassib missed him by 15 yards.

Even if he underthrew that ball, it would've been a TD. when guys get that open, you have to score. you just have to. and that's on Nassib. It's not like any offense depends on WR getting that wide open downfield 5 times a game

Agree with everything except the last comment, I remembered that play differently so Iwent back and watched. ESPN3, 45 minutes in. Chew wasn't as wide open as you think. Underthrown ball would have been broken up, if not picked. Needed to be the perfect throw, and it wasn't, about 5 yards too far. I don't mean to be defending Nassib, we need to complete those, but the way you wrote that up just isn't the way it happened. Unless we're talking about a different play.

As for the offensive philosophy stuff, I think it's scary. Not just because it's NFL mentality and the NFL has NFL players to run it with. But because he obviously wasn't thinking that when he started. So did his bad choice at OC scare him into what he thought was safer?

The Rutgers game 2 years ago was like we had a different coach altogether. We were running option, quick outs to Bailey before RU could set, reverses, all of that stuff in addition to some standard offense. Rutgers didn't know what to expect. Saturday, they didn't have that problem because we made it easy for them.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Agree with everything except the last comment, I remembered that play differently so Iwent back and watched. ESPN3, 45 minutes in. Chew wasn't as wide open as you think. Underthrown ball would have been broken up, if not picked. Needed to be the perfect throw, and it wasn't, about 5 yards too far. I don't mean to be defending Nassib, we need to complete those, but the way you wrote that up just isn't the way it happened. Unless we're talking about a different play.

As for the offensive philosophy stuff, I think it's scary. Not just because it's NFL mentality and the NFL has NFL players to run it with. But because he obviously wasn't thinking that when he started. So did his bad choice at OC scare him into what he thought was safer?

The Rutgers game 2 years ago was like we had a different coach altogether. We were running option, quick outs to Bailey before RU could set, reverses, all of that stuff in addition to some standard offense. Rutgers didn't know what to expect. Saturday, they didn't have that problem because we made it easy for them.

Yeah is he just going into a hole again, jesus. Open the ing thing up whatever the system is

 

[kcsu]

I have said this many times. Doug is a good head coach and a poor oc we need to hire a true oc this off season not some kid who runs Dougs O for him

 

[Millhouse]

Agree with everything except the last comment, I remembered that play differently so Iwent back and watched. ESPN3, 45 minutes in. Chew wasn't as wide open as you think. Underthrown ball would have been broken up, if not picked. Needed to be the perfect throw, and it wasn't, about 5 yards too far. I don't mean to be defending Nassib, we need to complete those, but the way you wrote that up just isn't the way it happened. Unless we're talking about a different play.

As for the offensive philosophy stuff, I think it's scary. Not just because it's NFL mentality and the NFL has NFL players to run it with. But because he obviously wasn't thinking that when he started. So did his bad choice at OC scare him into what he thought was safer?

The Rutgers game 2 years ago was like we had a different coach altogether. We were running option, quick outs to Bailey before RU could set, reverses, all of that stuff in addition to some standard offense. Rutgers didn't know what to expect. Saturday, they didn't have that problem because we made it easy for them.

Are we talking about the same play. I don't remember it being 45 min in. But of course, that game made a mockery of the notion of time... Made a move to the sideline then cut back to the middle of the field. He looked pretty open to me

 

[Chip]

Are we talking about the same play. I don't remember it being 45 min in. But of course, that game made a mockery of the notion of time... Made a move to the sideline then cut back to the middle of the field. He looked pretty open to me

It was the only deep ball that I remembered and it was in the middle of the field. He had a step for sure, and need to complete that. But it wasn't a situation where he was so open that Nassib could make a safe throw and have Chew wait for it. Still need to hit him pretty much in stride.

 

[DocFlanders]

NFL offenses depend on precise execution for success. Breaking news! SU are not the New England Patriots. SU is not going to dink and dunk their way down the field on 5 yard slants. Not going to happen. Inevitably, they will gain 1 yard on 1st down, miss the pass and then be in 3rd and long. So, predictable. The system actually gets in the way of success.

Watching Oregon last night. Their system helps them win. The Cal defense had to have no idea what was coming next.

Yes, a play making WR would certainly help. But, since there is no evidence that such an animal exists, I would think it would make sense to alter the system so it's not so easy for defenses.

We need to install an offense that can be effective in college...not force an offense that's not gonna work...work it around our players abilities to maximize their talent level...not sure if we are doing that or not, but if we are not, that has to change.

 

[orlandoorange]

Agree with everything except the last comment, I remembered that play differently so Iwent back and watched. ESPN3, 45 minutes in. Chew wasn't as wide open as you think. Underthrown ball would have been broken up, if not picked. Needed to be the perfect throw, and it wasn't, about 5 yards too far. I don't mean to be defending Nassib, we need to complete those, but the way you wrote that up just isn't the way it happened. Unless we're talking about a different play.

As for the offensive philosophy stuff, I think it's scary. Not just because it's NFL mentality and the NFL has NFL players to run it with. But because he obviously wasn't thinking that when he started. So did his bad choice at OC scare him into what he thought was safer?

The Rutgers game 2 years ago was like we had a different coach altogether. We were running option, quick outs to Bailey before RU could set, reverses, all of that stuff in addition to some standard offense. Rutgers didn't know what to expect. Saturday, they didn't have that problem because we made it easy for them.

wasn't HCDM acting as OC in that game in place of the soon to be departed Spence?

 

[kcsu]

We need more talent time to go Juco and pick out some kids that can make an impact next year as the D is going to be top 15 material. I know i sound like a broken record but we really need a RB and stud WR you would think that with both positions wide open with Su going to the ACC with Tyrone and Rob coaching the position that we could land one stud at each position

 

[Chip]

wasn't HCDM acting as OC in that game in place of the soon to be departed Spence?

That was the assumption at the time. Probably because there were no bubble screens. It wasn't like we had explosive WRs then either. Mike Williams was already on the dearly departed list. Lemon was playing quite a bit as a true frosh. Sales was getting some play, but not a ton at that time.

 

[orlandoorange]

That was the assumption at the time. Probably because there were no bubble screens. It wasn't like we had explosive WRs then either. Mike Williams was already on the dearly departed list. Lemon was playing quite a bit as a true frosh. Sales was getting some play, but not a ton at that time.

any validity to the assumption or was it off-base?

 

[Millhouse]

That was the assumption at the time. Probably because there were no bubble screens. It wasn't like we had explosive WRs then either. Mike Williams was already on the dearly departed list. Lemon was playing quite a bit as a true frosh. Sales was getting some play, but not a ton at that time.

collier helped, the o line always puts it together late in the year, paulus remembered how to play.

our execution philosophy offense will continue to put it together way too late

meanwhile skulletor installs his at WVU in about an hour and a half...

 

[IthacaBarrel]

collier helped, the o line always puts it together late in the year, paulus remembered how to play.

our execution philosophy offense will continue to put it together way too late

meanwhile skulletor installs his at WVU in about an hour and a half...

In addition, I don't see a ton of NFL guys at wr or rb for WVU.. call me crazy

 

[SoBristol]

Good thing we have Tulane this week, and some extra time to re-tool. But there is only so much that can be done -- it isn't as if we can look to the bench and find a young Joe Morris or a young Rob Moore. The kid receivers (Foster & West) will be OK (next season) and it would be good to get them on the field, but don't expect any instant upgrade compared to Lemon and Chew.
The more likely improvement comes from giving Moore his chance to run the ball, using Bailey (and Graham) a lot more from a wing-back position.
You get more power running, and put Bailey in a better position to attack the outside.
It is an obvious move -- I suspect that Marrone wanted to give Moore some weeks of practice time, and the best opportunity (Tulane) to break in. When he had Gulley, there was no reason to rush Moore.

It won't be an aerial circus. But you have to look at what we have (a frosh power runner) and what we don't have (a fleet elusive WR in the wings).

 

[dollarbill44]

Because accepting what the so-called "experts" say in any field of endeavor without questioning it is always dangerous. Could any of us coach? Of course not. But we can certainly ferret out dumb ideas.

This is college football. What is "dangerous" about accepting that Marrone has more offensive system knowledge in his taint than all of the "experts" on this site?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I don't get how it's so easy to be a good head coach that everyone on the internet knows how to be one, yet so many making a living doing it are so bad at it.:noidea:

There are some really smart people in football. There are also some really dumb people in football.

I know that this isn't a popular opinion, but I suspect that there are a lot of fans that are a lot smarter than the coaches of the teams they root for.

 

[Upstate]

this was one of my biggest questions when Doug came in -- Is he flexible during his first 4 years to mold the offense around the players that he has, or does he implement a system, to teach the underclassmen, and build from there?

 

[Millhouse]

This is college football. What is "dangerous" about accepting that Marrone has more offensive system knowledge in his taint than all of the "experts" on this site?

these guys learn their own system in depth better than outsiders. jack of all trade master of none coaches don't make it.

how often do you see coaches totally change their philosophy and scheme? they're all knowledgeable but they can't all have the most effective philosophy. they go all in on what they know best and they hope that it works out.

but outsiders can often have a better perspective on which system is more effective. marrone knows the saints offense better than everyone in the world save for a couple people. but that doesn't necessarily make it a great idea in college

it's been a long time since marrone coached players that weren't supremely talented. ga tech mid 90s, georgia, tennessee, jets, saints.

 

[billsin01]

meanwhile skulletor installs his at WVU in about an hour and a half...

I think this is the point. I keep reading about how we need talent and I agree to some extent. But you also have to start installing the offense you want to run and it should work, to some degree, with the players you have. Brian Kelly would rather have a run-pass threat at QB, but ND is still chewing up huge chunks of yardage week in and week out. Leach's offense is more dangerous with Crabtree and Harrell but it still was good without them. Holgorsen's appears to work with anyone.

And as far as someone pointing out that we couldn't be football coaches, fine. I'll acknowledge that (though I'd point out I'm happy I'm not a football coach trying to make offensive philosophy sound like astrophysics). But there is a really simple bottom line: 2.5 years in we aren't moving the ball and good teams, no matter who they are, move the ball. So if I'm an idiot, fine, but someone needs to figure this out and don't give me "it'll be incredible in 2013 with the proper personnel."

 

[Scooch]

This is college football. What is "dangerous" about accepting that Marrone has more offensive system knowledge in his taint than all of the "experts" on this site?

Taking this to it's logical conclusion...

Greg Robinson was a good coach, because he was a coach and had been a coach, while none of us have been a coach. Right?

I have no doubt that Marrone knows more about football than 100 of us put together. It does not make him infallible. Knowledgable people make dumb decisions every day. I assume you see this at your own place of business?