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

[OttoinGrotto]

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."

Pretty much. You've been ripping it up lately, Bills.

 

[Scooch]

Everytime I watch Oregon I am totally friggin' blown away at how fast they are. Our "speed" guys aren't in the same league.

 

[dollarbill44]

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?

Hmm, I see your point, but the situation is a little different. I see dumb decisions at work from the perspective of an insider and as a "professional" in my field. I associate threads like this more closely with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, where the protestors have limited knowledge of what they are protesting.

Assessing the GRob example, GRob did some things right, but his biggest problem was not having a plan. His offensive and defensive schemes were non-existent or constantly changing, as was his staff. This created confusion with his team and led to his undoing.

It is quite possible to be successful employing less than optimal plans as long as there is a consistent approach to the task and a buy-in by those working towards the goal. Conversely, plenty of brilliant plans have failed because there wasn't a proper conveyance of the overall vision or there was a lack of consistent effort, while plenty of "blunter" ideas have succeeded because of the application of persistence and teamwork.

I can't help but chuckle at posts on here that claim that the offense has to be "this way" or "that way" to be successful because it works at State U. There are examples of pro-style offenses that are successful in HS, so why is it too difficult for a college team to run? Do I want to see SU get more production from it's offense? Of course, but keep in mind that every play is designed to go for 6 (other than a kneel-down).

 

[ImperialOrange]

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's 45 minutes into the ESPN3 replay if you drag/fast forward on the bottom scroll bar.

Same play. Lemon was wide open breaking towards the sideline on the same play as well. P*sses me off that we didn't run that one again at some point. No QB makes a perfect throw everytime. No WR runs the exact same speed every play. Timing was off a fraction of a second and resulted in a 5 yard overthrow. Give the QB and the WRs another chance at it. Maybe Chew has better balance and gets 1 stride forward the next time. Maybe Chew ran perfect and Nassib misjudged it. Maybe throw it to the other open WR next time.
End of the day, we need to push the ball down the field more than once a game and not get scared if it doesn't work every time.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

End of the day, we need to push the ball down the field more than once a game and not get scared if it doesn't work every time.

Spurrier likes to run the same play over and over again until the defense shows they can stop it.

He's pretty successful on offense.

 

[Scooch]

Hmm, I see your point, but the situation is a little different. I see dumb decisions at work from the perspective of an insider and as a "professional" in my field. I associate threads like this more closely with the "Occupy Wall Street" movement, where the protestors have limited knowledge of what they are protesting.

Assessing the GRob example, GRob did some things right, but his biggest problem was not having a plan. His offensive and defensive schemes were non-existent or constantly changing, as was his staff. This created confusion with his team and led to his undoing.

It is quite possible to be successful employing less than optimal plans as long as there is a consistent approach to the task and a buy-in by those working towards the goal. Conversely, plenty of brilliant plans have failed because there wasn't a proper conveyance of the overall vision or there was a lack of consistent effort, while plenty of "blunter" ideas have succeeded because of the application of persistence and teamwork.

I can't help but chuckle at posts on here that claim that the offense has to be "this way" or "that way" to be successful because it works at State U. There are examples of pro-style offenses that are successful in HS, so why is it too difficult for a college team to run? Do I want to see SU get more production from it's offense? Of course, but keep in mind that every play is designed to go for 6 (other than a kneel-down).

That's all fair and fine. Personally I'm on record as saying I don't give a flying fig what system we use, as long as it generates yards and points. People are clearly upset with this "pro style" offensive scheme because the results have been absolutely craptastic.

Even this line from Rahme's piece made me laugh: "Through five games a year ago the Orange was 4-1 and was rolling along with 369.8 yards and 28.4 points per game"

Rolling? People need to look at rankings, that production is entirely average. There's nothing "rolling" about 370 yards and 28 points in the college game. And that includes output against TWO FCS teams!

So sure, brush off the arguments from armchair QBs if you want, but their macro point is entirely valid. This scheme is not getting it done. Period.

 

[Scooch]

Spurrier likes to run the same play over and over again until the defense shows they can stop it.

He's pretty successful on offense.

During the Toledo game they said Hackett told them he likes to do that too. Said he ran the same play 6 times in a row (I think against K-State).

Hell, I've watched the Pats miss on a long ball and then run the same exact play again right afterwards countless times.

 

[GoSU96]

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

He overthrew it by two strides at the most.

 

[dollarbill44]

So sure, brush off the arguments from armchair QBs if you want, but their macro point is entirely valid. This scheme is not getting it done. Period.

Again, I don't think it's the scheme. In this respect, I agree with Marrone's assessment in that it's the execution. Condemn him for that if you will, but I don't think it's the system. We had the entirely correct play called in several instances thus far this season where, had one or two players executed as they should have (following the block instead of cutting back, catching the ball when it hits the hands, not overthrowing, etc), they would have netted big gains, if not TDs.

 

[GoSU96]

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

I told you guys you were going to be disappointed.

 

[ImperialOrange]

Spurrier likes to run the same play over and over again until the defense shows they can stop it.

He's pretty successful on offense.

So do Penn State which results in them losing to Iowa every year. :noidea:
We need players who can slip tackles or break coverage and make a play with regularity. Spurrier has/had them, we haven't found them so far this year.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Pro players go to work all day during the week to prepare for the game on Sunday. College players are limited because of school and NCAA rules on practice time. That's a big hurdle imo. A pro offense requires execution and it asks a lot of the QB. It can be done, but at the college level a lot of teams keep it very simple and do very well stretching the defenses.

 

[Blaster]

Pro players go to work all day during the week to prepare for the game on Sunday. College players are limited because of school and NCAA rules on practice time. That's a big hurdle imo. A pro offense requires execution and it asks a lot of the QB. It can be done, but at the college level a lot of teams keep it very simple and do very well stretching the defenses.

I would like to add on to this a little.
IMO all plays require execution to be successful. I mean even the Oregon offense it's not like you can tell the OL not to block this play becouse this is an undefendable 41 dive? Offense, Defense both require execution to be good. Players have to get to where their suppose to be when they are suppose to be there or else. Can broken plays score? Yes. Has a safety ever been out of position and picked off a pass? Sure. But realistically thats not the norm.

Most offenses ask alot from the QB, the question is the offense to complex where the players are spending more time thinking about what they have to do rather than just doing it. I would lean slightly to no. Nassibs second year in this system he seems to have it down pat mentally, so it seems easy to pick up.
He gets them out of bad plays and gets them into good plays like the coaches say. If i were to put blame on anything at this point i would point to Nassib and his decision making and his willingness to pull the trigger dip.

He seems to me like he keeps making ultra safe decisions and doesnt want to risk a deep ball. We have seen players running open in the secondary and not get thrown to a few times this year. He seems like he is just affraid to pull the trigger down field.

 

[PhatOrange]

During the Toledo game they said Hackett told them he likes to do that too. Said he ran the same play 6 times in a row (I think against K-State).

Hackett might like to do that but I hope he doesn't really believe that he actually does it himself, that's a crock.

I don't recall KState but for any plays this season, plays that pick up nice yards (5/6) and work every single time, I've never seen him run twice in row this season.

 

[Czar]

I have never seen a high school team run a true pro style offense, whoever mentioned that.

 

[MikeSU02]

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."

This is my sentiment. I don't want anyone fired, but a functional offense with glimpses of excitement and solid execution is what I expect.

The other issue that I've had for a while now is that we refuse to take advantage of playing in the Dome. How can we not have a fast-paced, spread offense that takes advantage of the controlled environment for our home games? I know the grass is always greener on the other side and maybe I'm just a bitter fan after our loss, but if you want butts in the seats, put on a freaking show on offense. D wins you championships but the offense gets you butts in the seats and gets the attention of recruits.

 

[Fjoinkay]

I would like to add on to this a little.
IMO all plays require execution to be successful. I mean even the Oregon offense it's not like you can tell the OL not to block this play becouse this is an undefendable 41 dive? Offense, Defense both require execution to be good. Players have to get to where their suppose to be when they are suppose to be there or else. Can broken plays score? Yes. Has a safety ever been out of position and picked off a pass? Sure. But realistically thats not the norm.

Most offenses ask alot from the QB, the question is the offense to complex where the players are spending more time thinking about what they have to do rather than just doing it. I would lean slightly to no. Nassibs second year in this system he seems to have it down pat mentally, so it seems easy to pick up.
He gets them out of bad plays and gets them into good plays like the coaches say. If i were to put blame on anything at this point i would point to Nassib and his decision making and his willingness to pull the trigger dip.

He seems to me like he keeps making ultra safe decisions and doesnt want to risk a deep ball. We have seen players running open in the secondary and not get thrown to a few times this year. He seems like he is just affraid to pull the trigger down field.

Yes. Every offense requires execution, and the QB position is always asked to do a lot. And I agree that Nassib understands the offense, and he struggles to execute including making decisions, handling blitzing pressure and moving around the pocket and buying time. I recall before the Rutgers game a quote from a Rutgers defender saying SU has a good QB- they ask the QB to do a lot. I'm nowhere close to an expert on offensive schemes, but I trust that HCDM knows what he is talking about when he says the SU offense demands offensive execution whereas many college offenses spread the defense and force the defense to execute.

The question that pops into my mind is does SU begin to mix it up (probably not, but I can hope)? I wondered the same thing last year, and SU just ran the ball more with DC3. The offense this year is healthy with more depth at most positions, more speed and 2 bye weeks. If HCDM does decide to mix it up, then I wonder what that would look like. Either way, the emphasis on competition in practice this week and for the game is a good sign. I wonder if HCDM is at a point where he's decided to show more trust and allow his players to play-which would be ironic coming off the disastrous turnovers last week. I personally loved the way the offense looked at the end of 2009, but I may have just been impressed with the transformation that Paulus underwent. At the end of the season he looked like a college QB.

 

[billsin01]

Again, I don't think it's the scheme. In this respect, I agree with Marrone's assessment in that it's the execution. Condemn him for that if you will, but I don't think it's the system. We had the entirely correct play called in several instances thus far this season where, had one or two players executed as they should have (following the block instead of cutting back, catching the ball when it hits the hands, not overthrowing, etc), they would have netted big gains, if not TDs.

You do realize this is almost an exact quote from a GRob presser, right? Well, OK, you were much more articulate than he was but this was his intended points. I'll accept this logic if you are routinely chalking up 400 yards and scoring pretty consistently and you have a game where you end up with 360 and 17 points or something. But in the scenario where you've struggled to move the ball for 2.5 years, this just rings pretty hollow.

 

[billsin01]

I told you guys you were going to be disappointed.

So what do you suggest is the answer? We know it won't be anything Marrone has done wrong because that's impossible. So, and I'm asking this genuinely, what will get this offense going? We'll assume, for the benefit of this discussion, that this offense is outstanding and simply needs execution and players. Are those players on the roster? Is it just a matter of experience? Do we still need to recruit those players? Is there an ETA on their arrival (either to campus of the playing field)?

Anyone not concerned at all with our system confuses me, b/c I just don't quite understand how they view our inability to move the ball consistently being resolved.

 

[OrangeZone]

The issue is more about getting undergrads, in a rebuilding program, to maintain focus throughout the game. Learning to win, especially following a losing trend, takes time and typically numerous ups and downs, on the field, are a part of this process.
Marrone's offense needs focused execution and we are not there yet.
His challenge is to modify what we is trying to do so that it's easier for his current charges to execute a modified-approach to what he ultimately wants until he recruits the players who fit that style.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

So what do you suggest is the answer? We know it won't be anything Marrone has done wrong because that's impossible.

I found this statement to be really, really funny.

 

[SaintTristan]

Marone can't recruit at the level we need to be successful. Nothing else matters.

You Don't win the ACC by competing with MAC teams for players.

 

[orlandoorange]

Marone can't recruit at the level we need to be successful. Nothing else matters.

You Don't win the ACC by competing with MAC teams for players.

Boise State seems to do ok with sub-par recruiting

http://www.obnug.com/2011/2/3/1972394/boise-state-finishes-with-no-64-recruiting-class

 

[SaintTristan]

Yep. But marone couldn't be a video coordinator on that team. Boise's head coach is in another league.