mind boggling stat number 10,000 about SU's passing

[bcubs9497]

Sigh.

I can infer that the punch bowl is, once again, overflowing?

 

[Millhouse]

Actually I take it back. The OP is kind of barely relevant since the OC is new. Not sure what it was meant to do except confirm that we've sucked at throwing the ball for a long time?

We should change oc every year. Recruiting bonanza. Past always irrelevant

 

[Scooch]

Actually I take it back. The OP is kind of barely relevant since the OC is new. Not sure what it was meant to do except confirm that we've sucked at throwing the ball for a long time?

It's June. We've been discussing the state of our offense, both currently and historically, all offseason.

This is a fan discussion site and we're discussing what is perhaps THE most critical issue that will affect the program's success in 2015 and beyond.

Or we can just make one post the day after season season ends that says "coaches will change, players will change, no discussion of anything vaguely unpleasant until September". and lock the board down.



M

 

[Scooch]

By the way, the hoops board is consistently more negative than this board. It's a shame how badly recruiting has gone over the past decade because of that.

 

[TheCusian]

We should change oc every year. Recruiting bonanza. Past always irrelevant

Past holds important lessons. Those numbers show that we need to get better. Hiring a new OC speaks to that.

 

[TheCusian]

It's June. We've been discussing the state of our offense, both currently and historically, all offseason. This is a fan discussion site and we're discussing what is perhaps THE most critical issue that will affect the program's success in 2015 and beyond. Or we can just make one post the day after season season ends that says "coaches will change, players will change, no discussion of anything vaguely unpleasant until September". and lock the board down. M

Oh - I agree with all that. Just not certain those stats are that helpful? Pointing out how historically bad we've been passing the ball under previous OC's seems like beating a dead horse. You guys have beaten that thing into an oblivion.

And your speaking to the guy who gets in long winded discussions here all the time. I enjoy it. Just tired of this one. Obviously we need to get better at passing, and offense in general. Obviously we can talk about it.

Maybe a better entry point would be: watch the BC v Syracuse game from 2013 again - only under the assumption Lester was calling the plays. Hunt played pretty well. Cornelius had a break out game. Does any of that carry over?

Or how about - Hunt's been talking about not running as much, staying in the pocket longer. Except that's how he got hurt last year. Are we better off spreading out and having him take two reads then run?

 

[TheCusian]

By the way, the hoops board is consistently more negative than this board. It's a shame how badly recruiting has gone over the past decade because of that.

Irrelevant. Similar to SEC football. So much good will and great history and passion - it covers a lot of warts. Football needs all the positive mojo it can get.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Irrelevant. Similar to SEC football. So much good will and great history and passion - it covers a lot of warts. Football needs all the positive mojo it can get.

rainbows and unicorns again.

please.

stop.

 

[anomander]

They could care less (for the most part) about off the field stuff. It was mentioned - but one of the "positives" used by the alums was that he was a "good role model". Whatever that means. They were more infuriated with his lack of... chutzpah... during game days. All I am saying is for the most part, the small group of hardcore SU football fans (which I would like to believe I am a part of) cares deeply about the team and the program. However, we have been hoodwinked one too many times and have seen the disintegration of a program that was top 15-20 in the mid 90s to a team struggling to reach .500 in the 2010's. From a team with an innovative offense that had premier talent to a team that has had bad coordinator after bad coordinator heading one of the worst offenses in college football (save one year). There are warning signs with this group of coaches that we have seen before. And we are a cautious group. It was easy to see the progress that Marrone's teams made, even during his first 4-8 year. We were competitive, made most of the games close and hung in with teams that were much better from a talent point of view. This is a huge year for Scott Shafer. He and the coaching staff need to prove that they are worthy of being high D1 coaches. They have shown they can win a few recruiting battles, but until he and the staff win on-field battles it probably won't matter much.

This post is dead nuts on target

 

[TheCusian]

This post is dead nuts on target

Agreed. I get the angst. We are all waiting to see if these guys can get it done on the field. In the meantime, I'll believe it can be done and maybe it will be a special year. You can be both: pissed at 3-9 and thinking 9-3 is possible.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Agreed. I get the angst. We are all waiting to see if these guys can get it done on the field. In the meantime, I'll believe it can be done and maybe it will be a special year. You can be both: pissed at 3-9 and thinking 9-3 is possible.

i love how you back track after quietly coming to the conclusion as to what the rest of us are stating.

 

[TheCusian]

rainbows and unicorns again. please. stop.

Denial is a funny thing, man.

 

[TheCusian]

i love how you back track after quietly coming to the conclusion as to what the rest of us are stating.

What are you talking about? I swear you don't read.

1. I get the past. I lived it too. Sucked.
2. People read what we write. People with the ability to help change the direction of the program.
3. I try to temper my negativity in light of that fact.

There is no backtrack. It's just you figuring out you weren't getting what I was saying.

 

[Scooch]

Irrelevant. Similar to SEC football. So much good will and great history and passion - it covers a lot of warts. Football needs all the positive mojo it can get.

SU football isn't some unique, special snowflake. All team boards have both positive and negative comments. I'd argue that ours in actually quite tame, all things considered.

The notion that people should refrain from making factual observations is silly and goofy.

Every single coach who is recruiting against us is saying things 1,000 times worse than anything posted on this board. But a post with a handful of data points that cover everything everyone knows is sinking our program. OK.

Posting about posting is the freakin' worst and I'm embarrassed that I engaged in it. I'm done.

Maybe the Pollyanna Club can start a megathread to enjoy the mutual smoke blowing. The 4 stars will be rolling onto campus in no time I'm sure. Zipppity-do-dah!!!

 

[TheCusian]

SU football isn't some unique, special snowflake. All team boards have both positive and negative comments. I'd argue that ours in actually quite tame, all things considered. The notion that people should refrain from making factual observations is silly and goofy. Every single coach who is recruiting against us is saying things 1,000 times worse than anything posted on this board. But a post with a handful of data points that cover everything everyone knows is sinking our program. OK. Posting about posting is the freakin' worst and I'm embarrassed that I engaged in it. I'm done. Maybe the Pollyanna Club can start a megathread to enjoy the mutual smoke blowing. The 4 stars will be rolling onto campus in no time I'm sure. Zipppity-do-dah!!!

I see you didn't respond to my real request at actually talking about how things could get better (Lester, Hunt running). Rather look at stats that confirm what we've already known for 10 years.

Long on diagnosis, short on cure.

 

[TheCusian]

SU football isn't some unique, special snowflake. All team boards have both positive and negative comments. I'd argue that ours in actually quite tame, all things considered. The notion that people should refrain from making factual observations is silly and goofy. Every single coach who is recruiting against us is saying things 1,000 times worse than anything posted on this board. But a post with a handful of data points that cover everything everyone knows is sinking our program. OK. Posting about posting is the freakin' worst and I'm embarrassed that I engaged in it. I'm done. Maybe the Pollyanna Club can start a megathread to enjoy the mutual smoke blowing. The 4 stars will be rolling onto campus in no time I'm sure. Zipppity-do-dah!!!

Also.

This is my favorite thing you guys do on the board. Take a small, obvious request (think about what you write in a public space) and blow it out (WE CANT POST FACTUAL INFORMATION), call person who made clear point out to be a crazy person (Pollyanna!), all while exaggerating the effects of the original small point (4 stars!).

 

[Millhouse]

Past holds important lessons. Those numbers show that we need to get better. Hiring a new OC speaks to that.

we hired a lot of new OCs during that long stretch. defensive head coaches need know what their offensive identity should be. if you're changing gears to something totally unknown out of desperation two years after prioritizing recruiting over everything else on offense, that's a red flag.

 

[bcubs9497]

Also.

This is my favorite thing you guys do on the board. Take a small, obvious request (think about what you write in a public space) and blow it out (WE CANT POST FACTUAL INFORMATION), call person who made clear point out to be a crazy person (Pollyanna!), all while exaggerating the effects of the original small point (4 stars!).

Cusian, man, I think you're wasting your time, effort, and your sanity on the "Doomers". They'll never change their minds.

Deep breaths, and realize that for them, it must suck to be so bitter.

 

[Scooch]

I see you didn't respond to my real request at actually talking about how things could get better (Lester, Hunt running). Rather look at stats that confirm what we've already known for 10 years.

Long on diagnosis, short on cure.

We know how things can get better... employ a competent OC, recruit better offensive talent, practice plays that have a high probability of success, execute those plays well in a game, score many more points than we have previously.

What else can I help with?

 

[TheCusian]

We know how things can get better... employ a competent OC, recruit better offensive talent, practice plays that have a high probability of success, execute those plays well in a game, score many more points than we have previously.

What else can I help with?

Good job! That's a whole lot better than rehashing why we've stunk. Fairly obvious and not that deep, but we have to start somewhere. (Also: Lester could be, we are recruiting better talent, Hunt said we are mastering fewer plays, and we'll see about points).

My questions from earlier: "Maybe a better entry point would be: watch the BC v Syracuse game from 2013 again - only under the assumption Lester was calling the plays. Hunt played pretty well. Cornelius had a break out game. Does any of that carry over?

Or how about - Hunt's been talking about not running as much, staying in the pocket longer. Except that's how he got hurt last year. Are we better off spreading out and having him take two reads then run?"

 

[TheCusian]

we hired a lot of new OCs during that long stretch. defensive head coaches need know what their offensive identity should be. if you're changing gears to something totally unknown out of desperation two years after prioritizing recruiting over everything else on offense, that's a red flag.

I don't think it's like that at all. He took a chance on Mcit (ace recruiter and maybe a good OC) and it went as bad as it could. He also hired Lester knowing what kind of system he ran at Elmhurst, and what kind of mind he has for this stuff - and I'd bet a solid belief in that system. He always had Lester in his back pocket as an experienced known quantity (to him).

 

[Millhouse]

I don't think it's like that at all. He took a chance on Mc. . . . it (ace recruiter and maybe a good OC) and it went as bad as it could. He also hired Lester knowing what kind of system he ran at Elmhurst, and what kind of mind he has for this stuff - and I'd bet a solid belief in that system. He always had Lester in his back pocket as an experienced known quantity (to him).

i don't think it's a good idea to be thinking about back pockets.

pick your offense and hire coaches who know it and buy into it

 

[TheCusian]

i don't think it's a good idea to be thinking about back pockets.

pick your offense and hire coaches who know it and buy into it

You might be projecting your weak opinion of Lester onto Shafer. He was attempting to lure Mcit from a SEC job. Position, title and money were needed. I think he took a chance he didn't need to take. I think he always wanted Lester. Maybe he should have just hired him right away?

 

[IthacaMatt]

its a dam shame when offensive futility stats are so easy to come by for syracuse

in todays world of scoring every 30 seconds by throwing the ball down field- how does a team with a dome look so bad for a stretch this long - we have a curse

Exactly - in the current era, a team averages about 25 points a game, and we still struggle for 20 against crap opposition and double digits against good teams. You can't expect defenses to pitch shutouts to win you games anymore, like you sort of could in the Pasqualoni or certainly Coach Mac eras.

 

[Scooch]

That's a whole lot better than rehashing why we've stunk.

FWIW, there are still a lot of people here who don't actually understand just how bad our offense has been for the past decade. I'm convinced that a significant portion of our fanbase doesn't watch any college football aside from SU. They watch the NFL, which offensively is practically a different sport these days. So they see us score 22 a game and think all we need is marginal improvement. When in reality we need near unprecedented improvement.

And it is important to make that point statistically because it provides the baseline to judge performance. I say it all the time here: context matters.

In my line of work we do a lot of forecasting, and we often provide low/medium/high scenarios for planning purposes. Providing the low and medium is not "negative", rather it is an imperative so that everyone completely understands what is necessary to achieve varying levels of performance.

So while you lament the "negative" statistical posts, they do serve a purpose. Without understanding where we've been, how are we to know how to gauge where we are going?

Everyone finds some genre of posts annoying. If I never read a "Hunt for Heisman" type post again I'll die a happy man.