My Take

[shu 49]

We are going to smash Yukon. The RBs were not the main problem against the blitz. It was as if the OL could not zone block.

They would turn their body towards a guy to double him instead of staying square in your gap looking for someonein your erea. yeah help eith one hand while still keeping your spot. Collins 1 or 2x i think and then the florida st kid did it and all ended up sacks

 

[NJCuse97]

Nothing to understand, where is the proof? Do you have insider information?

Clemson got $5M, with an incentive for more tickets sold last year. Clemson sold out its 25k tickets. Do you think we did? How many tickets do you think we sold? With attendance at less than 50k, nearly impossible. Would we have even guaranteed 10k tickets sold? If so, why would they pay $5M to us?

https://www.islandpacket.com/sports/college/acc/article291650445.html.

I cannot find anything suggesting travel expenses are paid. I am sure they work out something for hotels and in-city travel. But I am questioning whether they pay for airfare, etc. And if they did, for how many people? Just players and staff? Did the school have to pay for family of staff? And so on.

And then you have the fact that some people might travel to Atlanta at the expense of traveling to Syracuse later in the year for a home game. And then the broader community cost of not having a home game to generate hotel/restaurant revenue. I am sure that it nets an advantage at the end of the day or we would not have done it. But is it such a clear revenue boost that it outweighs every other consideration?

We have been taking neutral site season openers for years. It certainly isn’t because we lose money on them. We stopped after our opener with GT in 2001 at Giants Stadium. We played USC in 1990, and Wisconsin in 1997 in the same game (the 1997 game is where Fran Brown became aware of Syracuse because of Camden native Donovin Darius).

We played several at Yankee Stadium and MetLife against strong opponents like USC, Penn State, and ND. All were done for money, publicity, … then alumni networking. The proof is in the repeating of the behavior.

Family of staff? Whenever I go on a business trip, my family stays home and if I decide to bring them, it’s definitely on me.

I don’t think the private university’s concern is the economic impact it has on the greater Syracuse region, especially conglomerate hotel groups, especially in the face of the State Fair which ended 2 days after the game was played.

 

[jr4750]

i remember beating Wisky and ron dayne at a neutral site to open 97 then coming back to the dome only to get upset by NC st.

Fran Brown was at that game too.

 

[OrangeMojo]

I don't know yet that we had a much better team. I think we had more established stars, but I think our lines are more physical this year. On offense we may be less explosive but better at grinding. On defense we need to find a pass rush, but we may be better aganst the run. I know we gave up some big plays on the ground to TN, but they're probably a more physical team than any we played last year.

Agree - definitely think this year’s team is much better at running the ball. Last year’s team would’ve been stuffed at the line over and over against that defense while this year’s team was consistently getting 4 or 5 yards per carry even when UT knew what was coming.

 

[upperdeck]

If we show that we can run vs UConn then I will start to think the Oline can be solid.

We didn't open up gaping holes but we also didnt get pushed into the backfield.

The one thing though was when it came push to shove at the goal line we had a bunch of tries and couldn't get it in without running wide.

 

[Qbobby]

We were able to take the Tennessee dline to a standstill in the run game. They weren't hitting the backs as soon as they were getting handoffs and we had a solid ypc for the game. That may be the best or certainly one of the best d lines we will see all year. I think the upgrade will be very obvious for our line this season when we start playing defenses that are not nearly as talented as Tennessee's is.

Overall I am happy with what we showed. Had some mistakes, but after the first quarter of mistakes/nerves/rust we basically played them to a draw. That's my takeaway from the game. Physically we should dominate the UConn defense and rush for 250+ yards against them. Make them play 8 or 9 in the box and then kill them over the top or with slants or crosses behind the linebackers.

If we can play decent defense we should win this by at least two scores. Our time of possession should be 2-1 and their defense should get gassed by the 4th quarter

 

[bigmike]

Not sure I agree with that, especially with the first game of the season. It's literally shooting yourself in the foot. In my opinion, a better strategy is to pace yourself for an entire season, not start off with a punch to the face.

Yes, kinda like

Although the $’s and the exposure in my view are worth it.

 

[sufandu]

The one thing though was when it came push to shove at the goal line we had a bunch of tries and couldn't get it in without running wide.

That's ok. A physical defense had to respect our inside running game enough to leave the outside open. Willis didn't have to truck someone the way Lequint had to last year against a lesser team. It's not perfect, but it's progress.

 

[Eric15]

I know the Tennessee game was scheduled around 5 years ago, but having said that my take is that it is absolutely ridiculous to schedule the first game of the year against an SEC team. We are not there yet. Better off scheduling a very winnable game, see where your weaknesses are, and adapt for week two.

In 2019 we saw what our weaknesses were in Week 1 vs Liberty and then got murdered by Maryland the following week. Same thing in 2021 with losing to Rutgers at home in Week 2.

IMO, you simply can’t turn down an offer to play in a high profile early season non conference game. It’s a compliment to our program to get invited. It’s impossible for us to predict how good we will be five seasons out. We just have to take the floaties off, jump in the pool and see what happens.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I thought the Tennessee defense was pretty good, not great. Though their offense was about the same. I think we were out coached everywhere. (it's one game, not a huge deal) I think they are probably a 7-8 win team. Certainly better than UCONN but I think they will be a very good test to see how weak our weaknesses are and maybe some of our strengths stand out more as well. Should know more by 4 pm Saturday.

It's a huge game really, lose this one and oh boy, could be a really long year, really long year

 

[23Zone]

In 2019 we saw what our weaknesses were in Week 1 vs Liberty and then got murdered by Maryland the following week. Same thing in 2021 with losing to Rutgers at home in Week 2.

IMO, you simply can’t turn down an offer to play in a high profile early season non conference game. It’s a compliment to our program to get invited. It’s impossible for us to predict how good we will be five seasons out. We just have to take the floaties off, jump in the pool and see what happens.

 

[Archbold44]

We have been taking neutral site season openers for years. It certainly isn’t because we lose money on them. We stopped after our opener with GT in 2001 at Giants Stadium. We played USC in 1990, and Wisconsin in 1997 in the same game (the 1997 game is where Fran Brown became aware of Syracuse because of Camden native Donovin Darius).

We played several at Yankee Stadium and MetLife against strong opponents like USC, Penn State, and ND. All were done for money, publicity, … then alumni networking. The proof is in the repeating of the behavior.

Family of staff? Whenever I go on a business trip, my family stays home and if I decide to bring them, it’s definitely on me.

I don’t think the private university’s concern is the economic impact it has on the greater Syracuse region, especially conglomerate hotel groups, especially in the face of the State Fair which ended 2 days after the game was played.

1987, the team went 11-0 and was not in the best bowl because of the bowl tie-ins and 3 undefeated teams, two of which had the perception of tougher schedules. In all those years since... in NO other season has our schedule mattered meaningfully--in a good way. If/when we play a difficult schedule, it either ends up not mattering or we do it to our own detriment. If we play a light schedule, it does not end up mattering much either.

Last year, we had the perception of a light schedule. But, if we had subbed out the Ohio win for a Michigan neutral game loss... do you think we would have gotten to a better bowl??? Nope. Most seasons, it just does not matter.

The other issue is team development. In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013? Which, by the way, was also hampered with a Penn State game opener in Game 1. Our choices were big-time program transfer Allen or hardly any experience at all Hunt--who gave us the best chance to win? Meanwhile, Hunt came in against Wagner and Tulane... moving the football. He got to find himself against reasonable opponents.

Is there a happy medium? I think more seasons than not, we are better starting off with a manageable opponent in Week 1. And then week 2 play a P4 that you have some Week 1 tape on. Duke/Illinois are doing that. Obviously, you cannot manage that perfectly every year. I still say, however, that so long as we are in THIS version of the ACC, no need to schedule an SEC team for an opener and Notre Dame. If we knew we had Tennessee lined up several years ago, why not work with Notre Dame to get them in a different year? At least switch the H/A so that we get them at home this year. We do not need 6 A/N games in ANY year.

 

[baggerbob]

1987, the team went 11-0 and was not in the best bowl because of the bowl tie-ins and 3 undefeated teams, two of which had the perception of tougher schedules. In all those years since... in NO other season has our schedule mattered meaningfully--in a good way. If/when we play a difficult schedule, it either ends up not mattering or we do it to our own detriment. If we play a light schedule, it does not end up mattering much either.

Last year, we had the perception of a light schedule. But, if we had subbed out the Ohio win for a Michigan neutral game loss... do you think we would have gotten to a better bowl??? Nope. Most seasons, it just does not matter.

The other issue is team development. In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013? Which, by the way, was also hampered with a Penn State game opener in Game 1. Our choices were big-time program transfer Allen or hardly any experience at all Hunt--who gave us the best chance to win? Meanwhile, Hunt came in against Wagner and Tulane... moving the football. He got to find himself against reasonable opponents.

Is there a happy medium? I think more seasons than not, we are better starting off with a manageable opponent in Week 1. And then week 2 play a P4 that you have some Week 1 tape on. Duke/Illinois are doing that. Obviously, you cannot manage that perfectly every year. I still say, however, that so long as we are in THIS version of the ACC, no need to schedule an SEC team for an opener and Notre Dame. If we knew we had Tennessee lined up several years ago, why not work with Notre Dame to get them in a different year? At least switch the H/A so that we get them at home this year. We do not need 6 A/N games in ANY year.

With Clemson playing Notre Dame for 10 years, we should just skip playing them the next 10 years.

 

[Eric15]

In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013?

Not trying to be argumentative but our schedule was average in 2012 (SOS 45). The Big East was a shell of itself with WVU leaving and then adding Temple. USC, Missouri and Minnesota all finished with losing records. Northwestern was very good — 10 wins and Top 20.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Not trying to be argumentative but our schedule was average in 2012 (SOS 45). The Big East was a shell of itself with WVU leaving and then adding Temple. USC, Missouri and Minnesota all finished with losing records. Northwestern was very good — 10 wins and Top 20.

They were still all BCS teams. No one else was playing 11 BCS games back then. It may have prevented us from ending the season ranked.

 

[sufan59]

1987, the team went 11-0 and was not in the best bowl because of the bowl tie-ins and 3 undefeated teams, two of which had the perception of tougher schedules. In all those years since... in NO other season has our schedule mattered meaningfully--in a good way. If/when we play a difficult schedule, it either ends up not mattering or we do it to our own detriment. If we play a light schedule, it does not end up mattering much either.

Last year, we had the perception of a light schedule. But, if we had subbed out the Ohio win for a Michigan neutral game loss... do you think we would have gotten to a better bowl??? Nope. Most seasons, it just does not matter.

The other issue is team development. In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013? Which, by the way, was also hampered with a Penn State game opener in Game 1. Our choices were big-time program transfer Allen or hardly any experience at all Hunt--who gave us the best chance to win? Meanwhile, Hunt came in against Wagner and Tulane... moving the football. He got to find himself against reasonable opponents.

Is there a happy medium? I think more seasons than not, we are better starting off with a manageable opponent in Week 1. And then week 2 play a P4 that you have some Week 1 tape on. Duke/Illinois are doing that. Obviously, you cannot manage that perfectly every year. I still say, however, that so long as we are in THIS version of the ACC, no need to schedule an SEC team for an opener and Notre Dame. If we knew we had Tennessee lined up several years ago, why not work with Notre Dame to get them in a different year? At least switch the H/A so that we get them at home this year. We do not need 6 A/N games in ANY year.

This is exhausting. Can we please stop Monday quarterbacking the schedule. The schedule is the schedule. Let’s have positive vibes. Let’s be honest, the program has suffered so much adversity in the last twenty years. Outcomes and scenarios we are afraid of with this schedule, is it really that much worse than what we have faced in the bigger picture over the last 20 years? Fran had zero control over this schedule that was determined before he even joined the program, but do you think the guy who ultimate goal is to bring a National Championship to Syracuse, not just a sneak into the 11 or 12 spot in the playoff because we went undefeated against an easy schedule and get exposed in round 1 deal. Do you think that guy is complaining about our schedule. I tend to think he would make our upcoming schedules harder if he could.

 

[Archbold44]

This is exhausting. Can we please stop Monday quarterbacking the schedule. The schedule is the schedule. Let’s have positive vibes. Let’s be honest, the program has suffered so much adversity in the last twenty years. Outcomes and scenarios we are afraid of with this schedule, is it really that much worse than what we have faced in the bigger picture over the last 20 years? Fran had zero control over this schedule that was determined before he even joined the program, but do you think the guy who ultimate goal is to bring a National Championship to Syracuse, not just a sneak into the 11 or 12 spot in the playoff because we went undefeated against an easy schedule and get exposed in round 1 deal. Do you think that guy is complaining about our schedule. I tend to think he would make our upcoming schedules harder if he could.

Again, the same thing. I am not talking about "undefeated against an easy schedule." I am just talking having a top 30 OOC slate with 1 P4, 2 G5, and 1 FCS. When we go to 9 ACC games, we go 1 P4, 1 G5, and 1 FCS. Is that asking too much?

There are more options than scheduling patsies and scheduling like a blue blood. Playing tough teams for $$$$ does not make you a tough team. Otherwise East Texas A&M is suddenly an elite school...

But I will stop with this one. Someone else can have the last word.

 

[Eric15]

They were still all BCS teams. No one else was playing 11 BCS games back then. It may have prevented us from ending the season ranked.

However you label it, our SOS was 45.

 

[GoSU96]

1987, the team went 11-0 and was not in the best bowl because of the bowl tie-ins and 3 undefeated teams, two of which had the perception of tougher schedules. In all those years since... in NO other season has our schedule mattered meaningfully--in a good way. If/when we play a difficult schedule, it either ends up not mattering or we do it to our own detriment. If we play a light schedule, it does not end up mattering much either.

Last year, we had the perception of a light schedule. But, if we had subbed out the Ohio win for a Michigan neutral game loss... do you think we would have gotten to a better bowl??? Nope. Most seasons, it just does not matter.

The other issue is team development. In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013? Which, by the way, was also hampered with a Penn State game opener in Game 1. Our choices were big-time program transfer Allen or hardly any experience at all Hunt--who gave us the best chance to win? Meanwhile, Hunt came in against Wagner and Tulane... moving the football. He got to find himself against reasonable opponents.

Is there a happy medium? I think more seasons than not, we are better starting off with a manageable opponent in Week 1. And then week 2 play a P4 that you have some Week 1 tape on. Duke/Illinois are doing that. Obviously, you cannot manage that perfectly every year. I still say, however, that so long as we are in THIS version of the ACC, no need to schedule an SEC team for an opener and Notre Dame. If we knew we had Tennessee lined up several years ago, why not work with Notre Dame to get them in a different year? At least switch the H/A so that we get them at home this year. We do not need 6 A/N games in ANY year.

Don’t screw up the Stanford game and things are different

 

[JeremyCuse]

I thought the Tennessee defense was pretty good, not great. Though their offense was about the same. I think we were out coached everywhere. (it's one game, not a huge deal) I think they are probably a 7-8 win team. Certainly better than UCONN but I think they will be a very good test to see how weak our weaknesses are and maybe some of our strengths stand out more as well. Should know more by 4 pm Saturday.

It's a huge game really, lose this one and oh boy, could be a really long year, really long year

Was going to start a new thread (probably still will) noting pretty much the same on Uconn. Hate to say a week 2 game is a must win but man a loss here and your staring an 1-3 start in the face and with this schedule things could get off the rails quickly. This is a very tricky game for a fairly young SU team especially on defense. This needs to be a game where the Offense really takes advantage of a Uconn defense replacing essentially 9 starters from last year and just lost its starting safety for Saturday. I fear this may be much closer than the majority of the fanbase thinks it will be and I do worry that if this team makes the same mistakes with turnovers we could be in trouble.

 

[tbonezone]

Although the $’s and the exposure in my view are worth it.

and by national exposure you mean everything but the last 4 minutes.

 

[sufandu]

1987, the team went 11-0 and was not in the best bowl because of the bowl tie-ins and 3 undefeated teams, two of which had the perception of tougher schedules. In all those years since... in NO other season has our schedule mattered meaningfully--in a good way. If/when we play a difficult schedule, it either ends up not mattering or we do it to our own detriment. If we play a light schedule, it does not end up mattering much either.

Last year, we had the perception of a light schedule. But, if we had subbed out the Ohio win for a Michigan neutral game loss... do you think we would have gotten to a better bowl??? Nope. Most seasons, it just does not matter.

The other issue is team development. In 2012, we had a very tough schedule. One FCS opponent. 7 Big East games. Northwestern (H), USC (N), Minnesota (A), and Missouri (A). Nassib had to play every game, all game. Hunt did not get much work in at all. Did that not impact 2013? Which, by the way, was also hampered with a Penn State game opener in Game 1. Our choices were big-time program transfer Allen or hardly any experience at all Hunt--who gave us the best chance to win? Meanwhile, Hunt came in against Wagner and Tulane... moving the football. He got to find himself against reasonable opponents.

Is there a happy medium? I think more seasons than not, we are better starting off with a manageable opponent in Week 1. And then week 2 play a P4 that you have some Week 1 tape on. Duke/Illinois are doing that. Obviously, you cannot manage that perfectly every year. I still say, however, that so long as we are in THIS version of the ACC, no need to schedule an SEC team for an opener and Notre Dame. If we knew we had Tennessee lined up several years ago, why not work with Notre Dame to get them in a different year? At least switch the H/A so that we get them at home this year. We do not need 6 A/N games in ANY year.

If you think 2012 was a tough schedule, you need to become a Rutgers fan. It was an average schedule. It was ranked 46th. Only two of our opponents ended up being ranked by the end of the year. 5 teams ended up with losing records. We didn't play backups that year because we were only a decent team, not because we played a gauntlet schedule.

 

[sufandu]

They were still all BCS teams. No one else was playing 11 BCS games back then. It may have prevented us from ending the season ranked.

Nobody else was playing 11 BCS teams back then? How may FCS teams were teams playing?

 

[rocklloyd]

We need a quick start offensively. Cannot afford to lollygag on offense. Need to score a lot and a lot of different ways

 

[Moontan]

I’d recommend naming future postings as:

My take: <opponent name>