my two cents

[Roger N]

I see Ben Schwartzwalder. A great leader with a talent for getting gifted athletes to come to the snowbelt.

Ben got his players from the rust belt.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

It's getting tough to track all the groups that are going to hijack our program if Shafer is fired.

The existing players are all going to transfer.

The HS coaches are all going to turn their backs on us.

What's next, the donors turn away if we change coaches?

The fans will stop coming to games?

TV will stop showing us?

I am getting tired of hearing about all of the parties holding Coyle hostage, now that you mention it.

 

[Scooch]

I dont agree. If the team was playing bad ball and was more of an upper class team i would say yes. The fact that we are basically a frosh RS and Soph team that could easily have won 2 more games screams more time. We had both Pitt and VA beat. We would have loses to SFU first road trip, LSU with our . . . . . team QB in a close game and FSU coming off their first conf loss in forever playing at home on homecoming day. Not too bad. One more year is needed for the programs stability

Of course you don't agree.

I'm not arguing with you about Shafer needing more time. I am specifically disputing the notion that IF he is let go THEN a bunch of high school coaches will turn their backs on SU. They won't. There will be another coach and staff who will build relationships in areas where they think it makes sense. Parents will still be interested in sending their kids to SU. Coaches will still want to help their player make the right decision.

We're an ACC school, one of only 65 P5 schools in the country. Not removing a coach because your worried that a couple HS coaches might get mad about it is beyond ridiculous.

 

[Chip]

I am getting tired of hearing about all of the parties holding Coyle hostage, now that you mention it.

Luckily Coyle is smart enough to know what will really happen.

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

If we go 3-9 again this year, he's got to go. You can't be 2-14 against peer programs over a 2-year stretch and keep your job. It shows a complete inability to game plan/scheme/make adjustments and just generally have the kids playing at their best. He was a carryover hire by a former AD. The program is in no way indebted to him

4-8 makes the decision a little murkier.

5-7 he gets another year.

6-6 with a bowl buys him an extension with a friendly buyout. If the program continues on an upward trend, they can extend him again and make more Shafer-friendly buyout terms.

I truly hope the team wins a few more games this year. I want Shafer to have success here. Seems like a great guy, a player's coach, and a good family man. Perfect for Syracuse.

 

[OrangePA]

Baloney on the HS coaches. They know how this game is played, a 3 win year and a 4 win year gets people fired. If the next coach was a stand up guy and a good recruiter selling a posited environment then those coaches will help send their players to SU.

I don't think you can discount HS relationships.

Keeping Shafer in such a fragmented coaching environment I think would benefit the program.

Stability is good

 

[SUFan44]

I sound like a broken record but this isnt about shafer it is about the program. Many HS coaches would turn their backs on Syracuse if Shafer wasnt given a fourth year. In addition with Maryland, VA, Rutgers, and Temple all looking for a new coach after this year NJ NY and the east is going to open up to us. Now is not the time but long term i can see Coyle making a move after next year

Why on earth would NJ & NY open up to us just because those schools are hiring new coaches? You don't think the next coaches will have some relationships with those guys? And we'd be coming off two bad seasons in a row. Why would kids from that area want to come to Syracuse over the other schools? Just because you think that's the way things work? I don't think so.

 

[tep624]

Of course you don't agree.

I'm not arguing with you about Shafer needing more time. I am specifically disputing the notion that IF he is let go THEN a bunch of high school coaches will turn their backs on SU. They won't. There will be another coach and staff who will build relationships in areas where they think it makes sense. Parents will still be interested in sending their kids to SU. Coaches will still want to help their player make the right decision.

We're an ACC school, one of only 65 P5 schools in the country. Not removing a coach because your worried that a couple HS coaches might get mad about it is beyond ridiculous.

You can help with continuity by having a few key retentions as well. There are assistants on this staff that are very capable. Daoust for example, you retain a guy like him, or Acosta on the offensive side of the ball, many of the recruiting worries go away.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Luckily Coyle is smart enough to know what will really happen.

I'm starting to worry that I've built Coyle up in my mind to be way more than he is. I've convinced myself he's some kind of mastermind AD that already has everything figured out and will lead us back to the promised land.

The good news is, I don't think we actually need a genius. I think our path back to relevance is really, really obvious (offense in the Dome) and if he just does anything that leads us down that road we'll be in good shape.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I don't think you can discount HS relationships.

Keeping Shafer in such a fragmented coaching environment I think would benefit the program.

Stability is good

Meh. If results are good, stability is good.

I don't want stable crappy results. Been there, done that for the last decade and a half.

 

[Willy75]

I don't think you can discount HS relationships.

Keeping Shafer in such a fragmented coaching environment I think would benefit the program.

Stability is good

Stability has and will have the fan base melting away 15-20% per year. Heck, even FSU couldn't fill its stadium against SU and it was Parents Weekend.

 

[tep624]

Deciding when to cut bait is always an agonizing decision. I think there are good arguments on both side of this coin.

At the end of the day, we all want the same thing - a successful program on and off the field. And I have lost all confidence in Shafer's ability to do that.

If it's a talent thing, quality of citizen thing, etc, you can show tangible improvement in those areas, i.e. Grades, recruiting rankings, community service performed, etc. These things aren't really our issue. Yes, recruiting could be improved, but I still think our current recruiting is good enough to get us in that 6-8 win range each season.

Our issue is game day performance of our HC and coach decision making. And 3 years in, you would expect those things to no longer be problems, because those things typically are improved with experience when it is just an experience issue. We haven't seen that, and if anything, we've seen a regression in quality of decision making from the 2013 season to now.

Which leads me to believe that the game day performance and decision making of Shafer is more a systemic problem. I have no confidence at this point in his ability to improve on this critical area. And this is an area that DECIDES games. I truly believe that even if this program is back humming, we will still encounter 2-4 games a year that will be close games, and will be games where decision making of the HC will have an enormous impact on the outcome of the game (think Pitt instead of URI, URI, we could have had a monkey on the sideline picking plays and still won.)

There has to be a guy out there that brings the qualities that Shafer brings to the program, and believe me, I appreciate those, while also having the ability to make good decisions in games. I truly value his commitment to good citizens, academics, the improvement in recruiting, and the conditioning and prep of our players. But we will never be successful on the field, where it really matters, where dollars are earned for the program, with decisions like we've seen over the past 3-4 weeks.

 

[Scooch]

I don't think you can discount HS relationships. Keeping Shafer in such a fragmented coaching environment I think would benefit the program. Stability is good

I'm not discounting them, I'm saying that being terrified of them is silly.

Stability can be good if you have the right man for the job.

Bobby Wallace coached at Temple for nine years and never won more than 4 games. That stability wasn't good.

 

[Millhouse]

This is for Millhouse, and Otto in the grotto, look at the last drive of the 1st half. We got the ball with 1:37 on the clock on our 25, in 7 plays and 59 seconds we moved 65 yards. I don't believe the current line could sustain that for 60 minutes, but our young players have a complete spring , and next fall to implement a fast paced offense. Look for Lester to use something along those lines next year, that was a masterful series by Eric, and the young playmakers.

I'm tired of lesters audition. Lots of hurry up coordinators out there

 

[SWC75]

A friend asked me about the defensive backback field. Why are they so bad? Is ti the players or is the coaches? I looked it up and not only were 27th in the country in total defense last year, we were 29th in pass defense. That's with the same coaches. It's the players and it's the youth of the players.

We bottomed out at the end of the Schwartzwalder Era. Then we spent a dozen seaosns alternately building up the defense, then the offense, then the defesne, then the offense. We finally got them both going strong in 1987 and went from 5-6, (and no 7 win seasons in 20 years) to 11-0.

We again bottomed out and have been building the defense, then the offense, then the defense and now the offense. But both units are so young, playing many recent recruits, that I have to think we are on the verge of another breakthrough, perhaps next year but likely the year after that. I don't think ti will be 12-0. In this conference it might be 10-2 but still a breakthough. I have no desire to pull the program up by the roots and plant something else. A coaching change isn't a reset button. it's a heart transplant.

That said, you've got to win to keep your job. Shafer is already being described as being "on the hot seat. Our board is full of speculation about who our next coach is. Recruits read this and wonder why they should come here is they don't know who the coach will be. if the recruiting dies, the program dies You ahev little choice but to make a change in that circumstance.

It's been pointed out that this would be a lousy year to make a change. There are so many good jobs open we might get the 9th or 10th best available guy. In any case, we are unlikely to get a guy with a resume any better than Shafer's. We've had one coach in our history who had been a head coach in a major conference before he came here: Ossie Solem, back int he 1930's. the rest have all been old alums, small college coaches or career assistants. It's always on-the-job learning for our head coach and also for most of his assistants, who tend to be guys doing jobs they've never done before. There is no assurance that somebody else would prove to be better than Scott Shafer.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Deciding when to cut bait is always an agonizing decision. I think there are good arguments on both side of this coin.

At the end of the day, we all want the same thing - a successful program on and off the field. And I have lost all confidence in Shafer's ability to do that.

If it's a talent thing, quality of citizen thing, etc, you can show tangible improvement in those areas, i.e. Grades, recruiting rankings, community service performed, etc. These things aren't really our issue. Yes, recruiting could be improved, but I still think our current recruiting is good enough to get us in that 6-8 win range each season.

Our issue is game day performance of our HC and coach decision making. And 3 years in, you would expect those things to no longer be problems, because those things typically are improved with experience when it is just an experience issue. We haven't seen that, and if anything, we've seen a regression in quality of decision making from the 2013 season to now.

Which leads me to believe that the game day performance and decision making of Shafer is more a systemic problem. I have no confidence at this point in his ability to improve on this critical area. And this is an area that DECIDES games. I truly believe that even if this program is back humming, we will still encounter 2-4 games a year that will be close games, and will be games where decision making of the HC will have an enormous impact on the outcome of the game (think Pitt instead of URI, URI, we could have had a monkey on the sideline picking plays and still won.)

There has to be a guy out there that brings the qualities that Shafer brings to the program, and believe me, I appreciate those, while also having the ability to make good decisions in games. I truly value his commitment to good citizens, academics, the improvement in recruiting, and the conditioning and prep of our players. But we will never be successful on the field, where it really matters, where dollars are earned for the program, with decisions like we've seen over the past 3-4 weeks.

Strong take.

 

[OrangePA]

Meh. If results are good, stability is good.

I don't want stable crappy results. Been there, done that for the last decade and a half.

We have had very little stability. Four HCs in ten years. And that's a problem.

 

[007]

We have had very little stability

Shafer has been here since 2009. That's 6.5 seasons as either the DC or HC. One of the reasons given for making him the HC was to ensure continuity. So, I guess it would depend on how one defines "very little stability."

 

[kcsu]

If we go 3-9 again this year, he's got to go. You can't be 2-14 against peer programs over a 2-year stretch and keep your job. It shows a complete inability to game plan/scheme/make adjustments and just generally have the kids playing at their best. He was a carryover hire by a former AD. The program is in no way indebted to him

4-8 makes the decision a little murkier.

5-7 he gets another year.

6-6 with a bowl buys him an extension with a friendly buyout. If the program continues on an upward trend, they can extend him again and make more Shafer-friendly buyout terms.

I truly hope the team wins a few more games this year. I want Shafer to have success here. Seems like a great guy, a player's coach, and a good family man. Perfect for Syracuse.

great post i agree 100%

 

[Willy75]

If we go 3-9 again this year, he's got to go. You can't be 2-14 against peer programs over a 2-year stretch and keep your job. It shows a complete inability to game plan/scheme/make adjustments and just generally have the kids playing at their best. He was a carryover hire by a former AD. The program is in no way indebted to him

4-8 makes the decision a little murkier.

5-7 he gets another year.

6-6 with a bowl buys him an extension with a friendly buyout. If the program continues on an upward trend, they can extend him again and make more Shafer-friendly buyout terms.

I truly hope the team wins a few more games this year. I want Shafer to have success here. Seems like a great guy, a player's coach, and a good family man. Perfect for Syracuse.

To me a 10-9 win over a 3-8 BC team in front of 18k would not make any decision murkier. Even GRob beat ND (on the road) his final year.

 

[baggerbob]

I think you actually assume they can't sustain it for 60 minutes, but that's fine because if you max out every drive early it gives you breathing room.

Nobody ever talks about offense getting tired. Only defense. There are reasons for that.

Our senior captain proved my point yesterday, his 2nd unsportmanlike conduct penalty in 3 weeks. These guys were undisciplined as a line when Doug was here,and still haven't learned. At least Adam has gotten them away from the many false starts. The young kids can start over without all the burden, of being the upperclassmen, and the most experienced unit.

 

[OrangePA]

Shafer has been here since 2009. That's 6.5 seasons as either the DC or HC. One of the reasons given for making him the HC was to ensure continuity. So, I guess it would depend on how one defines "very little stability."

The Marrone staff and the Shafer staff are really quite different. Shafer was a holdover but his administration was a distinct change in many ways.

Again four HCs in ten years is not the kind of stability that brings long term success.

 

[CuseOnly]

The Marrone staff and the Shafer staff are really quite different. Shafer was a holdover but his administration was a distinct change in many ways.

Again four HCs in ten years is not the kind of stability that brings long term success.

Marrone - Get the best guy available that agrees with his philosophies
Shafer - Get the band back together whether they are good or not

 

[OrangePA]

I'm tired of lesters audition. Lots of hurry up coordinators out there

I like Lester.

And I like how he has brought along Dungey, who I think is a true talent.

We were supposed to lose yesterday by 21. Just as we were supposed to lose to USF, UVA and Pitt.

There have been no surprises this season. We are playing pretty much as we were expected to play.

So, I am with the Stand Up For Shafer crowd - I think he is building something and despite the losses, I have had fun watching this team play this year.

 

[OrangePA]

Marrone - Get the best guy available that agrees with his philosophies
Shafer - Get the band back together whether they are good or not

Actually, there have been similar developments when comparing Marrone and Shafer.

After year one Marrone got rid of Rob Spence.

And after a little bit more than one year, Shafer got rid of McDonald.

I don't believe that Scott Shafer sacrificed his HC career to take care of some friends.