Nassib haters

[kingottoiii]

No doubt he had a bad game but I have a couple questions.

1. Is Nassib a Top 50 QB? If your answer is no, stop posting. If your answer is yes then move on.

2. Why is it that our O isn't Top 100, if our QB is Top 50? How can all these schools with worse QBs have better Os?

Our O has to execute at such a high level, it is insane. When we execute we look great, see last week. But you cannot expect college kids to execute on that level week in and week out. Our kids are put under a lot of pressure to execute EVERY play. Because if we have a negative play the whole system fails. Having every play be critical to success on O isn't fair to the kids.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

The scheme sucks... And nassib needs to run more even luck is running versus USC. Did you just see that long ball he threw? Thing of beauty

 

[qdawgg]

Nassib would have missed that throw by 10 yards, at least.

 

[phil77]

I will tell you this much he didn't play like a top 50 QB today and hasn't played like a top 50 QB most of the season. He has shown flashes of great QB play but he has also shown flashes of very very poor QB play. For every great game he has like WVU he has games like Rutgers and UL. He just is not a very good QB plain and simple. He misses too many open WR's time and time again.

 

[bnoro]

Nassib would have missed that throw by 10 yards, at least.

Uh no stuff, Andrew Luck is a better QB than 10 NFL starters.

 

[orangenirvana]

Uh no stuff, Andrew Luck is a better QB than 10 NFL starters.

You don't need to be Peyton Manning to connect on a long ball once in a while.

 

[BostonOrange]

No doubt he had a bad game but I have a couple questions.

1. Is Nassib a Top 50 QB? If your answer is no, stop posting. If your answer is yes then move on.

2. Why is it that our O isn't Top 100, if our QB is Top 50? How can all these schools with worse QBs have better Os?

Our O has to execute at such a high level, it is insane. When we execute we look great, see last week. But you cannot expect college kids to execute on that level week in and week out. Our kids are put under a lot of pressure to execute EVERY play. Because if we have a negative play the whole system fails. Having every play be critical to success on O isn't fair to the kids.

No offense...but I have no idea what you are talking about. Our scheme doesn't look much different than a lot of other ones. We have an avg qb, avg rbs, avg receivers, and a below avg line. We need to recruit better players. And do a better job of coaching them up. Scheme has little or nothing to do with it.

 

[matcuse]

I will tell you this much he didn't play like a top 50 QB today and hasn't played like a top 50 QB most of the season. He has shown flashes of great QB play but he has also shown flashes of very very poor QB play. For every great game he has like WVU he has games like Rutgers and UL. He just is not a very good QB plain and simple. He misses too many open WR's time and time again.

seriously...im sorry to inform you that this kid is a good qb...the talent around him isnt quite there yet...Did people forget where we were as a program 4 seasons ago...i mean seriously i wont even mention who the coach was because anybody who follows this team will understand we as a football program have made strides and yes...it is frustrating at times that we dont perform well against teams you would think we should beat but to say nassib is a bad qb is very unintelligent...hes the best qb we've had in at least 10 years..give him a break...we are 5-3 not 3-5.

 

[Czar]

Nassib is not a Top 50 QB. Get that notion out of your head.

 

[Czar]

No offense...but I have no idea what you are talking about. Our scheme doesn't look much different than a lot of other ones. We have an avg qb, avg rbs, avg receivers, and a below avg line. We need to recruit better players. And do a better job of coaching them up. Scheme has little or nothing to do with it.

Our scheme is a lot different than the majority of college offenses.

 

[BostonOrange]

Our scheme is a lot different than the majority of college offenses.

How so. Enlighten me.

 

[kingottoiii]

No offense...but I have no idea what you are talking about. Our scheme doesn't look much different than a lot of other ones. We have an avg qb, avg rbs, avg receivers, and a below avg line. We need to recruit better players. And do a better job of coaching them up. Scheme has little or nothing to do with it.

I can count on one hand the number of teams running our O scheme. Even you you just watch SU FB can you name ONE team we have played that runs the same O?

 

[kingottoiii]

Nassib is not a Top 50 QB. Get that notion out of your head.

Then you are a moron. The O we run needs a guy like Luck to be successful.

 

[BostonOrange]

I can count on one hand the number of teams running our O scheme. Even you you just watch SU FB can you name ONE team we have played that runs the same O?

Tell me what's different...I'm not trying to be a wiseass...but I have watched about 10 college football games today and our O doesn't look any different than any of the non spread teams out there.

 

[cuseincincy]

No doubt he had a bad game but I have a couple questions.

1. Is Nassib a Top 50 QB? If your answer is no, stop posting. If your answer is yes then move on.

2. Why is it that our O isn't Top 100, if our QB is Top 50? How can all these schools with worse QBs have better Os?

Our O has to execute at such a high level, it is insane. When we execute we look great, see last week. But you cannot expect college kids to execute on that level week in and week out. Our kids are put under a lot of pressure to execute EVERY play. Because if we have a negative play the whole system fails. Having every play be critical to success on O isn't fair to the kids.

Interesting. I would agree that Nassib is a top 50 QB. Not sure if his stats support that but I am positive that there are not 49 QB's better than him. And your right, the offense isn't where it should be. I've got to put that on scheme and play calling. We seem to play field position for too long, particulary when losing.

 

[Czar]

Then you are a moron. The O we run needs a guy like Luck to be successful.

Then why are we running it?

 

[Czar]

How so. Enlighten me.

We take a lot more snaps under center compared to most college football teams, a lot of teams run out of the shotgun for the most part. I don't know any other team that runs 2 TE sets, nor many teams that rely on one runner and Ace sets as much as us. Most college offenses, at the moment, are shotgun, wide open systems.

 

[phil77]

Why is it the scheme and play calling and not the players fault? There were many wide open WR's today and Ryan failed to get him the ball. Missed at least 2-3 TD's today on wide open WR's who is to blame for that? The WR? The coaches? The play calling? The scheme? There is no excuse for Ryan's play today so stop trying to push the blame to others.

 

[Shrmdougluvr]

Then you are a moron. The O we run needs a guy like Luck to be successful.

I have long felt, contrary to some here, including Dave Rahme, that Marrone's ideal offense is what Stanford runs (i.e., power running, hard play action, take shots occasionally, etc.). I really like Stanford's offense, but Stanford generally has more talent then SU. Right now they are really clicking but that is with an excellent line, an elite qb, and a good rb, te and wr. It will be interesting to see if Stanford takes a big step back when Luck, Owusu, Fleener et al are gone.

My point, Stanford, with better players, has to be nearly perfect to run their offense well. Is Marrone asking too much of his players?

 

[BostonOrange]

We take a lot more snaps under center compared to most college football teams, a lot of teams run out of the shotgun for the most part. I don't know any other team that runs 2 TE sets, nor many teams that rely on one runner and Ace sets as much as us. Most college offenses, at the moment, are shotgun, wide open systems.[/quote Ehhh...I don't see it. I mean...I know a lot of teams run spread, but a lot don't. I'm watching Stanford-USC and they are in a lot of similar sets as we are.

Ehhh...I don't see it. I mean...I know a lot of teams run spread, but a lot don't. I'm watching Stanford-USC and they are in a lot of similar sets as we are.

 

[BostonOrange]

Then you are a moron. The O we run needs a guy like Luck to be successful.

fwiw Nassib is 45th in qb rating, 58th in yards, 74th in yds per attempt, 23rd in %, and 25th in td's. So yeah I'd say he's top 50. Barely. But he doesn't make any plays at all with his feet, so I would ding him for that as I think that is huge in college.

 

[Millhouse]

fwiw Nassib is 45th in qb rating, 58th in yards, 74th in yds per attempt, 23rd in %, and 25th in td's. So yeah I'd say he's top 50. Barely. But he doesn't make any plays at all with his feet, so I would ding him for that as I think that is huge in college.

kingotto thinks that well if nassib's top 50 and the offense is worse than that, well he must not be the problem

teams with qbs as bad as nassib don't pass as much as syracuse does.

he has a good completion percentage. rollout pseudohandoffs to tight ends 15 times a game for 15 yards will help that

 

[orange03]

I don't hate the kid. I just don't think he's all that great a QB. In his defense, we're not that great at any position.

 

[rosconey]

kid is a average qb on his best days-and that aint a bad thing-
problem is no one else on offense is even near being average-cant play consistantly when you have no weapons

 

[CIL]

I can count on one hand the number of teams running our O scheme. Even you you just watch SU FB can you name ONE team we have played that runs the same O?

USC