Nassib | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

Nassib

Nassib is far from being "the problem" with this team, but can we please lose the "best quarterback since McNabb" nonsense?

That is clearly a tallest midget argument.

Perhaps, but I don't think you appreciate how few really good QB's SU has had in its entire history...not just post McNabb, but in the history of the program
As for the "tallest midget" point, when you look at virtually all of the passing records at SU, 4-6 of the top 10 guys in the standings have been post-McNabb.

If the guy stays healthy, he'll likely finish his career in the top 3 of every major passing record at the school. Might even end up at the top in a catagory or two.
 
Doug and his staff are not presently holding a meeting to figure out "What are going to do about Nassib?"

Do you really want Loeb or Kinder in there? I can't believe we are really discussing this.
 
People may think I'm crazy, but I see what I see. And it's not a guy that's going to lead a team to a championship. That is what we're all striving for, right?

Ultimately, you want a kid that's going to win games for you at the QB position. Not not lose them. Is he terrible? I'd say no. He's actually not terrible. He's not bad, and he's, in some instances, above average.

But consistently, he misses at least three or four throws a game that need to be completed and that would be game changers. And he just doesn't look like he's ever comfortable in the pocket. That's why we do play-action every single passing play. What happens when we're facing a team that can stop the run with four down linemen, and can bring pressure from the back side on our play action passes? He's going to go right back to throwing for 130 yards a game like he did last year during BIG EAST play.

If I'm wrong about this, I'll be the first to say so. I really do root for him, and root for the team to win. But I just don't see it.

I don't disagree that he's the best since McNabb -- but come on, what is the competition? It's not like he's going up against Peyton Manning or Andrew Luck.

The kid is 10-5 as a starter with a bowl victory. You sir, are a moron.

By the way, this board is being overrun by idiots. You lead the parade.
 
This guy's right. Can we sign Kerry Collins? No? Ok, let's roll the dice with David Garrard and tank for a shot at Andrew Luck.
 
throws a nice ball.tight spiral.could use some more time but gets up after each mugging. i like what i've seen so far. mcnabb/graves??? NO.
 
throws a nice ball.tight spiral.could use some more time but gets up after each mugging. i like what i've seen so far. mcnabb/graves??? NO.

Of course he's not Graves or McNabb. Their games are totally different. The comparision to Philcox would be more appropriate.
 
All in all I like what I've seen of Nassib. He's shown poise at the end of games and has been mostly accurate. Every college quarterback throws a bad pass now and then. He's been pretty darn accurate especially considering the duress he's been under and lack of run game.
 
Aren't passes out of the pocket generally more difficult? I doubt Nassib's going to get worse when we give him time to throw...

No, 3 & 5 step drop timing routes are more difficult. Many young athletes can throw outside of the pocket (Newton, Tebow, A. Smith, Kaepernick, etc), but timing routes in the pocket are what makes a "quarterback." I only saw Nassib execute one 3-step timing route against Rhode Island. The biggest strategic difference between the SU offense the offenses run at Alabama, USC, Florida, and the other NFL football factories, is that they employ 3 & 5 step drop timing routes (aka "pro style offense"). The most complicated part of developing a top notch QB is working on the 3 & 5 step drop timing routes: the staff hasn't yet developed Nassib in this manner.

Also, I don't understand the hysteria that results whenever someone questions Nassib. For years, Milhouse and others have been vocal in suggesting that we adopt an innovative, gimmicky passing offense.

Now we have moved towards a gimmicky passing offense, and some of the fears associated with moving towards a gimmick offense have come true: we put up good passing numbers but otherwise fail to move the ball and get critical yards in a consistent manner. We make big plays when the opposing defense falls asleep, but we haven't been effective at meat and potato football. Therefore, a couple of posters are pointing out that Nassib might be more of a bandaid QB who works ok in our system, rather than a star QB who can take us to the next level. To his credit, Nassib had solid numbers last year, a hot start this season, and not much help along the way.

The fact that Nassib is 10-5 as a starter with a bowl game win, however, isn't dispositive of whether Nassib is the answer at QB. R.J. Anderson (aka "not the answer") put up a better record and a better bowl win not so long ago (albeit with more help), and many bandaid QBs in gimmick offenses at mediocre programs put up similar numbers, so Cuseman78, please spare us your witty commentary on the 'idiot parade.'

Many posters have used strange logic, arguing that since we have bigger problems than Nassib, Nassib should somehow be immune from scrutiny. Or since SU was lousy recently, we ought to have a low bar when judging Nassib. None of that makes any sense. The only question that really matters, for the purpose of evaluating Nassib, is "how good is Nassib compared to other BCS caliber QBs?" Is he a top 75 QB, a top 50 QB, a top 25 QB?

Last year he ranked fairly low in regards to talent, poise, and numbers. This year he looks improved: might be a top 50 guy. His numbers so far are certainly impressive. Ultimately, we need a top 25 guy to go where we want to go. That's what we always had (McPherson, Graves, McNabb) when we were great. So it makes perfect sense that SU fans are asking themsevles, "Is Nassib good enough to take us where we need to go, or is he merely a gimmick QB who looks like a savior simply by following GRob?"

SuFan44 actually articulated his argument very well: Nassib averaged only 130 yards passing per game last season in the Big East, which is a very poor number. Nassib put up bigger numbers this year, but our offense has relied on an unsustainable number of bootlegs and play action fakes. Tactically, bigger and faster teams are going to do exactly what SuFan44 said: they are going to sniff out our play action fakes and bootlegs by bringing a lot more back side pressure than mediocre teams like Wake Forest (borderline bottom 10 on ESPN to start the year, coming off of 3-9 season) and Rhode Island (FCS) were able to bring.

I'd say the jury is still very much out on Nassib: regardless of whether Nassib passes Troy Nunes, Todd Norley, and Perry Patterson in the Syracuse record books. Thankfully, there is plenty of reason for optimism.
 
I think Nassib is a good solid QB who has the potential be be very good and I think if you surrounded him with NFL type talent he'd be pretty high on draft analysts board. He has room to improve and his long throws are something he needs to work on but I think he's better than McNabb or Graves when it comes to short accurate throws at this stage of their careers. I'm thrilled with this young man being the Syracuse QB.
 
<<<The fact that Nassib is 10-5 as a starter with a bowl game win, however, isn't dispositive of whether Nassib is the answer at QB.>>>

Having a record like that won't guarnatee someone is a good QB. Having a much worse record -- which is definitely possible at SU - will eliminate that possibility. His positive record should not be dismissed.

<<<arguing that since we have bigger problems than Nassib, Nassib should somehow be immune from scrutiny.>>>

This isn't professional programs like Miami/USC/the NE Patriots. SU is rebuilding college football program in a mediocre conference. His play is a total asset given the circumstances. No one is immune from scrutiny. I just respectfully think it is misdirected at this point of the season given what we've seen. Put another way, if you were going to critique the O, would you start with the OL, the RBs or Nassib? And, if you were the coach this week, with a cross-country game on the schedule, would you devote extra time to developing 3/5 step drops or some semblance of an offensive line?
 
He's 49 for 65 in two games for 6 TDs and 1 pick and completing 75% of his passes. If he completed 3 or 4 more passes per game, that would be about 55 for 65 or 85% completion rate! ...and OttointheGrotto makes a GREAT point, "How many late game/4th quarter/OT scoring drives has he led to tie or take the lead?"

He's had late game/4th quarter/OT scoring drives in the last 3 games he has played! This is what wins championships and is one of the most telling signs of a QB's leadership!

He throws extremely accurate when rolling to his right and yes, he did miss Chew for a sure TD on that pick. ...but very, very rarely does he throw a ball like that.
 
Sorry, hate to be harsh, Post is stupid
 
By the way, this board is being overrun by idiots.

Agree. Can't wait for the implementation of a pay side. http://media.At their request, this network is being blocked from this site./media/forums/emoticons/ohlord.gif
 
If he hits either of the ones to Stevens or Chew early, the game is over before it begins.

Instead, he misses, throws a terrible pick, and allows them to stay in the game in the first quarter.

I don't care what anyone says, he's not the answer. Not even close.
You started this thread just to get a rise, didn't you? Well done.
 
Honestly, would people rather have BJ Daniels? Sure, the guy makes plays, but he also makes really stupid ones that cost his team the game. Nassib is a fantastic game manager, makes the right passes and doesn't risk much. He's like Chad Pennington with a better arm. I know people love the flashy QB that takes risks and sometimes makes excellent plays, but I'll take a guy like Nassib any day of the week. And this is only his second year starting, there's no where to go but up for him.
 
Honestly, would people rather have BJ Daniels? Sure, the guy makes plays, but he also makes really stupid ones that cost his team the game. Nassib is a fantastic game manager, makes the right passes and doesn't risk much. He's like Chad Pennington with a better arm. I know people love the flashy QB that takes risks and sometimes makes excellent plays, but I'll take a guy like Nassib any day of the week. And this is only his second year starting, there's no where to go but up for him.

Thing is, the "game manager" usually is successful when he is complemented by a lot of offensive weapons, or when his team has a stingy defense and doesn't need to score a lot to win.

It is unclear that this year's team fits the bill on either count.
 
Thing is, the "game manager" usually is successful when he is complemented by a lot of offensive weapons, or when his team has a stingy defense and doesn't need to score a lot to win.

It is unclear that this year's team fits the bill on either count.

But when he is on point, like the Wake Game, they can put up points in bunches. He can make the big play when he needs to, that's the main thing. The deep ball to Chew yesterday was a great example.
 
Honestly, would people rather have BJ Daniels? Sure, the guy makes plays, but he also makes really stupid ones that cost his team the game. Nassib is a fantastic game manager, makes the right passes and doesn't risk much. He's like Chad Pennington with a better arm. I know people love the flashy QB that takes risks and sometimes makes excellent plays, but I'll take a guy like Nassib any day of the week. And this is only his second year starting, there's no where to go but up for him.

I agree with this.
 
By the way, this board is being verrun by idiots. You lead the parade.
The apparent price for moving the board. :-(

The payside can't get here soon enough.
 
I'm not sure how anyone can get on Nassib right now. I wasn't a big fan last year (until the bowl game), but he has been great these first 2 games. While it has only been 2 games, the only QB in the BE that has been better is Smith at WVU. Nassib and the WR's are the least of our problems.
 
Thing is, the "game manager" usually is successful when he is complemented by a lot of offensive weapons, or when his team has a stingy defense and doesn't need to score a lot to win.

It is unclear that this year's team fits the bill on either count.

How did he end up getting labeled as a "game manager"? That should be reserved for QBs who's main job is to hand off 45 times a game and throw for first downs in 3rd and long situations. What are we averaging 30+ pass attempts a game? To me it seems like he's been a pretty damn accurate pro-style passer here and he's being asked to win these games, not to "not lose" them.
 
No, 3 & 5 step drop timing routes are more difficult. Many young athletes can throw outside of the pocket (Newton, Tebow, A. Smith, Kaepernick, etc), but timing routes in the pocket are what makes a "quarterback." I only saw Nassib execute one 3-step timing route against Rhode Island. The biggest strategic difference between the SU offense the offenses run at Alabama, USC, Florida, and the other NFL football factories, is that they employ 3 & 5 step drop timing routes (aka "pro style offense"). The most complicated part of developing a top notch QB is working on the 3 & 5 step drop timing routes: the staff hasn't yet developed Nassib in this manner.

Also, I don't understand the hysteria that results whenever someone questions Nassib. For years, Milhouse and others have been vocal in suggesting that we adopt an innovative, gimmicky passing offense.

Now we have moved towards a gimmicky passing offense, and some of the fears associated with moving towards a gimmick offense have come true: we put up good passing numbers but otherwise fail to move the ball and get critical yards in a consistent manner. We make big plays when the opposing defense falls asleep, but we haven't been effective at meat and potato football. Therefore, a couple of posters are pointing out that Nassib might be more of a bandaid QB who works ok in our system, rather than a star QB who can take us to the next level. To his credit, Nassib had solid numbers last year, a hot start this season, and not much help along the way.

The fact that Nassib is 10-5 as a starter with a bowl game win, however, isn't dispositive of whether Nassib is the answer at QB. R.J. Anderson (aka "not the answer") put up a better record and a better bowl win not so long ago (albeit with more help), and many bandaid QBs in gimmick offenses at mediocre programs put up similar numbers, so Cuseman78, please spare us your witty commentary on the 'idiot parade.'

Many posters have used strange logic, arguing that since we have bigger problems than Nassib, Nassib should somehow be immune from scrutiny. Or since SU was lousy recently, we ought to have a low bar when judging Nassib. None of that makes any sense. The only question that really matters, for the purpose of evaluating Nassib, is "how good is Nassib compared to other BCS caliber QBs?" Is he a top 75 QB, a top 50 QB, a top 25 QB?

Last year he ranked fairly low in regards to talent, poise, and numbers. This year he looks improved: might be a top 50 guy. His numbers so far are certainly impressive. Ultimately, we need a top 25 guy to go where we want to go. That's what we always had (McPherson, Graves, McNabb) when we were great. So it makes perfect sense that SU fans are asking themsevles, "Is Nassib good enough to take us where we need to go, or is he merely a gimmick QB who looks like a savior simply by following GRob?"

SuFan44 actually articulated his argument very well: Nassib averaged only 130 yards passing per game last season in the Big East, which is a very poor number. Nassib put up bigger numbers this year, but our offense has relied on an unsustainable number of bootlegs and play action fakes. Tactically, bigger and faster teams are going to do exactly what SuFan44 said: they are going to sniff out our play action fakes and bootlegs by bringing a lot more back side pressure than mediocre teams like Wake Forest (borderline bottom 10 on ESPN to start the year, coming off of 3-9 season) and Rhode Island (FCS) were able to bring.

I'd say the jury is still very much out on Nassib: regardless of whether Nassib passes Troy Nunes, Todd Norley, and Perry Patterson in the Syracuse record books. Thankfully, there is plenty of reason for optimism.
It's time to stop calling shotgun, passing and less reliance on fullbacks "gimmicky".
 
It's time to stop calling shotgun, passing and less reliance on fullbacks "gimmicky".

I don't get calling any offense in college football today "gimmicky". If it works, it's offense that works. If it doesn't, then it doesn't. Point is to move the ball and score points, not only in some special traditional way.
 
You started this thread just to get a rise, didn't you? Well done.
Actually, I didn't. I came to point out something that may be masked by what everyone is seeing in the stat sheet.

I think Nassib has the tools to be a good college QB. I don't think he has the aptitude though. As was said above, every time there's a three or five-step drop, he seems rushed or uncomfortable. Yes, the offensive line has been atrocious. But even when they do give him time, he's hopping around back there like a fish out of water.

Listen, I think Nassib is going to have a statistically good year. Because the coaches are good enough to know that he needs help if he's going to be successful (i.e. playcalling). Look at the kid from Wake Forest and notice the feel for the position and the game he has. He's accurate and knows when to move and where to move to in order to get a throw off.

When Nassib comes up with a decent game against a good defense, I'll be the first one to say I'm wrong and he's a good QB. Right now, calling a spade a spade as I see it, he's an improved, average QB who is accurate to about 10-15 yards from the hashes out. And he is careful with the football (last years fumbles not withstanding). Can't speak to his accuracy on over-the-middle medium-range passes, because we don't see any. But he's a poor thrower of deep balls, despite adequate arm strength.
 
I don't get calling any offense in college football today "gimmicky". If it works, it's offense that works. If it doesn't, then it doesn't. Point is to move the ball and score points, not only in some special traditional way.

IMO, Gimmicky means, essentially, "unsustainable strategy based on unconventional tactics that do not work in a repeat game setting." So using lots of shotgun isn't necessarily gimmicky, unless a team uses shotgun so much, and lacks adequate pass protection talent, to maintain an element of surprise.

Some offenses are gimmicky, and they do not fit your formula of "if it works it works, if it doesn't it doesn't," because they only work against lower quality talent. Obviously, all offenses will play better against Rhode Island than against Alabama, but some gimmicky offenses work dis-proportionally well against Rhode Island and work dis-proportionally poorly against Alabama.

It's time to stop calling shotgun, passing and less reliance on fullbacks "gimmicky".

I agree with your statement, but I wasn't calling shotgun, passing, and less reliance on fullbacks gimmicky. No one said that, so even though you are correct, you are arguing a straw man.

You've no doubt seen our offense, and it has very little shotgun, very little vertical passing, and uses the fullback a ton. Our offense is gimmicky because we use way, way, way too many bootlegs and play action fakes. We run very few 3 or 5 step drop timing routes. We run very few timing routes out of shotgun. We run very few plays that are at the cutting edge of tactical offensive strategy.

Instead, we are using an unsustainable, gimmicky strategy of moving the QB out of the pocket at a rate that will not work against better quality opponents. That is why our offense is gimmicky.

Sure, some innovative and brilliant offenses, most notably the spread option, have been incorrectly labeled "gimmicky" on the false assumption that the offense wouldn't be sustainable against better talent. But that does not mean that gimmicky offenses do not exist. Many have come and gone with an embarrassing lack of efficiency against quality talent. Chris Ault's pistol offense is a good example. Mouse Davis's Run-and-Shoot is another solid example. Ditto for the triple option out of the flexbone.

Honestly, would people rather have BJ Daniels? Sure, the guy makes plays, but he also makes really stupid ones that cost his team the game. Nassib is a fantastic game manager, makes the right passes and doesn't risk much. He's like Chad Pennington with a better arm. I know people love the flashy QB that takes risks and sometimes makes excellent plays, but I'll take a guy like Nassib any day of the week. And this is only his second year starting, there's no where to go but up for him.

Yes, are you kidding me? As an objective football fan, BJ Daniels is easily the better college quarterback. He is a force on a college offense. His career passing numbers are as good as Nassib's, and his rushing numbers are far superior. He also comes from a gimmicky offense though, haha, so you've got me on that point.

As a Syracuse fan, I am glad Nassib is our guy, I appreciate his popularity and his exciting role as someone playing a pivotal role in our return to respectability, and I have some Nassib memorabilia. I'm a Nassib guy! But Daniels has so far been the much more effective college QB. Also using a Chad Pennington analogy as a compliment is kinda self-defeating.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,930
Messages
4,737,884
Members
5,931
Latest member
CuseEagle8

Online statistics

Members online
266
Guests online
1,207
Total visitors
1,473


Top Bottom