Nathaniel Hackett: Up-and-coming coach in the Big East

[OrangePA]

Don't you get tired of throwing our players under the bus over and over again?

The "lack of talent" does not excuse Hackett's poor playcalling and overall lack of production we've seen against porous competition over the last two seasons.

Don't you get tired of throwing coaches under the bus over and over again?

Tell us please how you know that there was poor playcalling last year? Were you in the huddle? Were you in the booth? Were you in the game plan meetings during the summer and in preparation for each game? Did you have access to the game plans? Did you watch coaches film? Did you attend even one practice?

And about that poor production.

Didn't Bailey have over 1000 rushing?

And didn't Nassib establish a series of season passing records last year? And didn't Provo set season pass receiving records for an SU TE? And didn't Alec Lemon set or approach a season pass catching record last year with 68 catches?

These are all decent players, but hardly the talented players that are need to dominate a defense.

It seems that even with a modicum of talent, the offense, though it was no dynamo obviously, had some solid moments last year due to proper scheming and solid coaching.

And by the way, who exactly was "porous" last season?

Who did we play who had less talent on defense than we did on on offense? Cincinnati? Rutgers? USF? Pitt? Louisville?

All of those teams had more talent than we did and all of them are picked ahead of us this year precisely because all agree that they have more talent.

Over the past two years, the one team we played that seemed to have a "porous" defense was K-State. And I recall that our offense moved the ball up and down the field and I think scored 37 points. And that was with Marcus Sales and Delone Carter, both of whom were gone last season.

Sorry, but your hackneyed complaints about "play calling" and your humanitarian sympathy for the poor players who have been so unmercifully "thrown under the bus" are just not accurate.

 

[Crusty]

Don't you get tired of throwing coaches under the bus over and over again?

Tell us please how you know that there was poor playcalling last year? Were you in the huddle? Were you in the booth? Were you in the game plan meetings during the summer and in preparation for each game? Did you have access to the game plans? Did you watch coaches film? Did you attend even one practice?

And about that poor production.

Didn't Bailey have over 1000 rushing?

And didn't Nassib establish a series of season passing records last year? And didn't Provo set season pass receiving records for an SU TE? And didn't Alec Lemon set or approach a season pass catching record last year with 68 catches?

These are all decent players, but hardly the talented players that are need to dominate a defense.

It seems that even with a modicum of talent, the offense, though it was no dynamo obviously, had some solid moments last year due to proper scheming and solid coaching.

And by the way, who exactly was "porous" last season?

Who did we play who had less talent on defense than we did on on offense? Cincinnati? Rutgers? USF? Pitt? Louisville?

All of those teams had more talent than we did and all of them are picked ahead of us this year precisely because all agree that they have more talent.

Over the past two years, the one team we played that seemed to have a "porous" defense was K-State. And I recall that our offense moved the ball up and down the field and I think scored 37 points. And that was with Marcus Sales and Delone Carter, both of whom were gone last season.

Sorry, but your hackneyed complaints about "play calling" and your humanitarian sympathy for the poor players who have been so unmercifully "thrown under the bus" are just not accurate.

What is the evidence to support the position that Hackett is a good OC? I can't find any objective data to support that Hackett is anything but somebody's son. So, tell me what makes you believe that Hackett is a good OC?

The object is to score points - if a team cannot do that stats don't mean much. Last year we were 84th in the nation with 24.2 points (20.9 vs BE opponents).

Our Big East Rankings (And let's face it the Big East sucks.)
Total Yards 7
Yds/Game 5
Total Passing Yds 6
Passing Yards/Game 5
Total Rushing Yards 6
Rushing Yards/Game 6
Points 7
Points/game 7

Nassib. First of all I do not think Nassib is the problem. If he is compared to other Big East QB's he stacks up pretty well. The stats are pretty representative of the problem. We are in the middle of the pack with pass attempts but we had the second highest completions together with the 2nd lowest average yards per attempt. We simply are playing dink and dunk. I have been a critic of Nassib's long passing accuracy but, in fairness, we seldom throw long who knows if he might improve if we threw more bombs.

Big East Quarterbacks 2011
QB Rating Nassib 4th
Passing Attempts 4th
Completions 2nd
Total Yards 2nd
Completion % 4th
Yards Per Attempt 7th
Longest 7th
TDs 2nd
Interceptions 4th
Sacks 4th

It seems to me that a couple of things jump out.

• Nassib had the 4th highest QB rating so he was middle of the pack. I think this is pretty good becasue there were some very good QB's last year.
• As mentioned above, Nassib had the 2nd most completions and 2nd highest total yards but 7th best yards per attempt meaning that his passes were mostly short and we didn't get many yards after the catch. His longest was also 7th.
• As a side note Nassib was sacked (as measured by sacks per attempt) was 5th in the BE. The OLine may have done a better job than most observers thought.

I think that by any reasonable standard the passing game taken as a whole is not the problem but its shortcomings contribute to the problems in the running game.

Last year we were 6th in total rushing yards and yards per game. Over 60 yards per game less than BE rushing leader South Florida. I believe that a lot of the reason is that opponents stack the box against us and do not fear the long pass. Every coach will tell you that they will stay in the defense that works until the opponent forces them out of it. We have never been able to do that. (Only West Virginia played that silly 3-3-5 passive garbage and we all know what happened.)

IMO Hackett was never able to design plays that worked against defenses that we consistently saw all year. He was also unable to change things at half time much less on-the-fly.

Nassib does not call the plays so the fault does not rest with him. I could be wrong but everything I look at tells me the fault lies with Hackett and, to the extent that he imposes his will on the offensive plan, Doug. I don't like to unfairly criticize the players or the staff but I just can't see that these observations are wrong. If someone gives me objective reason to change my conclusion I will gladly do so.

I am hopeful that the much publicized O changes will yield results. If not we need to go back to the drawing board with respect to everything we are doing on offense.

 

[Cadillac]

Go back and watch the UConn game. Playcalling was crispy. We had Nassib giving fakes, end around passes that worked, Lemon found a soft spot across the middle and Nassib kept hitting him - to the tune of 157 yards! Two of our TDs were some Tecmo Bowl trickery. I thought the Leach disciples would be thrilled or at least encouraged.

We lost because we had key drops in key spots and in the 2nd the defense couldn't stop a QB that could only do one thing: run.

Anyway, on here afterward the same people were doing the same whining about offensive playcalling. Is it just ingrained? Knee-jerk? You could do better bravado B.S.? Myth or not, run run pass was two coaches ago. Fix the D and the ST.

 

[Crusty]

Go back and watch the UConn game. Playcalling was crispy. We had Nassib giving fakes, end around passes that worked, Lemon found a soft spot across the middle and Nassib kept hitting him - to the tune of 157 yards! Two of our TDs were some Tecmo Bowl trickery. I thought the Leach disciples would be thrilled or at least encouraged.

We lost because we had key drops in key spots and in the 2nd the defense couldn't stop a QB that could only do one thing: run.

Anyway, on here afterward the same people were doing the same whining about offensive playcalling. Is it just ingrained? Knee-jerk? You could do better bravado B.S.? Myth or not, run run pass was two coaches ago. Fix the D and the ST.

You are giving me one freakin game? That we lost!

 

[Orijinal]

I think, bottom line, Marrone has to find a system of playcalling that will make the deep ball effective, whether that be making more attempts at intermediate routes or correcting the patterns run by all receivers on any given play.

It seems every time Nassib throws downfield he has one receiver a step ahead of two defenders. That's a small window to throw in to, hence the ball being overthrown by about 3 yards to avoid potential interceptions.

 

[Cadillac]

You are giving me one freakin game? That we lost!

Cool, thanks for reading the first sentence!

 

[orangenirvana]

Don't you get tired of throwing coaches under the bus over and over again?

1. I don't throw coaches under the bus
2. It wouldn't bother me much if I did because the coaches are well-paid professionals. The players are unpaid amateurs.

Tell us please how you know that there was poor playcalling last year? Were you in the huddle? Were you in the booth? Were you in the game plan meetings during the summer and in preparation for each game? Did you have access to the game plans? Did you watch coaches film? Did you attend even one practice?

And about that poor production.

Didn't Bailey have over 1000 rushing?

And didn't Nassib establish a series of season passing records last year? And didn't Provo set season pass receiving records for an SU TE? And didn't Alec Lemon set or approach a season pass catching record last year with 68 catches?

These are all decent players, but hardly the talented players that are need to dominate a defense.

It seems that even with a modicum of talent, the offense, though it was no dynamo obviously, had some solid moments last year due to proper scheming and solid coaching.

And by the way, who exactly was "porous" last season?

Who did we play who had less talent on defense than we did on on offense? Cincinnati? Rutgers? USF? Pitt? Louisville?

All of those teams had more talent than we did and all of them are picked ahead of us this year precisely because all agree that they have more talent.

Over the past two years, the one team we played that seemed to have a "porous" defense was K-State. And I recall that our offense moved the ball up and down the field and I think scored 37 points. And that was with Marcus Sales and Delone Carter, both of whom were gone last season.

Sorry, but your hackneyed complaints about "play calling" and your humanitarian sympathy for the poor players who have been so unmercifully "thrown under the bus" are just not accurate.

Contrary to popular belief, football isn't really that complicated. In the end, it's all about results. Syracuse's offense finished #101 out of 120 FBS teams in 2011. Are you really trying to tell me that that is good?

Maybe I'm alone (I'm not) in thinking that 101 out of 120 is "porous."

The talent excuse does not work because we play teams in the Big East that is extremely comparable from an ability standpoint. Why do you assume that Cincinnati, Rutgers, USF, Pitt, and Louisville all had more talent on defense than SU did on offense? What proof do you have of that? And even if it were true, it's not an overwhelming difference that would excuse a 101/120 finish.

My complaints about the offense are extremely accurate and warranted.

 

[OrangePA]

1. I don't throw coaches under the bus
2. It wouldn't bother me much if I did because the coaches are well-paid professionals. The players are unpaid amateurs.



Contrary to popular belief, football isn't really that complicated. In the end, it's all about results. Syracuse's offense finished #101 out of 120 FBS teams in 2011. Are you really trying to tell me that that is good?

Maybe I'm alone (I'm not) in thinking that 101 out of 120 is "porous."

The talent excuse does not work because we play teams in the Big East that is extremely comparable from an ability standpoint. Why do you assume that Cincinnati, Rutgers, USF, Pitt, and Louisville all had more talent on defense than SU did on offense? What proof do you have of that? And even if it were true, it's not an overwhelming difference that would excuse a 101/120 finish.

My complaints about the offense are extremely accurate and warranted.

You are right about one thing - football is not complicated.

It's not about playcalling and schemes and all the other nonsense - you're right.

It's about talent.

And if you think the Orange had great or even really good talent on offense last year, you're being utterly blind to reality.

And despite that lack of talent, the Orange was good enough to set a number of SU Football offensive records. It did so despite losing two or maybe three of its best players on offense from 2010 - Bartholomew, Carter and Sales. The loss of Sales obviously hurt a great deal.

To answer your question - Yes, of course, Rutgers, Cincy, Pitt and Louisville all had more talent on defense than we did on offense. Rutgers had a very strong defense last year - nobody debates that. And Cincy had its entire defense back from 2010. And Louisville is viewed as the most talented team in the BE.

Recall that Cincy was 10-3, Rutgers 9-4, Louisville 7-6, and Pitt 6-7. And most experts agree that USF was much better than its record indicated.

Again, you're one observation was right. Football is simple. It's a lot like the playground. The teams with the best players usually win.

And right now SU on offense does not have the best players. All the scheming and game planning and play calling - the supposed complicated stuff that you apparently discount - will not change that basic fact.

Your complaints about the offensive scheming and coaching and playcalling remain dead wrong.

 

[billsin01]

You are right about one thing - football is not complicated.

It's not about playcalling and schemes and all the other nonsense - you're right.

It's about talent.

Come on. Seriously? You're going to boil it down to nothing but talent each week? That's it? So how did RU lose to us two years in a row when they obviously have been more talented. Should have lost this past year as well. How did we lose by two TDs to Toledo a few years ago? Nothing but talent?

Ty Willy got fired at ND, Weis got hired and went to two straight BCS games with the leftovers. And Weis wasn't Lombardi.

Football may be simple, but coaching, development, schemes, play-calling, S&C ... I mean, seriously.

And despite that lack of talent, the Orange was good enough to set a number of SU Football offensive records. It did so despite losing two or maybe three of its best players on offense from 2010 - Bartholomew, Carter and Sales. The loss of Sales obviously hurt a great deal.

This is a completely different era of SU football and football in general. We're setting passing records b/c it's what teams do. We've done it for less than a decade. If you want to include the later incarnations of P's era, then maybe 15 years. It's completely intellectually dishonest to argue we're setting records b/c we were proficient offensively.

To answer your question - Yes, of course, Rutgers, Cincy, Pitt and Louisville all had more talent on defense than we did on offense. Rutgers had a very strong defense last year - nobody debates that. And Cincy had its entire defense back from 2010. And Louisville is viewed as the most talented team in the BE.

Recall that Cincy was 10-3, Rutgers 9-4, Louisville 7-6, and Pitt 6-7. And most experts agree that USF was much better than its record indicated.

Umm, who are the experts? Mark May? USF may have been a solid team but they got 5 TOs from ND including two in the end zone and won by a score. They had as much good luck as bad.

Your complaints about the offensive scheming and coaching and playcalling remain dead wrong.

I have no dog in this fight and am not sure of the exact nature of the complaints, but I really don't think people should get that viscerally upset with people questioning the quality of SU's offensive play the last couple years.

 

[kcsu]

Hack was horrible last year. Talent or no talent he was so bad i almost thought for a few series that he was actualy Parian in disguise. Come on we all know that we lack some juice on O but Hack would have made the Saints look like last year. He stunk beyond belief. Now in spite of all that I actually think that we may see him grow into a decent OC this year. Why because he is smart and he is learning. Lets hope that he comes of age soon because last year he couldnt find his ass with a flash light

 

[orangenirvana]

You are right about one thing - football is not complicated.

It's not about playcalling and schemes and all the other nonsense - you're right.

It's about talent.

And if you think the Orange had great or even really good talent on offense last year, you're being utterly blind to reality.

And despite that lack of talent, the Orange was good enough to set a number of SU Football offensive records. It did so despite losing two or maybe three of its best players on offense from 2010 - Bartholomew, Carter and Sales. The loss of Sales obviously hurt a great deal.

To answer your question - Yes, of course, Rutgers, Cincy, Pitt and Louisville all had more talent on defense than we did on offense. Rutgers had a very strong defense last year - nobody debates that. And Cincy had its entire defense back from 2010. And Louisville is viewed as the most talented team in the BE.

Recall that Cincy was 10-3, Rutgers 9-4, Louisville 7-6, and Pitt 6-7. And most experts agree that USF was much better than its record indicated.

Again, you're one observation was right. Football is simple. It's a lot like the playground. The teams with the best players usually win.

And right now SU on offense does not have the best players. All the scheming and game planning and play calling - the supposed complicated stuff that you apparently discount - will not change that basic fact.

Your complaints about the offensive scheming and coaching and playcalling remain dead wrong.

Talent certainly helps, but when you're facing teams with comparable talent week in and week out, it also helps to have good coaching (scheme, game adjustments, playcalling, etc.) on your side.

The Orangemen did not have really good talent on offense last year. Far from it. But no defense in the Big East had really good talent, so in the end, it's a wash.

I couldn't care less about "SU Football offensive records." The offense finished #101 in the country in total offense. Period.

"Yes, of course" those teams had more talent on defense than SU did on offense? Based on what?

Good scheming and game planning and play calling can offset slight talent disadvantages. And if SU has talent disadvantages in the Big East conference, then that is exactly what it is - slight.

#101

My complaints about the offensive scheming and coaching and playcalling remain on the money until proven otherwise.

 

[Crusty]

Orangenirvana is on point. Again, I ask what is the objective criteria that leads one to concule that Hackett is an "up and comer". Adrea writes any garbage to provide content and she provides no support for he stupid statement.

Hopefully, Hackett will grow and the O will improve but for now would anybodyhire him away with his body of work thus far? I don't think so.

 

[OrangePA]

Talent certainly helps, but when you're facing teams with comparable talent week in and week out, it also helps to have good coaching (scheme, game adjustments, playcalling, etc.) on your side.

The Orangemen did not have really good talent on offense last year. Far from it. But no defense in the Big East had really good talent, so in the end, it's a wash.

I couldn't care less about "SU Football offensive records." The offense finished #101 in the country in total offense. Period.

"Yes, of course" those teams had more talent on defense than SU did on offense? Based on what?

Good scheming and game planning and play calling can offset slight talent disadvantages. And if SU has talent disadvantages in the Big East conference, then that is exactly what it is - slight.

#101

My complaints about the offensive scheming and coaching and playcalling remain on the money until proven otherwise.

Your complaints remain dead wrong.

But, shower us with your football acumen.

What schemes would you have introduced last year? What coaching techniques would you have employed?

And while you're giving us your point of view, tells us about your coaching background.

A few more things.

Were you at any of the games last year? Did you miss Cincy and Louisville just muscling our offense? That Cincy game was not even close. They out and out beat our offense up.

Did you miss how Rutgers just shut down our WRs - how we could not get anybody open?

Have you followed the recruiting trail and reviewed the defensive stats?

Everybody was aware of just how talented the Rutgers defense was last year - Marrone even said it would be the toughest defense we would face all year.

Once again, we lost to teams that were just better than we were. It's just that simple.

The scheme and the coaching were tailored to the talent.

You can't throw 75 yard passes when you don't have WRs who can't get of the LOS or stretch the defense. You can't run a spread option when you have a QB with average feet and no legitimate back-up at that position.

Thanks for playing, but you're still dead wrong.

 

[OrangePA]

Hack was horrible last year. Talent or no talent he was so bad i almost thought for a few series that he was actualy Parian in disguise. Come on we all know that we lack some juice on O but Hack would have made the Saints look like **** last year. He stunk beyond belief. Now in spite of all that I actually think that we may see him grow into a decent OC this year. Why because he is smart and he is learning. Lets hope that he comes of age soon because last year he couldnt find his ass with a flash light

Explain how.

Fill the board with your football intelligence. How would you have made our WRs better or our QB better or our OL better? Tell us.

And what about our defense, any problems there?

Or special teams, any problems there? What would you have done about our KO specialist? How would you have made him better?

Or our punter? What would you have done to make him better?

 

[Ozcuse]

Your complaints remain dead wrong.

But, shower us with your football acumen.

What schemes would you have introduced last year? What coaching techniques would you have employed?

And while you're giving us your point of view, tells us about your coaching background.

A few more things.

Were you at any of the games last year? Did you miss Cincy and Louisville just muscling our offense? That Cincy game was not even close. They out and out beat our offense up.

Did you miss how Rutgers just shut down our WRs - how we could not get anybody open?

Have you followed the recruiting trail and reviewed the defensive stats?

Everybody was aware of just how talented the Rutgers defense was last year - Marrone even said it would be the toughest defense we would face all year.

Once again, we lost to teams that were just better than we were. It's just that simple.

The scheme and the coaching were tailored to the talent.

You can't throw 75 yard passes when you don't have WRs who can't get of the LOS or stretch the defense. You can't run a spread option when you have a QB with average feet and no legitimate back-up at that position.

Thanks for playing, but you're still dead wrong.

If it's all on the players talent level then explain what happened in the WVU game. Did our players all take steroids before the game and then revert back to their normal talent levels for the next 5 games?

Before WVU we played Toledo neck and neck, and Tulane neck and neck. Are you saying our talent level was equivalent to theirs? Whose fault is that?


My opinion is that we had players good enough to win as evidenced by the WVU game but inconsistent coaching and inexperienced play (on the defense/special teams especially) caused some real head scratchers i.e. the Uconn, Rutgers and Pitt games where mistakes cost us a chance if not blew the win.

 

[OrangePA]

Come on. Seriously? You're going to boil it down to nothing but talent each week? That's it? So how did RU lose to us two years in a row when they obviously have been more talented. Should have lost this past year as well. How did we lose by two TDs to Toledo a few years ago? Nothing but talent?

Ty Willy got fired at ND, Weis got hired and went to two straight BCS games with the leftovers. And Weis wasn't Lombardi.

Football may be simple, but coaching, development, schemes, play-calling, S&C ... I mean, seriously.



This is a completely different era of SU football and football in general. We're setting passing records b/c it's what teams do. We've done it for less than a decade. If you want to include the later incarnations of P's era, then maybe 15 years. It's completely intellectually dishonest to argue we're setting records b/c we were proficient offensively.



Umm, who are the experts? Mark May? USF may have been a solid team but they got 5 TOs from ND including two in the end zone and won by a score. They had as much good luck as bad.



I have no dog in this fight and am not sure of the exact nature of the complaints, but I really don't think people should get that viscerally upset with people questioning the quality of SU's offensive play the last couple years.

These are very good questions.

ND was better under Weiss for a limited period of time because the players Ty Willingham brought to the program matured. When those players left Weiss struggled monumentally, don't you remember?

Weiss the so-called genius had a horrible record at ND and was fired because of it.

I have read numerous articles this offseason about USF being very talented - that the team lost a bunch of games last season that it should not have lost. Plus, I watched them play last year - they were far superior to the Orange at every position. From QB to WR to OL. And if you didn't see that you were not paying attention.

Do teams with inferior talent win games against superior teams? Of course they do. SU trashed WVU last year even though we obviously were not as good as the Mountaineers.

And in 2010 we beat some teams that were clearly more talented.

The point is that for the most part, the team with the better talent wins.

In 2011 SU won 8 games and ran and threw the bowl up and down the field against K-State. Does that mean that Hackett was a great coach that year?

As far as records are concerned, I really don't get what you're trying to say. At what point do we start to assess the value of records? Do we start in 2007 or 2008 or 2001?

Or do we have to begin this year?

Wow.

 

[orangenirvana]

Your complaints remain dead wrong.

It's so easy to call a poster "dead wrong" when you have no argument to refute what he's saying, isn't it?

But, shower us with your football acumen.

What schemes would you have introduced last year? What coaching techniques would you have employed?

And while you're giving us your point of view, tells us about your coaching background.

Ah yes, the tried-and-true "I'd like to see you do it."

I'm not a football coach. But if I was one, I would implement a creative scheme that would at least finish in the Top 100 among the 120 FBS programs. And if I failed that, then I would be shocked if I was retained.

And despite not being a football coach, I know a struggling football coach when I see one. An offense that ranks #101 may be good enough for you, but it's not good enough for me and it shouldn't be good enough for anyone.

And I would certainly hope that if we see another type of performance in 2012, it won't be good enough for Marrone, either.

Were you at any of the games last year? Did you miss Cincy and Louisville just muscling our offense? That Cincy game was not even close. They out and out beat our offense up.

Did you miss how Rutgers just shut down our WRs - how we could not get anybody open?

Yep, those were dominant SEC defenses that will be remembered for decades. Oh wait, no they aren't, and no they won't. How many players were drafted from those three teams? A whopping three - two from Cincinnati, one from Louisville (7th round), none from Rutgers. None chosen in the first round. Wow, no wonder Hackett's offense couldn't finish in the Top 100 against powerhouse defenses like that week in and week out. No coach in the world could come up with schemes and game plans that would perform better than Hackett's did considering the ultimate defenses his overmatched talent-deprived inferior players had to face those days.

Have you followed the recruiting trail and reviewed the defensive stats?

Wait - I thought recruiting rankings didn't count? Or are we to only ignore the recruiting experts when they evaluate Syracuse recruiting classes? Unless the evaluations are positive.

Once again, we lost to teams that were just better than we were. It's just that simple.

The scheme and the coaching were tailored to the talent.

You can't throw 75 yard passes when you don't have WRs who can't get of the LOS or stretch the defense. You can't run a spread option when you have a QB with average feet and no legitimate back-up at that position.

Your logic for years has been that all coaches are the same, there are no good coaches or bad coaches, only good and bad players. It's pretty ridiculous.

It's okay to evaluate a coach and conclude that the coach did a poor job relative to his peers. Really, you won't go to hell, I promise.

Thanks for playing, but you're still dead wrong.

There it is again. "Dead wrong." Yet, you've done nothing to prove that I'm even a little wrong, much less "dead wrong." Maybe someday.

 

[kcsu]

Explain how.

Fill the board with your football intelligence. How would you have made our WRs better or our QB better or our OL better? Tell us.

And what about our defense, any problems there?

Or special teams, any problems there? What would you have done about our KO specialist? How would you have made him better?

Or our punter? What would you have done to make him better?

Orange PA first of all let me tell you that if i ever need legal help you will get my vote as you stay on point about as good as anyone i have ever come across and i appreciate your passion. As to Hack being a good OC last year the evidence is beyond discussion beyond a lack of talent and is not worth debating anymore. Hack was horrible. His play calling was weak and predictable. Play calling in the red zone was strange at best almost like he was playing Madden. He didnt take advantage of our strengths such as Macy being a good snapper and going out of the gun in situations other than 3rd and long or rolling Nassib out of the pocket realizing that Ryan throws his best ball while moving. Personel decisions were out of the twilight zone. Foster on a slant at the goal line. Not using AAM on short down situations. I could on and on. His use of the clock reminded me of P days and i often wondered if he had early onset of dementia. Conservative play when we had the chance to put a team away such as the Rutgers game. Not realizing that Smith was a viable option to Baily and beating baily down some badly that he was a shell of a back the last three games. Not getting a second QB any snaps. I could on and on and on. Sure we lacked talent but Hack made a bad situation horrible. If George had been leading this O last year do you think he would have done better? Won more games? See to me when i review a coach my primary criteria is how would our coaches have done with the other team and how would they have done with ours. In almost every game last year i would have taken the opposing teams OC over Hack. Other than the magic of the WV game i cant think of one game that i would have said that Hack out coached his opponent. Not one game where i came away thinking that he called a great game. Actually i cant think of one half last year sans WV that i came away thinking great game calling guys. Please realize that he stunk last year If he had been in school he would have flunked out. At almost any other D1 school he would have been demoted or fired. He was simply a disaster.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

What schemes would you have introduced last year? What coaching techniques would you have employed?

Last season if I was in charge...

1. Ant Bailey would not have been a one dimensional player. Last season the staff took the school's all-time best dual threat back (I'm not 100% sure what that means exactly, just acknowledging that he has the most prolific match of rushing and receiving stats in school history) and converted him into a single threat back.

2. Harris and Kose wouldn't have seen the field much if at all, in favor of spreading the field with an additional wideout or back that actually poses some threat to advance the ball. No more playing 10 on 11.

3. I would have wiped my butt with the page of the playbook that has that ridiculous bunch formation and flushed it.

4. I wouldn't have burned Ameen-Moore's redshirt, and if I did, I would have burned it long and good.

5. The offense would have moved at a quicker pace before the snap. Quicker getting the play in, quicker substitutions, quicker getting to the line, because I wouldn't give a defense all the time in the world to assess our formation and personnel.

6. I would have game planned to the passing game. It would be clear that the objective each game would be to get Lemon/Provo/Bailey 25 receptions a game between them.

7. I would have gone for the TD against Buttgers. And I would have gotten it.

8. Fans would have never heard that my offensive game plan was to hope that if the offense did just enough to hang around for three quarters that we might have a chance to win it in the 4th.

The net result of all of these changes would have been an offense that forces the defense to account for more threats on the field to all parts of the field, without giving the defense much time to think.

And while you're giving us your point of view, tells us about your coaching background.

How about I don't, because if you haven't noticed we're posting on a message board named syracuseFAN.com and being a coach isn't a prerequisite for posting.

I challenge any poster here to explain to me why any of the above 8 changes would have been a mistake.

 

[orangenirvana]

As far as records are concerned, I really don't get what you're trying to say. At what point do we start to assess the value of records? Do we start in 2007 or 2008 or 2001?

Or do we have to begin this year?

Wow.

As far as assessing the value of records, how about using the following standard - when your record-breaking season results in #101 out of 120 FBS teams, then the value of those records is equivalent to that of dog poo and can be pretty much ignored.

 

[GoSU96]

As far as assessing the value of records, how about using the following standard - when your record-breaking season results in #101 out of 120 FBS teams, then the value of those records is equivalent to that of dog poo and can be pretty much ignored.

101st?

In what, because it certaintly isn't any kept by the NCAA.

 

[Ozcuse]

If I was coach, I would have gone up to the Toledo OC Matt Campbell (their head coach as of 12/12/12 ) after our game this year and offered him the OC job on the spot. They ranked 8th in the nation in scoring offense (42.2 pts/game) with MAC talent. Toledo's offense with BCS talent being played in the dome would be something fun to watch and it's not as one dimensional as Leach's offense. The guy was a BOSS at recruiting as well.

http://www.utrockets.com/ViewArticl...B_OEM_ID=18000&ATCLID=204987252&Q_SEASON=2012


I would have also told Campbell to tell their stud WR Eric Page to change his name to Derrick Page and re-recruit him as a freshman to SU (joking, kinda).

 

[orangenirvana]

101st?

In what, because it certaintly isn't any kept by the NCAA.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/statistics/team/_/stat/total

 

[NovaOrange]

I challenge any poster here to explain to me why any of the above 8 changes would have been a mistake.[/quote]
I will give it a try I disagree with
3. I would have wiped my butt with the page of the playbook that has that ridiculous bunch formation and flushed it.

Not all bunch formations are garbage. The bunch if ran correctly can give you space by picks & crossing. It also allows you a one on one match up on the backside with your stud receiver. Example a bunch formation ran while Mike Williams was on the backside would have done wonders. I am not going to say we didn't struggle in that formation because we did but that doesn't mean it doesn't work and can't work with more reps this spring and fall. Timing is very important for a offense and wide receivers have to be smooth and they need to pre read the defense pre snap when playing zone so all of them know what there doing and on the same page when working that close in with each other.

5. The offense would have moved at a quicker pace before the snap. Quicker getting the play in, quicker substitutions, quicker getting to the line, because I wouldn't give a defense all the time in the world to assess our formation and personnel.
This is a very common misconception by fans. It's always a lot easier said then done. Your either a no huddle team all the time or have a two minute offense and sub during the game. When you sub like you suggest you also slow down the quick attack for 5 additional seconds at least which would give the defense a chance to match personnel and adjust. Quick queston for you how long do you think it takes the Mike to make the call according to the offense? A defense can be set up easy in 5 seconds so unless your moving Oregon speed the no huddle isn't as great as you think. I know you never said no huddle in number 5 but not sure what the difference would have been by the Oline sprinting to the line instead of jogging.

6. I would have game planned to the passing game. It would be clear that the objective each game would be to get Lemon/Provo/Bailey 25 receptions a game between them.
So no matter what those three players get targeted around 30 times (since your not going to go 25 for 25) this isn't pop warner you have plays for certain people however when the defense starts jumping those players you go else where. Call BS on this one

7. I would have gone for the TD against Buttgers. And I would have gotten it.
You can go for 6 all you want but you hav zero idea how that would have turned out. You can't statethat as a fact no matter how you want to spin it

 

[JeremyCuse]

Some really good posts in this thread. Regardless of whether you like Hackett or not its clear based on all last year that the play calling was below average and in some cases down right awful. From the end around to Provo inside the 20, to the Rutgers game disasters: 3rd and 1 circle route to Bailey, 1st and goal slant to a true freshmen who had caught zero passes up to that point and who had been sitting on the sidelines while we ran it down there throat that drive.

As others have pointed out this is without mentioning the bizarre play calling that didnt match down and distance and the lack of any sort of spread formations that actually include 3 ro 4 WR's. Splitting out Adam Harris and the back up TE into the formation was useless and was no threat to the defense.