New QB?

[cuseincincy]

I didn't see this article referenced anywhere else. Found this little gem kind of surprising in their Syracuse section: http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=mh-huguenin_big_east_football_spring_preview_022812

Buzz: The rushing attack was weak last season, and improvement in that facet has to be the spring priority. The Orange lost its best lineman (G Andrew Tiller) and TB Antwon Bailey, so the going could be tough. Syracuse also needs a new starting quarterback and a new starting tight end.

It was just surprising to me for a "national" writer to state that. I would think most people nationally think SU is pretty happy with having a 3rd year starting SR QB who won a bowl game as a soph. I know there's some differing of opinion on Nassib but I think a lot of people feel like I do (as usual. I wouldn't mind having a better QB than Nassib but I also believe he can do just fine, with some help. He reminds me of a typical Big 10 type QB that always seem to have big senior years. I can see that happening this year for SU.

 

[Upstate]

He probably looked at the roster, saw Ryan was listed as a senior (which he is academically) and wrote the story. I understand the confusion

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

It's called lazy reporting. The guy wrote a brief preview based on a glance at the roster (with its massively confusing system of class years) and post-season accolades.

 

[SU2NASA]

I agree. It's time for the return of the freeze option and the start of the Ashton Broyld Show.

 

[kcsu]

Are we the only school that list players the way we do? Is this unique to us kind of like an upper or lower injury

 

[Hoov50]

Are we the only school that list players the way we do? Is this unique to us kind of like an upper or lower injury

Unique and IMHO dumb. If they insist on doing it that way at least have another column for year of eligibility.

 

[jtorange]

Unique and IMHO dumb. If they insist on doing it that way at least have another column for year of eligibility.

This is blatantly obvious. Rather alarming that "those in control" apparently disagree.

 

[JoeSU]

This is blatantly obvious. Rather alarming that "those in control" apparently disagree.

I think the rationale behind this system is to reflect Marrone's policy that the RS year is not automatic, and is not awarded until after the player's Sr. season. Thus, Nassib's eligibility and academic standing are considered identical until this point in his career. For many non-contributing players, this policy translates into taking their degree and moving on after 4 years, which IMO is as it should be.

 

[OrangeXtreme]

It's how to tell the diference between "credible" writers who do the research, and the fly-by-night crowd that tries to cobb together 120 articles in 60 days.

 

[dollarbill44]

I don't think losing the "best lineman" from last year's team is that big of a hurdle to overcome. Sure, Tiller was serviceable, but it's not like it was a sure thing that if we needed 1 yard that we could just run behind him.

 

[SU2NASA]

I don't think losing the "best lineman" from last year's team is that big of a hurdle to overcome. Sure, Tiller was serviceable, but it's not like it was a sure thing that if we needed 1 yard that we could just run behind him.

Still mad at Marrone for kicking a FG when we had the ball six inches from a first down inside the 1 against Rutgers with the game on the line. If you can't get 6 inches with the game on the line, you don't deserve to win.

 

[xc84]

I don't think losing the "best lineman" from last year's team is that big of a hurdle to overcome. Sure, Tiller was serviceable, but it's not like it was a sure thing that if we needed 1 yard that we could just run behind him.

And don't all teams lose many of their best players each year? Most "best" players are seniors or if they are not but really good, they frequently leave school before their last year of eligibility is done to make some money in the pros (e.g. Jones). It's college football. The only get 4 years and then they all leave.

 

[Hoov50]

Still mad at Marrone for kicking a FG when we had the ball six inches from a first down inside the 1 against Rutgers with the game on the line. If you can't get 6 inches with the game on the line, you don't deserve to win.

I took that theory too far this past season. We had a 6-2, 215 fullback who rushed for over 900 yards in our seven games. In a game against our rival while leading 3-0, I allowed myself to be talked into going for it on 4th and literally an inch from our own 20. Needless, to say we didn't get it and ended up losing the game, at least due in part to that decision!

 

[CbusCuse]

I took that theory too far this past season. We had a 6-2, 215 fullback who rushed for over 900 yards in our seven games. In a game against our rival while leading 3-0, I allowed myself to be talked into going for it on 4th and literally an inch from our own 20. Needless, to say we didn't get it and ended up losing the game, at least due in part to that decision!

Hey, nothing is 100% assured to happen. Just because it didn't work out on that particular occasion doesn't mean it was the wrong call. You make a call based on what you believe gives you the best odds. Sometimes the dice show craps.