No sure what to think | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

No sure what to think

I get the rationale, these bubble screens work for other teams, why not us? It just seems that our screens have our players outnumbered 2 to 3 or at best 2 on 2 but our lead blocker doesn't get the job done... It's poor scheming and/or poor blocking technique that makes the play look really ugly...
 
TheCusian said:
This is bordering on insane. Our 2nd string QB who is a redshirt freshman couldn't go as fast. Not a harbinger for the rest of the season. Also - McDonald said only 10% of the offense was available for Wilson. Going fast was not in the cards once Hunt went down.

I call BS on the 10%. That's a coach making an excuse that sounds good. No way Wilson, whose in his 2nd year, only knows 10% of the offense. It's impossible.
 
CIL said:
Chris people, it's one game and we won. Any of you ever ever play golf? Maybe you bogey the first hole. Bounce back and make a birdie. Do you all really think we won't improve during the season? Do you think Shafer and co didn't realize there's work to be done? Hunt plays the whole game we probably win by 3 TD's.

3 TD's. I dint think so. He wasn't doing much and if not for the PTG TD, he would have led zero TD drives. Plus, he couldn't play defense and slow Nova down who was dominating the clock.
 
I call BS on the 10%. That's a coach making an excuse that sounds good. No way Wilson, whose in his 2nd year, only knows 10% of the offense. It's impossible.
What he said was that 90% of the game plan was for Hunt. that is not the same thing as Wilson only knows 10% of the offense.
 
That may be the case, but something is radically wrong when you're backup qb, who has been here as long as you're OC only knows 10% of the offense.
I don't think "knows" is the correct term - the paraphrased quote says "available. They probably only had confidence that he could execute a portion of the offense at game speed.

Keep in mind that Wilson was in a three-way battle for the backup spot until late in camp. I don't know how they allot practice reps, but at most he'd get a quarter of the reps if all were equal. If QB1 usually got half the reps (probably significantly more during the week the game plan was installed), then the other three were getting around 15% or less. There were probably plays that he barely ran during camp that made it into the game plan, or gameweek tweaks to those plays that he didn't practice at all.

Or, he may "know" more plays that weren't in the game plan, so the rest of the offense didn't work on them recently and they didn't want to risk mistakes by others. This leads to questions about adaptability and in-game adjustments, which are valid. But it is the first game and this week's set are the only plays they've worked on intensely. It becomes easier to switch things up as the season progresses and the team has worked on multiple variations of the offense for different opponents.
 
I would be interested in the rationale behind all the lateral passes. You watch the usual high octane offenses that Gundy, Sumlin, Kingsbury, and Briles have and it's all pushing the ball downfield. I really hope some people are watching Baylor right now. They have 24 points in the 1st quarter and I have yet to see a pass that hasn't traveled at least 7 yards downfield. Even the running plays are straight ahead attacking the defense. I've never heard of an offense, or at least a successful one that wants to go laterally.
Maybe McDonald should have visited Baylor, Auburn, and A&M after last season to see how the hurry up off offense should actually be run effectively.
 
Still smarting from Friday night's game.

What an awful performance and what a let down.
I'm trying to be rational and get my head around this one as to what it means for the future. If one puts a lot and too much stock in this one game then the future looks bleak. But that's too reductionistic and simplistic as some things need to play out before this can be fairly assessed. This program (other than vs elite teams) seems to more time then not play to its level of competition. And I want to believe that Nova will be good, real good going forward with a lot of w's.

That said this game was oh so frustrating to watch and other than the W I didn't come out with many positives. Tough to get too excited having to go to OT to beat an FCS team. And not to sound like the old man on the porch...

That dome environment is now like a Crunch game and an absolute non stop assault on the senses with noise (I guess some call it "music"), ads, and oh yeah a football game. Theres no break in the assault. It's really not that much fun anymore to sit there subjected to this. If the performance is good it's easier to overlook. With this performance it gets like torture to sit there knowing generally whats going to transpire. That last drive they had before the missed FG was brutal and so predictable that I left as soon as they got the ball.

I could take no satisfaction in the result, win included as the negatives at this point so overshadowed that. To not put a spy on that qb is beyond the pale to me. To not scheme better to stop the kid or at least adjust to slow him down a bit is beyond belief. To not be able to punch it in with MULTIPLE chances from the one against an FCS team is mind boggling.

They mean to tell me they no longer have a package with two or three backs in the back field overloading power to one side, vs relying on staying with one back and putting that pressure on the OL who clearly are in flux, injured and a work in progress. And then sticking with having the qb stay in shotgun. Gotta be kidding me. Not getting more vertical with the playcalling when your back up shows enough in drive one to be competent. The Keystone cop nature of the general offensive system when you don't have the skill and personnel for it just begs for errors, mistakes and underperformance as the original post alludes too.

And then when they score or finally make a good play all the stupid gyrating, posturing, primping and celebrating, this over an FCS team?! Really? Hard to watch. Just get it done celebrate a little in a class fashion and move on. This shows no team discipline compounded and evidenced further by not staying in lanes on the punt return, or with the D ends all too many time taking the inside track letting the qb outside so often and all this was compounded by Hunts lack of judgement. I hope Shaffer is erring on the side of being a tough taskmaster and not too much of a players coach, and seeing this all lack of discipline is concerning that he's erring on the wrong side of this.

And those God awful uniforms. Again old man on the porch but it gets harder and harder to keep identifying the history associated with this program when it feels less and less like "yours" which is the end effect of all this. So that's a lot of negatives on the one side. Ones that I fear will set the stage for still another season of flirting with only .500 at best when I hoped (irrationally so I presume) we might be beyond this.

The Upsides? Wow the crowd and students were great and here's hoping they stick around (which the casual fan just may do seeing the type of game it was enjoying it for what it was not knowing the nuances involved). As for the game itself it's only game one of a season where we had to replace so many, with injuries too this within a program just getting back up on it's feet over the last five years. Shaffer has shown the ability to refocus the troops, bounce back from poor performances, has improved recruiting and was clearly upset in the presser recognizing what the magnitude of the problems and what need be done despite the coach speak platitudes coming out of his mouth.

We can only try to keep the glass half full with hopes for improvements I guess which gets increasingly harder after performances and experiences like this. And as the OP topic suggests we really don't know what to think from this so we go on with hope, cross the fingers the Nova game is an aberration and see what happens.

Did I mention how God awful those unis were...
 
Last edited:
3 TD's. I dint think so. He wasn't doing much and if not for the PTG TD, he would have led zero TD drives. Plus, he couldn't play defense and slow Nova down who was dominating the clock.

I agree, I think it is that he can only actually run about 10% of it effectively with his skill-set. Thinking that is what he meant.
 
Oregon's offense has zero to do with clock management either. They could have the ball 13 min all game and score 75 points and win by 50.

Time of possession means nothing to them.
 
This is bordering on insane. Our 2nd string QB who is a redshirt freshman couldn't go as fast. Not a harbinger for the rest of the season. Also - McDonald said only 10% of the offense was available for Wilson.

Going fast was not in the cards once Hunt went down.

The next question you have to ask - why didn't they have a play book ready for Wilson in case Hunt got injured or something like what happened.

What - that is a horrible thing to say by our OC - consistently shows a lack of planning skill. Now I'm getting mad - we pay these people a lot of money to get these simple what if crap accounted for.

If you are going to have a motto - next man up - you better have a play book especially at the QB level to match the style. amateur level coaching!
 
I don't think "knows" is the correct term - the paraphrased quote says "available. They probably only had confidence that he could execute a portion of the offense at game speed.

Keep in mind that Wilson was in a three-way battle for the backup spot until late in camp. I don't know how they allot practice reps, but at most he'd get a quarter of the reps if all were equal. If QB1 usually got half the reps (probably significantly more during the week the game plan was installed), then the other three were getting around 15% or less. There were probably plays that he barely ran during camp that made it into the game plan, or gameweek tweaks to those plays that he didn't practice at all.

Or, he may "know" more plays that weren't in the game plan, so the rest of the offense didn't work on them recently and they didn't want to risk mistakes by others. This leads to questions about adaptability and in-game adjustments, which are valid. But it is the first game and this week's set are the only plays they've worked on intensely. It becomes easier to switch things up as the season progresses and the team has worked on multiple variations of the offense for different opponents.

It's a fair point about splitting reps in camp, but I have a hard time buying our backup qb has that high a % of our offense unavailable to him to run. Tell me it's half but not 90%- he didn't just walk in off the street. It's only the most important position on the field
 
I guess I am at the point where I don't see why many thought we would be any better than last year? I hope we are but we lost bromley, spruill, Mackey and Jerome who wasn't sexy running back but was pretty good. I just don't see why people thought we would be a lot better. Granted I didn't anticipate this game being so close but this program isn't even close to taking any opponent for granted. I still think we will be fine but the over the top stuff was just that. All because we beat Bc and Minny to finish. Our coordinators are up and down and last Friday they were both down and that is what you get.

We were so so close to being 5-7 last year with 3-4 pretty bad blow outs. That said I like Shafer a lot even when we play like we did a Friday. I get people being disappointed but people need to grasp reality. Are we seriously looming at Baylor and asking why we can't do that? Please
 
GoSU96 said:
I guess one happy way to look at it that they managed to hit their average. I'm sorry, but the kid has been in the program for a year, had a spring and August camp to learn more that 10% of the offense. Here's a thought, run the ball with one of your four TB's effectively and make some first downs. There are more plays than the zone read and stretch I hope. There are redshirt freshmen starting all the time that are able to execute more that 10% of the offense.

They said the 3-3 stack was causing problems for Miller and Wilson. That's why the run game looked bad.

The kid knew more that 10%. McDonald said the the 90% was tailored for Hunt. That combined with the weird defense compounded the usual first game jitters and mistakes.

I'm not that worried, honestly.
 
What he said was that 90% of the game plan was for Hunt. that is not the same thing as Wilson only knows 10% of the offense.

That is different but I don't believe that either. That means 90% of the plays were going to be read options or something using Hunt running.
 
I'm not overly concerned with the performance, but then again, i thought this was a 6-6 team anyway.

That being said, my concerns are pretty basic:

1. Inability for the oline to blow the villanova d-line off the ball. D-1 lineman should be moving 1-aa linemen.
2. Lack of playmakers on defense. I think it's been said, but Thompson and Johnson seem to be our most explosive DEs, and they are marginalized playing as way-undersized DTs. Davis was a no show. Welsh was a no show except for maybe one play. Someone other than Eskridge and Crume is going to have to step up.
3. Personnel groupings on offense are weird. I dont like how McDonald is so taken with spreading the ball around. As far as i can tell, the best offenses give you heavy doses of their best players. To me, that means almost every play should go to a RB, Broyld, Estime or West (downfield for that matter). Way too many rbs are used. Gulley should be getting 3/4 series.

I am less concerned about the offense because i think they intentionally kept it pretty vanilla. I think you will see more of Hunt running, and more downfield looks, once we start playing the bigger boys (i.e., after the C. Mich game).
 
anomander said:
That is my main thing. I'm not bitching because I want to complain. I'm extremely disappointed. I had extremely high expectations, and feel we have the players to be a very good team. That performance was just so disheartening. I think most here finally felt it was the beginning of a new era and it just felt like more of the same BS.

Think it's time to flush it and move on. There are lots of reasons to think they'll get it righted. The best being last seasons finish to the season.

If you want to poke holes and find reasons for being disappointed - they are there after every win/loss. Respect the hell out of you and usually value your take - but this win is not the worst thing to ever happen to Syracuse football.
 
Statesman1 said:
That may be the case, but something is radically wrong when you're backup qb, who has been here as long as you're OC only knows 10% of the offense.

Misstated that - he said that 90% was specifically tailored to Hunts abilities and what he does best.
 
That is different but I don't believe that either. That means 90% of the plays were going to be read options or something using Hunt running.
Yes, I think it is BS as well. I think we were playing not to lose and since we had the lead most of the time they really never changed until it was too late. We were a little more aggressive in the OT's.
 
Crusty said:
What he said was that 90% of the game plan was for Hunt. that is not the same thing as Wilson only knows 10% of the offense.

This was what I was trying to say - honestly was out with the family at a party and didn't have the time to get it right...
 
3 TD's. I dint think so. He wasn't doing much and if not for the PTG TD, he would have led zero TD drives. Plus, he couldn't play defense and slow Nova down who was dominating the clock.


We were driving when he got ejected. We score, get the ball back to start the 3rd and again put some points on the board Villanova cannot go 4 corners on us. Completely different game. One that to me makes complete sense once we get the offense going.
 
BlazeOrange said:
I don't think "knows" is the correct term - the paraphrased quote says "available. They probably only had confidence that he could execute a portion of the offense at game speed. Keep in mind that Wilson was in a three-way battle for the backup spot until late in camp. I don't know how they allot practice reps, but at most he'd get a quarter of the reps if all were equal. If QB1 usually got half the reps (probably significantly more during the week the game plan was installed), then the other three were getting around 15% or less. There were probably plays that he barely ran during camp that made it into the game plan, or gameweek tweaks to those plays that he didn't practice at all. Or, he may "know" more plays that weren't in the game plan, so the rest of the offense didn't work on them recently and they didn't want to risk mistakes by others. This leads to questions about adaptability and in-game adjustments, which are valid. But it is the first game and this week's set are the only plays they've worked on intensely. It becomes easier to switch things up as the season progresses and the team has worked on multiple variations of the offense for different opponents.

That and the stack defense and a new starter at center and LG. Add in the first game usual rust, and a suddenly competitive FCS team? That's exactly why we looked disjointed on offense.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
170,310
Messages
4,884,079
Members
5,991
Latest member
Fowler

Online statistics

Members online
23
Guests online
922
Total visitors
945


...
Top Bottom