Offense with nassib will never be good, I am convinced

[qdawgg]

AB having spent a year in prep school and making the likely assumption that he was provided a playbook, he should not be looked at as just a freshman.

He really didn't play in incredible amount at Milford, not enough to even qualify as a year of experience. Out of 13 games I don't believe he played the entire game. 7 of those 13 games he threw a TOTAL of 12 passes in 7 games and he didn't play at all in 3 games. For the entire year he threw 6 tds, 2 int, and had 2 fumbles. To be fair he did rush for 8 td's. But his stats at Milford go along with what Bees is saying I believe.

 

[Cuseregular]

He really didn't play in incredible amount at Milford, not enough to even qualify as a year of experience. Out of 13 games I don't believe he played the entire game. 7 of those 13 games he threw a TOTAL of 12 passes in 7 games and he didn't play at all in 3 games. For the entire year he threw 6 tds, 2 int, and had 2 fumbles. To be fair he did rush for 8 td's. But his stats at Milford go along with what Bees is saying I believe.

Point I guess being from the extra year he's more physically mature vs an av. freshman, assume too (hopefully) more mentally mature from the extra year then the average freshman all combined with his game changer type talent that Rocco notes which is why we'll see him so much this year which is rarely the case with a "real" true frosh.

The coach at Milford must have been nuts, or influenced by off the field isssues effecting playing time,or maybe they were that good they didn't need him all game long; don't know as I did not and do not follow what goes on there. Marrone and co. however sees the ability of this kid and that's why we'll see him a lot. and I'll take it that its true that Marrone said also he'll get his shot at qb next year.

 

[qdawgg]

Point I guess being from the extra year he's more physically mature vs an av. freshman, assume too (hopefully) more mentally mature from the extra year then the average freshman all combined with his game changer type talent that Rocco notes which is why we'll see him so much this year which is rarely the case with a "real" true frosh.

The coach at Milford must have been nuts, or influenced by off the field isssues effecting playing time,or maybe they were that good they didn't need him all game long; don't know as I did not and do not follow what goes on there. Marrone and co. however sees the ability of this kid and that's why we'll see him a lot. and I'll take it that its true that Marrone said also he'll get his shot at qb next year.

I agree with what your saying, I just wonder if AB was in the backfield as the QB, if we would see more scenarios where he looked like Paulus throwing a bunch of INT's? I don't know the answer, nobody does but there is no doubt in my mind that he will be a good player in the future and hopefully the staff is utilizes him in an effective way this year.

As far as Milford, they had at least 4 - 5 QB's, a couple of the other Norwich guys would know the exact number better then I do but there was a big rotation. If Broyd had been the only good QB there he would have played all of the games but they have an immense amount of talent and try to give everyone with talent time on the field.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Honestly, I'm really tired of complaints about "THE SYSTEM." Personally speaking, I couldn't care less what system we run, provided we move the ball and put points on the board.

With all due respect to anyone tired of hearing about the system, the truth is that until we do move the ball and put points on the board at a better than bottom of the barrel clip you're going to hear about it and should learn to deal with it. Until that happens, yes, it falls under scrutiny. I don't care what we run sounds great in theory but we haven't even been close to seeing if that's true in application.

I never give the D a hard time. Know why? Because we've shown we can have a good D. Something has proven it can work.

I mean geez, we've got people saying we should just turn the whole thing over to Broyld because he's our best athlete- the same strategy we busted on Buttgers for and said how that wasn't a real offense . The talent is that bad here? Really? Think it through.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[RF2044]

With all due respect to anyone tired of hearing about the system, the truth is that until we do move the ball and put points on the board at a better than bottom of the barrel clip you're going to hear about it and should learn to deal with it. Until that happens, yes, it falls under scrutiny. I don't care what we run sounds great in theory but we haven't even been close to seeing if that's true in application.

I never give the D a hard time. Know why? Because we've shown we can have a good D. Something has proven it can work.

I mean geez, we've got people saying we should just turn the whole thing over to Broyld because he's our best athlete- the same strategy we busted on Buttgers for and said how that wasn't a real offense . The talent is that bad here? Really? Think it through.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Turning the keys over to Broyld is over-reactionary and panicky. Like many, I'm excited to see what Broyld an do--and I wouldn't count him out of the QB race next year.

But system doesn't trump execution, in my book. Running an effective offense--doesn't matter what type of offense it is--requires 11 players adequately performing their roles in tandem. You asked if "the talent is that bad here" -- well, let's think it through like you suggest above. To date, we've had a group of subpar WRs and an OL that has been horrendous, putting it mildly. QB has been more than adequate [sorry Millhouse], the RBs have been generally solid -- and I expect that to continue this season, and get even better with Morris / Gus in the pipeline. Similarly, the WR talent seems to finally be improving, and we look better at TE than we have in a long time. But I don't care what kind of system you run, whether it is old school wishbone or a modern spread, you aren't going anywhere if your OL doesn't open holes in the running game or pass block adequately, which they have not done.

THE problem with this offense has been the play of the OL. Lack of playmakers, play calling, etc. have been issues as well, but those are secondary issues. The talent everywhere else is improving, but unfortunately the talent at that one positional unit HAS been that bad and has hamstrung offensive productivity. Go had a post earlier today where he talked about how few running plays we've had of 10+ yards in recent years. Solve that issue, and the offense is going to look a helluva lot better. Solve that issue, and you will see the offense move the ball and put points on the board at a more prolific clip that what we've seen these past three years.

Now, you can certainly make a case that the system deserves criticism. In no way do I disupte that. Faster tempos, more wide open play calling--whatever talking point people want to glom onto to push their agenda, there is merit to each perspective. But if the OL doesn't do it's job, then it won't matter what we run--and that is why I feel like the majority of criticism about the system is off target.

 

[Hoov50]

Point I guess being from the extra year he's more physically mature vs an av. freshman, assume too (hopefully) more mentally mature from the extra year then the average freshman all combined with his game changer type talent that Rocco notes which is why we'll see him so much this year which is rarely the case with a "real" true frosh.

The coach at Milford must have been nuts, or influenced by off the field isssues effecting playing time,or maybe they were that good they didn't need him all game long; don't know as I did not and do not follow what goes on there. Marrone and co. however sees the ability of this kid and that's why we'll see him a lot. and I'll take it that its true that Marrone said also he'll get his shot at qb next year.

The goal of Milford Academy is to get exposure for all of their players. That's why in most cases everyone plays in games. It also seems like the guys who already have solid scholarship offers don't always play as much as the guys who are still looking to get offers.

 

[RF2044]

The goal of Milford Academy is to get exposure for all of their players. That's why in most cases everyone plays in games. It also seems like the guys who already have solid scholarship offers don't always play as much as the guys who are still looking to get offers.

I was going to post something similar, although I qualify that by acknowledging like cuseregular above that I don't follow Milford closely. Don't they also make promises to many players about getting PT at certain positions? Seems like that's what I remember from past reports.

In which case, it could explain why Broyld didn't see full time duty as the "starting" QB.

 

[Hoov50]

I was going to post something similar, although I qualify that by acknowledging like cuseregular above that I don't follow Milford closely. Don't they also make promises to many players about getting PT at certain positions? Seems like that's what I remember from past reports.

In which case, it could explain why Broyld didn't see full time duty as the "starting" QB.

I am not sure about the promises, but I do know that every year they completely tailor their offensive and defensive schemes to showcase their players. I know one of their ex-offensive coordinators and one of the reasons he left was because he had to come up with a offensive systems annually. At first he enjoyed doing that but after a few years he didn't like not being able to develop a single system over multiple years.

 

[Cuseregular]

The goal of Milford Academy is to get exposure for all of their players. That's why in most cases everyone plays in games. It also seems like the guys who already have solid scholarship offers don't always play as much as the guys who are still looking to get offers.

got it thanks Hoov. Always wondered what the prep philosophy was. Is this approach true for most prep schools with respect to football (I'd imagine hoops is different?).

 

[IthacaBarrel]

Most of you missed my point, o line play is horrendous too, I get that, the o line sucked quite a bit even when we were good too. I just think having a NFL type qb wil, never work at Syracuse because the other 10 guys will NEVER be good enough to support him, plain and simple. I don't think nassib stinks he just will never have the support that he needs at Syracuse, just don't see it ever happening. Get a kid that can run, make plays with his feet and throw that ball ok and we will be much better off instead of hoping for drew brews to show up, yeah a guy like broyld.

 

[AZOrange]

It's not the QB, it's not the system, it is the OL.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

ding ding ding...look every position in some respect is important, but if you cant block up front, you certainly cannot run and you really cannot throw. i think Marrone is the right guy for the job, but you have to be able to teach your position and this is a problem that should have been solved by now.

 

[Hoov50]

got it thanks Hoov. Always wondered what the prep philosophy was. Is this approach true for most prep schools with respect to football (I'd imagine hoops is different?).

I am not as familiar with basketball prep schools, but as far as football goes kids either go there to work to qualify academically or for exposure and to get scholarship offer(s). The prep schools normally try to give every kid (at least the ones who can realistically compete) a chance to play. One of my former players is at Milford now, he is a borderline line D1-1AA player so he is hoping to open some eyes and maybe get on offer or two. In early spring each year I have a week when about 3-4 coaches come in each day to talk about any potential players I am coaching. This is because coaches from all over the country come to see the Milford kids during a workout day and where I coach is close enough for them to pop in (many times without warning, apparently they assume I can just leave 20 fifth graders unsupervised while I talk with them). So you can see Milford accomplishes the goal of getting exposure for their players.

 

[Fjoinkay]

I agree that the OL has issues, and I agree that it all starts up front. But we haven't seen 50-plus sacks like we did with GRob before Mitch Browning was brought in for GRob's final season. Under Marrone it seems to me the OL has been average. The OL has not been bottom of the barrel. I think it has been more complicated than just the OL, and perhaps just too complicated period.

SU has more talent on the offensive side this year which is good. Also, I believe the defense this year will be a good unit-above average. But at the end of the day the offense needs to move the chains consistently and score points. I still cringe when I think about the 5 consecutive 3 and outs last year against Tulane. SU moved the ball early and scored points, and then took a nosedive against a poor defense. I'm not sure what that was, but it must be addressed.

 

[RF2044]

I agree that the OL has issues, and I agree that it all starts up front. But we haven't seen 50-plus sacks like we did with GRob before Mitch Browning was brought in for GRob's final season. Under Marrone it seems to me the OL has been average. The OL has not been bottom of the barrel. I think it has been more complicated than just the OL, and perhaps just too complicated period.

Your comments above highlight what the coaching staff did to compensate for the weak OL these past more years. Things like numerous quick slants that everybody knows are coming, but where the QB releases the ball before the pass rush can get there, max protect formations, dual TEs, calling a more limited subset of plays that the coaching staff believes the offense can run effectively, etc. are things that people gripe about and point to as "system" flaws, when in fact they are decisions by design to compensate for both subpar run blocking and poor pass blocking.

Just looking at sacks allowed is deceptive, and doesn't factor in all of the things that the coaching staff was forced to adjust in order to minimize sacks and mask the ineffectual play of the guys up front. I disagree that the OL was anywhere close to average in performance. I contend that if you transplant uconn's OL onto our last two teams, we'd win the BE conference both years--despite the depth and offensive playmaker limitations both squads had. That's how much our OL has held offensive production back, in my opinion.

 

[rrlbees]

Your comments above highlight what the coaching staff did to compensate for the weak OL these past more years. Things like numerous quick slants that everybody knows are coming, but where the QB releases the ball before the pass rush can get there, max protect formations, dual TEs, calling a more limited subset of plays that the coaching staff believes the offense can run effectively, etc. are things that people gripe about and point to as "system" flaws, when in fact they are decisions by design to compensate for both subpar run blocking and poor pass blocking.

Just looking at sacks allowed is deceptive, and doesn't factor in all of the things that the coaching staff was forced to adjust in order to minimize sacks and mask the ineffectual play of the guys up front. I disagree that the OL was anywhere close to average in performance. I contend that if you transplant uconn's OL onto our last two teams, we'd win the BE conference both years--despite the depth and offensive playmaker limitations both squads had. That's how much our OL has held offensive production back, in my opinion.

Yep. We compensate for weak pass blocking with multiple TE's, a FB and short quick passes. The raw numbers don't always tell the whole story.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[SoBristol]

People who focus on the OL tend to forget that Pugh was all-league and Tiller got some league honors and got drafted (though not until the 6th round). Even with some soft spots (a smallish C and Hay at one OT), the OL would have looked at least average if we had one better WR and a second RB.

Same this year -- once Pugh is back, the OL should be on a par with what we have at WR or RB.

 

[reedny]

Nassib has to have someone to throw to who can separate and catch the ball. Until then, we'll see stacked-box defenses that shut down our running game and force us into a short passing offense that can't move the ball down the field.

Maybe Sales and an improved Lemon will turn things around. But until we can stretch defenses out, or run the ball down other teams' throats, our offense is going to be predictably lame. Blaming this on Nassib isn't fair.

 

[Fjoinkay]

Your comments above highlight what the coaching staff did to compensate for the weak OL these past more years. Things like numerous quick slants that everybody knows are coming, but where the QB releases the ball before the pass rush can get there, max protect formations, dual TEs, calling a more limited subset of plays that the coaching staff believes the offense can run effectively, etc. are things that people gripe about and point to as "system" flaws, when in fact they are decisions by design to compensate for both subpar run blocking and poor pass blocking.

Just looking at sacks allowed is deceptive, and doesn't factor in all of the things that the coaching staff was forced to adjust in order to minimize sacks and mask the ineffectual play of the guys up front. I disagree that the OL was anywhere close to average in performance. I contend that if you transplant uconn's OL onto our last two teams, we'd win the BE conference both years--despite the depth and offensive playmaker limitations both squads had. That's how much our OL has held offensive production back, in my opinion.

Yep, SU compensates for it's OL like many other teams do, and sack numbers are just one stat. SU has had 3 straight years with 1000 yard rushers, and when you have next to no game in the air that says something about the OL.

Many factors are involved in making plays in the air. I watched perhaps too many bowl games in December and January, and what I saw was a lot plays being made by many teams under pressure similar to what SU's OL gave up last year.

Like I said SU's OL could have been much better each year under Marrone, but in my opinion the OL isn't a disaster or even close to a disaster. The QB and the receivers need to step up too, and I think we've heard this from the staff.

 

[syr02esq]

Will Broyld be like Vince Young coming in for Chance Mock?