Pressure builds at Syracuse as bad years pile up | Syracusefan.com

Pressure builds at Syracuse as bad years pile up

dasher said:
I wonder if that was a hit piece aimed at getting Washington to reconsider and also to influence Neal? Why else would they write an article about Syracuse football in a North Carolina paper? I can't imagine many people caring down there.
Expand...
That might have influenced the direction the article took, but down at the bottom it has a list of the ACC previews they're doing. They're going through the whole conference, previewing each school.
 
jekelish said:
That might have influenced the direction the article took, but down at the bottom it has a list of the ACC previews they're doing. They're going through the whole conference, previewing each school.
Expand...
The article went out of it's way to say we didn't have anyone deserving of #44.
 
dasher said:
The article went out of it's way to say we didn't have anyone deserving of #44.
Expand...
The N&O has a history of covering the entire ACC conference. I've followed it online ever since I got my Master's at Duke in the 80's. I think the article was fair. BTW, who do you think on this team is deserving of #44? Nobody comes to mind? Didn't think so.
 
I think the article is fair. There was something that had me thinking positively about our future defense.

" The Orange ranked No. 27 in the country in total defense (349.2 yards per game) and in the top 40 in both passing and rushing defense"

IMO it would have been even better if we had a half way decent offense.

Now to my point , we all know we lost alot of experience on that side of the ball but could our success on defense be due to scheme more than actually talent of the players? D Davis, Lynch, Eskridge were good players for us, no doubt but none of them were All ACC and none were drafted. Why not be optimistic and say that Bullough and Shafer can out scheme offenses to have a better than expected defense. They run a relentess pressure defense. We can get alot of production with the new starters IMO. Shafer's 2009 defense under Marrone. I believe it was pretty good despite having new starters and a new scheme. We actually had coverted RB's playing LB. Can we do something like that this season? What do you guys think?
 
Last edited:
money3189 said:
I think the article is fair. There was something that had me thinking positively about our future defense.

" The Orange ranked No. 27 in the country in total defense (349.2 yards per game) and in the top 40 in both passing and rushing defense"

IMO it would have been even better if we had a half way decent offense.

Now to my point , we all know we lost alot of experience on that side of the ball but could our success on defense be due to scheme more than actually talent of the players? D Davis, Lynch, Eskridge were good players for us, no doubt but none of these guys were All ACC and none were drafted. Why not be optimistic and say that Bullough and Shafer can out scheme offenses to have a better than expected defense. They run a relentess pressure defense. We can get alot of production with the new starters IMO. Shafer's 2009 defense under Marrone. I believe it was pretty good despite having new starters and a new scheme. We actually had coverted RB's playing LB. Can we do something like that this season? What do you guys think?
Expand...
I absolutely, 100% agree that we have the right scheme on defense for college football and it makes an enormous difference for us.
 
Definitely a fair piece in my mind, especially coming from an outsider in North Carolina.

We need to start 3-0 and then either surprise LSU (I know, not likely) or at least make the game competitive. The narrative could start to turn then.

Cheers,
Neil
 
It's a fair piece. I don't know if Shafer gets 1 year or 2 to bounce back, but the end will come if he doesn't. That's the case for any coach.
 
money3189 said:
I think the article is fair. There was something that had me thinking positively about our future defense.

" The Orange ranked No. 27 in the country in total defense (349.2 yards per game) and in the top 40 in both passing and rushing defense"

IMO it would have been even better if we had a half way decent offense.

Now to my point , we all know we lost alot of experience on that side of the ball but could our success on defense be due to scheme more than actually talent of the players? D Davis, Lynch, Eskridge were good players for us, no doubt but none of them were All ACC and none were drafted. Why not be optimistic and say that Bullough and Shafer can out scheme offenses to have a better than expected defense. They run a relentess pressure defense. We can get alot of production with the new starters IMO. Shafer's 2009 defense under Marrone. I believe it was pretty good despite having new starters and a new scheme. We actually had coverted RB's playing LB. Can we do something like that this season? What do you guys think?
Expand...

Yep. I feel the same. Have said a few times I don't think we see a huge drop off on the defensive side of the ball. The players may be younger, but imo they are slightly more talented. Better talent should negate some of the inexperience.

Defense isn't the side of the ball i'm worried about.
 
dasher said:
Why else would they write an article about Syracuse football in a North Carolina paper?
Expand...
There will be an article about each program. The article included the following schedule:
ACC PREVIEW SCHEDULE

ATLANTIC DIVISION
May 31: No. 1 Florida State
June 7: No. 2 Clemson
June 14: No. 3 N.C. State
June 21: No. 4 Louisville
June 28: No. 5 Boston College
July 5: No. 6 Syracuse
July 12: No. 7 Wake Forest

COASTAL DIVISION
July 19: No. 1 Virginia Tech
July 26: No. 2 Georgia Tech
Aug. 2: No. 3 UNC
Aug. 9: No. 4 Duke
Aug. 16: No. 5 Pitt
Aug. 23: No. 6 Miami
Aug. 30: No. 7 Virginia
Expand...
Did you not read the article? Nothing sinister here.
 
I'll be excited our pressure D is still in top gear once the season starts, especially if the offense can get its head removed from the place it's been since Nassib graduated.

If we have a meh offense, we have a chance to be really good.
 
money3189 said:
...
Now to my point , we all know we lost alot of experience on that side of the ball but could our success on defense be due to scheme more than actually talent of the players? D Davis, Lynch, Eskridge were good players for us, no doubt but none of them were All ACC and none were drafted. Why not be optimistic and say that Bullough and Shafer can out scheme offenses to have a better than expected defense. ..
Expand...

In the back half of 2011, with some of our better defenders out, we weren't stopping anyone -- same schemes, too many injuries. Schemes are great, but you need veteran players, with adequate size, to make the schemes effective. Sprinkle in a few real good, younger players. I really don't get an analysis that starts with our defensive stats in 2014, then 2015 will be ... Have to consider how the current players in each unit stack up against their predecessors.

On the other side of the ball, I throw out the stats for the second half of the 2014 season. It all starts with a QB, and we were rotating back-up Joes who just weren't ready to start.
 
anomander said:
Yep. I feel the same. Have said a few times I don't think we see a huge drop off on the defensive side of the ball. The players may be younger, but imo they are slightly more talented. Better talent should negate some of the inexperience.

Defense isn't the side of the ball i'm worried about.
Expand...
I've always felt a healthy John Raymon, alongside Thompson will give any offensive line nightmares.
 
Moontan said:
There will be an article about each program. The article included the following schedule:

Did you not read the article? Nothing sinister here.
Expand...
Not my point. If I am a running back from N.C. and read that article, in a North Carolina paper. I might think it was aimed at me.
 
SU68 said:
The N&O has a history of covering the entire ACC conference. I've followed it online ever since I got my Master's at Duke in the 80's. I think the article was fair. BTW, who do you think on this team is deserving of #44? Nobody comes to mind? Didn't think so.
Expand...
Ah, there is a running back from North carolina that we just recruited that might get 44. Might be one of the main reasons he committed to us. That was my point
 
anomander said:
Yep. I feel the same. Have said a few times I don't think we see a huge drop off on the defensive side of the ball. The players may be younger, but imo they are slightly more talented. Better talent should negate some of the inexperience.

Defense isn't the side of the ball i'm worried about.
Expand...
Feeling of uncertainty when you hear how many guys we have to replace on D but the more and more I think about it, I think we will surprise people. For the same reason you mentioned. I think we can be as good or better on the DL. Its just depth Im worried about there. Im honestly confident at LB. Hodge and Franklin can be just as good as Davis and Lynch. Its the other LB spot Im nervous about. In the secondary, we will be serviceable at CB. I think everyone is worried about the safety positions and for good reasons.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
2
Views
845
Oakland
Oakland
sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Friday for Football
Replies
1
Views
983
Ozone!
Ozone!
sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Friday for Football
Replies
3
Views
1K
Oakland
Oakland
sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Thursday for Football
Replies
1
Views
975
Ozone!
Ozone!
sutomcat
    • Like
Orangeyes Daily Articles for Tuesday for Football
Replies
1
Views
779
Ozone!
Ozone!

Forum statistics

Threads
170,403
Messages
4,889,817
Members
5,996
Latest member
meierscreek

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
252
Guests online
1,361
Total visitors
1,613
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom