QB's in Babers system...

[reedny]

and BG was a mid-major playing against an SEC team in UT, and a 1st round draft pick in Memphis who runs a similar offensive style.

True -- we'll have a high major D, but it's not as though Florida State and Clemson are stiffs. I'm not doomsaying ... just hope our D has some shining moments too.

 

[TheCusian]

True -- we'll have a high major D, but it's not as though Florida State and Clemson are stiffs. I'm not doomsaying ... just hope our D has some shining moments too.

If BG is any indication - INT's will be way up. #8 nationally last year.

Playing from behind will force some QB's into some mistakes.

 

[bnoro]

True -- we'll have a high major D, but it's not as though Florida State and Clemson are stiffs. I'm not doomsaying ... just hope our D has some shining moments too.

Can't be worse than losing 56-0 to Ga Tech...

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Can't be worse than losing 56-0 to Ga Tech...

Ouch

 

[Briancuse]

I think Dungy is going to thrive his system, provided he stays healthy, which is a huge factor.

 

[baggerbob]

I think Players like Steven Clark, and Chris Slayton, are going to enjoy getting after the OB's on the other teams.

 

[HtownOrange]

I think Players like Steven Clark, and Chris Slayton, are going to enjoy getting after the OB's on the other teams.

This was discussed a short time ago in another thread, essentially it will be open season on QBs for the D-Line and the D will get many reps. This system can allow young kids to pick up stats and game exposure real fast. If they prove up, getting lots of playing time even as a bench player in years 1&2 could help them get a draft look.

 

[JackBauer44]

Our new defense is built similarly to JB's 2-3 zone. He's said it makes sense to play the 2-3 because their is a dearth of shooting on most teams (in addition to a lot of other reasons).

The Tampa 2 is has issues with smart, accurate and consistent passers. There are not a ton of those guys out there.

Unfortunately, the two best teams in our division are usually going to have smart, accurate, and consistent passers. Regardless, I think this offense is going to be fun.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Thank you to the OP for an interesting set of statistics. It caused me to look at the two years at Bowling Green under Dave Clawson and the two years under his successor Dino Babers. The operative years are 2012-2015.

Year Points Scored (National Rank) Points Against (National Rank) Final Record

2012 23 (94th) 17 (10th) 8-5

2013 34 (28th) 16 (5th) 10-4

2014 30 (57th) 33 (108th) 8-6

2015 42 (6th) 29 (84th) 10-4

Interestingly, Clawson had the same amount of wins as Babers in this sample without running a hurry up and without sacrificing defensive efficiency. Of their respective 10-win seasons 2013 is actually more statistically impressive than 2015. On a side note, I wonder how badly WFU fans were salivating for Clawson coming off of that 2013 season? He's gone 6-18 in his two seasons since while coaching a P5 school (what may work in the MAC may not work in the ACC).

Simply put, I continue to fail to see the correlation between winning % (what I care about) and increased offensive output due to a hurry-up tempo. Sure, increased tempo (pace of play) leads to increased plays per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game. However, it also leads to more defensive snaps per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game surrendered.

I don't doubt that we will produce more yards and points but what I can't understand is why people think that Babers system itself will lead to more wins which seems to be the prevailing thought.

After watching this program and college football for many years I firmly believe that Players>System (by alot) at the P5 level and until we get better players all over the field our struggles to get to 6 wins will continue no matter what system is run on offense/defense. I guess that's my main point. Offensively focused teams can win games,defensively focused teams can win games, fast teams can win games, slow teams can win games, etc. but ultimately the team with the best talent and balance on both sides of the ball will win championships and play "meaningful" (Coyle term) bowl games at the end of the year.

All of this is not a slight on Babers as I want really bad for him to succeed on behalf of the program. As a season ticket holder for decades (through good and bad) I am starved for good football back in CNY and getting sick of the revolving door of football coaches since Coach P. I just guess my faith only applies to my religion and I'll just have to see it work before I'll understand how it will bring us back from depths to which we have fallen.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Thank you to the OP for an interesting set of statistics. It caused me to look at the two years at Bowling Green under Dave Clawson and the two years under his successor Dino Babers. The operative years are 2012-2015.

Year Points Scored (National Rank) Points Against (National Rank) Final Record

2012 23 (94th) 17 (10th) 8-5

2013 34 (28th) 16 (5th) 10-4

2014 30 (57th) 33 (108th) 8-6

2015 42 (6th) 29 (84th) 10-4

Interestingly, Clawson had the same amount of wins as Babers in this sample without running a hurry up and without sacrificing defensive efficiency. Of their respective 10-win seasons 2013 is actually more statistically impressive than 2015. On a side note, I wonder how badly WFU fans were salivating for Clawson coming off of that 2013 season? He's gone 6-18 in his two seasons since while coaching a P5 school (what may work in the MAC may not work in the ACC).

Simply put, I continue to fail to see the correlation between winning % (what I care about) and increased offensive output due to a hurry-up tempo. Sure, increased tempo (pace of play) leads to increased plays per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game. However, it also leads to more defensive snaps per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game surrendered.

I don't doubt that we will produce more yards and points but what I can't understand is why people think that Babers system itself will lead to more wins which seems to be the prevailing thought.

After watching this program and college football for many years I firmly believe that Players>System (by alot) at the P5 level and until we get better players all over the field our struggles to get to 6 wins will continue no matter what system is run on offense/defense. I guess that's my main point. Offensively focused teams can win games,defensively focused teams can win games, fast teams can win games, slow teams can win games, etc. but ultimately the team with the best talent and balance on both sides of the ball will win championships and play "meaningful" (Coyle term) bowl games at the end of the year.

All of this is not a slight on Babers as I want really bad for him to succeed on behalf of the program. As a season ticket holder for decades (through good and bad) I am starved for good football back in CNY and getting sick of the revolving door of football coaches since Coach P. I just guess my faith only applies to my religion and I'll just have to see it work before I'll understand how it will bring us back from depths to which we have fallen.

Fast = more wins because of the Dome.

But even if not, I don't care. I'm tired of seeing us bang our heads against the wall in rock fights.

I think Clawson is failing because he's a good normal football coach at a program where it's really hard for normal to succeed.

Babers has a thing. Players > system is a fine belief if you can get players, but if you can't compete on talent you sure better figure out something different for your system that levels the playing field.

 

[CaliCuse]

I wouldn't say that is mind-blowing. As hard as it is to really grasp what our offense is about to become, it's going to be just as hard to wrap our brains around the defensive realities.

- by playing fast, we're giving teams extra possessions

- teams will be forced to be more aggressive offensively in their game planning (crap, we gotta out score THIS team)

- our defense will be on the field a lot, by design

If you mean theater offense will be out there to take up game time,terrific. Wear out the opposition defense for a change. THAT would be a switch from the last few coaches who have watched our defense in after a pleathora of 3 and outs by the offense. This is at the same time a fan killer in the standsWho TF wants to pay for a game,and trying to find parking for a reasonable amount of $ to sit and watch the defense trying to score points to cover the points given up. Hell thats not easy even 3,000 miles away and watching on television!

 

[TheCusian]

Unfortunately, the two best teams in our division are usually going to have smart, accurate, and consistent passers. Regardless, I think this offense is going to be fun.

Agreed.

I'd love to be in 3rd place in the division and a headache for the other two.

 

[TheCusian]

Thank you to the OP for an interesting set of statistics. It caused me to look at the two years at Bowling Green under Dave Clawson and the two years under his successor Dino Babers. The operative years are 2012-2015. Year Points Scored (National Rank) Points Against (National Rank) Final Record 2012 23 (94th) 17 (10th) 8-5 2013 34 (28th) 16 (5th) 10-4 2014 30 (57th) 33 (108th) 8-6 2015 42 (6th) 29 (84th) 10-4 Interestingly, Clawson had the same amount of wins as Babers in this sample without running a hurry up and without sacrificing defensive efficiency. Of their respective 10-win seasons 2013 is actually more statistically impressive than 2015. On a side note, I wonder how badly WFU fans were salivating for Clawson coming off of that 2013 season? He's gone 6-18 in his two seasons since while coaching a P5 school (what may work in the MAC may not work in the ACC). Simply put, I continue to fail to see the correlation between winning % (what I care about) and increased offensive output due to a hurry-up tempo. Sure, increased tempo (pace of play) leads to increased plays per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game. However, it also leads to more defensive snaps per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game surrendered. I don't doubt that we will produce more yards and points but what I can't understand is why people think that Babers system itself will lead to more wins which seems to be the prevailing thought. After watching this program and college football for many years I firmly believe that Players>System (by alot) at the P5 level and until we get better players all over the field our struggles to get to 6 wins will continue no matter what system is run on offense/defense. I guess that's my main point. Offensively focused teams can win games,defensively focused teams can win games, fast teams can win games, slow teams can win games, etc. but ultimately the team with the best talent and balance on both sides of the ball will win championships and play "meaningful" (Coyle term) bowl games at the end of the year. All of this is not a slight on Babers as I want really bad for him to succeed on behalf of the program. As a season ticket holder for decades (through good and bad) I am starved for good football back in CNY and getting sick of the revolving door of football coaches since Coach P. I just guess my faith only applies to my religion and I'll just have to see it work before I'll understand how it will bring us back from depths to which we have fallen.

I think it does three things:

- It says we can score fast consistently and that is hard to replicate for teams with QB issues, lesser talent, and teams that over emphasize defense (meatheads) (BC, Wake, 2 or 3 of our OOC match ups - here's looking at you). If you can score you put pressure on the elite teams (that were handling our decent defenses since we've been in the ACC).

- those kind of numbers will get us a nice uptick in recruiting. We've seen how hard it is to build recruiting via defensive minded coaching without a fun offense. So players > system will sort itself out in time...

- it helps us have an identity that is unique in the region. Even if Rutgers O leans towards what we're doing - they still have a meathead coach in a meathead conference. Fastest show on turf II.

 

[Moontan]

Can't be worse than losing 56-0 to Ga Tech...

You had to go there?
Worst game that I've ever been to.

Could be a 48-45 barn-burner when the Yellow Jackets visit the Dome in a few years.

 

[SoBristol]

Apart from the interesting stats, you can see that Babers worked with inherited talent on offense at BG. He added one 4 star WR (Roger Lewis) and in the second year added a good TE from a Kansas juco. He inherited a lot of experienced offensive talent, and amped up the air attack and pace. His inherited QB and RB were good as sophs under Clawson, continued to be good, and earned all-league honors as seniors

His recruiting tended to slant toward the defensive side, and he favored stouter LBs and taller DBs (compared to what SS was bringing in). Might say the same about his first recruiting class here, though that is a small sample of work.

 

[Millhouse]

The concern is ... BG gave up 59 points against UT and 44 against Memphis.

guys with big guts, short arms, and bushy moosedouches would be less concerned if BG has played as slow as we do, give UT fewer plays, lose by a bigger margin, and never have a chance at all

Tennessee was very good last year (11th in SRS). 4 close losses to very good teams

no more white knuckling.

 

[upperdeck]

my question would be system vs level of competition. BG played in a lower level and then played up. is BG playing a p-5 like tenn/OSU more of leap than SU playing a "peer" p-5 like FSU. even now we have several games against top 5-10 teams and hung in.

so while BG won 10 games last year, you could argue that playing p-5 tenn/mary/Purdue is still a bigger leap than anything SU does playing clemson/ND/FSU.

look at what BG did last year in games against Mass/Akron/kent/ohio teams that we wish we would drill consistently and often dont. does 30 pt games against CMU become 45? 7 pts a game more , we get rid of OT, we win virg. we win pitt, we get rid of 2-3 nail bitters. the D cant play worse , lets just hope the offense does play better.

 

[jr4750]

my question would be system vs level of competition. BG played in a lower level and then played up. is BG playing a p-5 like tenn/OSU more of leap than SU playing a "peer" p-5 like FSU. even now we have several games against top 5-10 teams and hung in.

so while BG won 10 games last year, you could argue that playing p-5 tenn/mary/Purdue is still a bigger leap than anything SU does playing clemson/ND/FSU.

look at what BG did last year in games against Mass/Akron/kent/ohio teams that we wish we would drill consistently and often dont. does 30 pt games against CMU become 45? 7 pts a game more , we get rid of OT, we win virg. we win pitt, we get rid of 2-3 nail bitters. the D cant play worse , lets just hope the offense does play better.

Amen. The margins of both our wins and losses haven't been huge, minus a few games here and there. 7-14 more points makes a world of difference. It will also allow the team to feel like they are never out of any particular game. There have been times down 10 starting the fourth where we had no chance cause our offense couldn't move the ball a yard. No more of that hopefully.

 

[kcsu]

Thank you to the OP for an interesting set of statistics. It caused me to look at the two years at Bowling Green under Dave Clawson and the two years under his successor Dino Babers. The operative years are 2012-2015.

Year Points Scored (National Rank) Points Against (National Rank) Final Record

2012 23 (94th) 17 (10th) 8-5

2013 34 (28th) 16 (5th) 10-4

2014 30 (57th) 33 (108th) 8-6

2015 42 (6th) 29 (84th) 10-4

Interestingly, Clawson had the same amount of wins as Babers in this sample without running a hurry up and without sacrificing defensive efficiency. Of their respective 10-win seasons 2013 is actually more statistically impressive than 2015. On a side note, I wonder how badly WFU fans were salivating for Clawson coming off of that 2013 season? He's gone 6-18 in his two seasons since while coaching a P5 school (what may work in the MAC may not work in the ACC).

Simply put, I continue to fail to see the correlation between winning % (what I care about) and increased offensive output due to a hurry-up tempo. Sure, increased tempo (pace of play) leads to increased plays per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game. However, it also leads to more defensive snaps per game which leads to more yards per game and points per game surrendered.

I don't doubt that we will produce more yards and points but what I can't understand is why people think that Babers system itself will lead to more wins which seems to be the prevailing thought.

After watching this program and college football for many years I firmly believe that Players>System (by alot) at the P5 level and until we get better players all over the field our struggles to get to 6 wins will continue no matter what system is run on offense/defense. I guess that's my main point. Offensively focused teams can win games,defensively focused teams can win games, fast teams can win games, slow teams can win games, etc. but ultimately the team with the best talent and balance on both sides of the ball will win championships and play "meaningful" (Coyle term) bowl games at the end of the year.

All of this is not a slight on Babers as I want really bad for him to succeed on behalf of the program. As a season ticket holder for decades (through good and bad) I am starved for good football back in CNY and getting sick of the revolving door of football coaches since Coach P. I just guess my faith only applies to my religion and I'll just have to see it work before I'll understand how it will bring us back from depths to which we have fallen.

I don't necessarily agree. As examples look at Georgia Tech and more importantly navy. Oh and you can look back to the early days of George D at Syracuse. The triple option and freeze option evened the playing field and allowed/allows teams with inferior talent to compete. In basketball my example would be Princeton.

So I disagree. In fact I believe that Babers and Syracuse are poised to do great things. We are in a perfect position to take advantage of what is not just a new coach but such a radical foundation type change that I believe we are going to be amazed.

I have been following our program for 50 years and I'm here to tell you that there is a sunami coming. Babers is not your typical coach. He is in my opinion so far ahead of his time in all aspects that provided the time and resources such as a refurbished Dome he is going to create a new era of Syracuse football that is going to be amazing.

 

[reedny]

guys with big guts, short arms, and bushy moosedouches would be less concerned if BG has played as slow as we do, give UT fewer plays, lose by a bigger margin, and never have a chance at all

Tennessee was very good last year (11th in SRS). 4 close losses to very good teams

no more white knuckling.

Lol. First of all, none of those characteristics in red applies to me. Second, yes UT was good -- sure. So are Clemson and F-State. What's your point? Third, playing slower means we lose by a smaller margin unless, using up-tempo, we're scoring just about every possession. Otherwise, the loss margin (with slower tempo) would be reduced since the opponent has fewer possessions. Indeed, BG's loss margin to UT was 29 points because, although they were playing fast, they weren't scoring every time and weren't defending well. And fourth, you have a minuscule chance to win if you give up 59 points to anybody.

 

[KaiserUEO]

If BG is any indication - INT's will be way up. #8 nationally last year.

Playing from behind will force some QB's into some mistakes.

reminds me of a great line by Bill Parcells, as quoted by Phil Simms in the "86 America's Game" documentary...'SIMMS!!! If you don't throw 2 interceptions today, youre just not trying'.

buckle up kids, its going to be fun...

 

[Millhouse]

Lol. First of all, none of those characteristics in red applies to me.

yet.

 

[KaiserUEO]

yet.

If I grow a moustache to complete the triple...what do I win??

 

[Millhouse]

Lol. First of all, none of those characteristics in red applies to me. Second, yes UT was good -- sure. So are Clemson and F-State. What's your point? Third, playing slower means we lose by a smaller margin unless, using up-tempo, we're scoring just about every possession. Otherwise, the loss margin (with slower tempo) would be reduced since the opponent has fewer possessions. Indeed, BG's loss margin to UT was 29 points because, although they were playing fast, they weren't scoring every time and weren't defending well. And fourth, you have a minuscule chance to win if you give up 59 points to anybody.

white knuckling leaves you susceptible to losses to bad teams. the math works the same for them.

playing fast will make the offense better. it might amplify the difference between us and FSU but we're not likely to ever beat them anyway. it'll help us beat up on teams like us.

if people are concerned about keeping it close, a 59-30 loss feels closer than a 29-0 loss. think in terms of percentage of total points scored if that 59 looks so ugly.

babers improves offenses so much that it's all worth it and it'll be more fun to boot

 

[Millhouse]

If I grow a moustache to complete the triple...what do I win??

i needed to include short arms because i am constantly battling food and every beard i grow eventually gets whittled down to various moosedouches

i'll never have short arms though. "You baby gorilla... why don't you work a zoo and stop bothering people?"

my mental image of the guy that hates this offense next year is a distended hard belly, a moustache and two alligator arms crossed in front of him resting on the beachball