Say what you want about our coaches

[Alsacs]

Also - I wasn't basing my opinion of the defense to the offense - but to the rest of the country. We're #29.

If we had a better offense, our defense would be on the field less and probably be rated higher.

Our defense is solid but its not top 30. That is an example where stats make us look better than we are. They are solid P5 defense, but it is not great. Notre Dame and Florida State flat dominated our defense. Maryland dominated us in the first half and then just ran the clock out in the second half. We were lucky Clemson had Stoudt, and Louisville had a true FR QB. Pitt dominated us. BC was a good effort, but nothing special. The D dominated Wake, Duke though.

 

[Millhouse]

Also - I wasn't basing my opinion of the defense to the offense - but to the rest of the country. We're #29.

If we had a better offense, our defense would be on the field less and probably be rated higher.

if we had a better offense, opposing teams would have to take more risk

9th fewest 4th quarter pass attempts against in the 4th quarter.

9th most 4th quarter rush attempts against in the 4th quarter

yards per pass is higher than yards per rush.

opposing teams shut it down knowing that our only hope is for defensive scores.

if the offense ever gets better, the defense will probably slip and that's fine

http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/situational07/category02/sort04.html

we're 86th in yards per pass attempt on defense. 19th in yards per rush attempt. despite that, teams ran on us 59% of the time. that's because the offense sucks and teams just run out the clock


the mix of rushes and passes will change when our offense presents any threat at all and we won't look as good on defense.

 

[TheCusian]

if we had a better offense, opposing teams would have to take more risk

9th fewest 4th quarter pass attempts against in the 4th quarter.

9th most 4th quarter rush attempts against in the 4th quarter

yards per pass is higher than yards per rush.

opposing teams shut it down knowing that our only hope is for defensive scores.

if the offense ever gets better, the defense will probably slip and that's fine

http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/situational07/category02/sort04.html

we're 86th in yards per pass attempt on defense. 19th in yards per rush attempt. despite that, teams ran on us 59% of the time. that's because the offense sucks and teams just run out the clock


the mix of rushes and passes will change when our offense presents any threat at all and we won't look as good on defense.

I think it evens out. If the defense is on the field less they won't be able to give up as many yards. You're falsely equating more passing attempts with success (shocker). The year before we were #35 overall - and using the same metrics/link - teams were passing more and our numbers were more or less the same (and our offense was 40 spots better that year).

 

[Millhouse]

I think it evens out. If the defense is on the field less they won't be able to give up as many yards. You're falsely equating more passing attempts with success (shocker). The year before we were #35 overall - and using the same metrics/link - teams were passing more and our numbers were more or less the same (and our offense was 40 spots better that year).

yards per pass attempt are higher than yards per rush attempt

you don't need the math to show this, it should be obvious.

but the average yards per attempt in college football is over 7 yards. the average yards per rush is 4.5

if your goal is to have low defensive yards, you want the other team to run a lot. one way to get other teams to run a lot is to never score on offense.

 

[TheCusian]

yards per pass attempt are higher than yards per rush attempt you don't need the math to show this, it should be obvious. but the average yards per attempt in college football is over 7 yards. the average yards per rush is 4.5 if your goal is to have low defensive yards, you want the other team to run a lot. one way to get other teams to run a lot is to never score on offense.

I don't think your wrong - just that you're overstating it. What's the value in a rested defense vs one that is on the field every 4 downs? Or what advantage does an aggressive blitzing team gain by knowing an opponent will be passing more?

 

[Millhouse]

I don't think your wrong - just that you're overstating it. What's the value in a rested defense vs one that is on the field every 4 downs? Or what advantage does an aggressive blitzing team gain by knowing an opponent will be passing more?

syracuse was 118th in first downs and the defense yards per game was good.

stanford, louisville, penn state, clemson all in the 70s in offensive first downs, good yards per game defenses

wake was dead last and their defense is ranked 42nd

doesn't matter that much

being terrible on offense might mean your defense is on the field more but it also means that the other offense will be in the lead more

 

[qdawgg]

Willing to bet that without injuries and playing their schedules, our efficiency would also be 20-40 points higher.

With the talent we have we should have been 20 points higher, minimum, WITH the injuries. And that is giving the staff the benefit of the doubt.

We are talking about bottom barrel numbers, the worst of the worse, on par with schools that split weight room time with the intramural chess club. We had some injuries, so did a lot of other schools along with teams we played. We shouldn't be sniffing the jock straps of the teams surrounding us at the bottom of the barrel. those teams aren't even attempting to get out of the bottom and we are still buried below some of them.

 

[qdawgg]

Honest question, because this keeps coming up. Name a coach, known for recruiting, that you think could start landing "4-star prospects" at Syracuse tomorrow.

I don't think many people think at this point we are going to land 4 star prospects on a regular basis. The bigger issue is we are ranked at the bottom in the ACC in recruiting, I think most of the complaining isn't to be at the top but to at least be near the middle.

How do we rank lower than WF or BC especially. To me, that can't happen.

 

[NKR1978]

Our defense is solid but its not top 30. That is an example where stats make us look better than we are. They are solid P5 defense, but it is not great. Notre Dame and Florida State flat dominated our defense. Maryland dominated us in the first half and then just ran the clock out in the second half. We were lucky Clemson had Stoudt, and Louisville had a true FR QB. Pitt dominated us. BC was a good effort, but nothing special. The D dominated Wake, Duke though.

And the absolute shellackings the D took last year. We're lucky GT wasn't on our schedule because their offense has improved immensely since last year.

 

[javadoc]

I don't think many people think at this point we are going to land 4 star prospects on a regular basis. The bigger issue is we are ranked at the bottom in the ACC in recruiting, I think most of the complaining isn't to be at the top but to at least be near the middle.

How do we rank lower than WF or BC especially. To me, that can't happen.

Skowt currently has us 7th in the ACC. WF and BC are in last, with 18 and 21 commits, respectively.

I do wonder what will happen when they issue their year-end revised ratings of prospects.

 

[NKR1978]

I don't think many people think at this point we are going to land 4 star prospects on a regular basis. The bigger issue is we are ranked at the bottom in the ACC in recruiting, I think most of the complaining isn't to be at the top but to at least be near the middle.

How do we rank lower than WF or BC especially. To me, that can't happen.

We have a Big East recruiting class in the ACC where even Wake Forest went out and paid for a proven coach.

 

[qdawgg]

Marrone was recruiting MAC kids and we were winning battles for kids with 1 offer from Akron. That's where we were 3 - 5 years ago. His first year coming in right before LOI he signed Charley Loeb and even guys with FBI, DEA, and milk carton connections couldn't figure out who the hell Charley Loeb was. In retrospect it was pretty funny, we were all on here trying to talk up a guy that even his High School didn't know who he was. A true diamond in the rough.

But Marrone with real MAC level recruits could coach and I felt I knew what he was trying to do. His ability at times not to do it, to me was based on the talent and not coaching... most of the time (all those freaking penalties for a real hard nosed coach, ugh).

Moral of the story. Talent isn't our problem. Coaching is. A better coach would have produced significantly better offensive efficiency, NO... DOUBT... ABOUT... IT

 

[qdawgg]

Skowt currently has us 7th in the ACC. WF and BC are in last, with 18 and 21 commits, respectively.

I do wonder what will happen when they issue their year-end revised ratings of prospects.

DAMN YOU... Now I have to start doing some research before making posts.

 

[qdawgg]

We have a Big East recruiting class in the ACC where even Wake Forest went out and paid for a proven coach.

We have a MAC level coaching staff in the ACC with ACC middle - low level talent. I think we have more than enough talent to put out a better product than we saw.

 

[AAM62]

You cant just look at offers, especially with this class where we had verbals since the summer. Teams may not want to deal with flipping a kid.

Teams don't win a lot of games relying on their defense. TCU which has been one of the best defensive teams in the country had the HC Gary Patterson realized he needed more offense.

Our defense BTW wasn't great. It was okay and compared to the clusterf@ck that was our offense looked like the 1985 Bears D. Our D played hard but they weren't great and BTW we are losing Crume/Reddish/Lynch/Davis.

Our recruiting is nothing special. I like the class, but its not top 40 according to ESPN.


Dungey's best offers Colorado State, Nevada, Syracuse
Strickland(our best recruit IMO) best offers Georgia Tech, Virginia, Rutgers, Wake Forest, Syracuse
Blair's best offers Purdue, Toledo, Kent State, Syracuse
Clausman's best offers Purdue, Syracuse
Conway's best offers Illinois, Rutgers, Syracuse
Hofrichter's best offers Syracuse
Perkins's best offers Syracuse
Cross's best offers Syracuse
Duerig's best offers Syracuse
Henderson Jr's best offers Nebraska, Rutgers, Cincinnati, Syracuse
Spence's best offers Indiana, South Alabama, Syracuse
Levine's best offers UAB, Alcorn State, Syracuse
Christopher Frederick's best offers Georgia Tech, Old Dominion, Syracuse
Jordan Ferdericks best offers Temple, Stony Brook, Syracuse
Ellison's best offers Boston College, Rutgers, Army, Syracuse
Adams best offers Maryland, UMass, UConn, Syracuse
Ginnetti's best offers Illinois, Buffalo, Syracuse
Cullen's best offers UMass, UNH, Syracuse
Davis's best offers West Virginia, Pitt, Cincinnati, USF, Syracuse
Giudice's best offers Syracuse
Byrne's best offers Syracuse
Dunkelberger's best offers Cincinnati, USF, Louisville, Syracuse
Keller's best offers Syracuse.

 

[qdawgg]

You cant just look at offers, especially with this class where we had verbals since the summer. Teams may not want to deal with flipping a kid.

I do agree with this, to some extent. You would think we wouldn't have the resources of other schools and we still attempt to flip kids. If PSU or ND as an example think a kid is good enough, they will have no issue trying to flip them from us. I do think it prevents some schools from getting involved but I don't think it entirely tells the whole story. Some of the kids we have verbals from, other schools just aren't interested, verbal or not..

 

[javadoc]

DAMN YOU... Now I have to start doing some research before making posts.

There's more to it, which will affect the final ratings. Plus some additional things to consider. (All according to skowt, ACC only.)

What do Syracuse, BC, WF, GT, and VT have in common? Teams with no 4- or 5-star commits.

There are a couple teams behind us that could pass us if they close strongly (all 3-star or better), since they have fewer commits at this moment. Pitt, NC State, VT all have 15 - 18 commits.

Our class is very similar to GT's. We are ahead of them by a tiny margin. We have 19 3-star guys, they have 17.

While everyone is in the same boat in this regard, it would be great if any of our guys got bumped up to 4-stars. More likely is that some of our 2-star guys get a bump up to 3-star. Even more likely, IMO, is that some of our 3-star guys get bumped back down to 2-star.

Early in the season when skowt redid their player evaluations, our class took an enormous leap, largest in skowt's history if I recall. We had a large number of commits, and almost all of them ended up 3-star. It looks like a very solid class that was assembled very early, and even included a true blue chip stud for a while, Davante Davis. At the end of a disastrous season, we're not looking at much defection, and many players are vocally affirming their commitment. That is a great job by the staff.

I love the fact that a solid "foundation" class like this includes so many linemen, on both sides of the ball.

The trend is upward, and IMO, given what we are seeing, next year is the year we can expect to have a realistic shot at some of the blue chippers. We really really need to do well next season.

 

[dollarbill44]

It doesn't matter the level of recruits we get if the coaches can't put them in a position to succeed. The offense was an absolute disaster this year. Shafer is really putting all his eggs in one basket with lester. No way he keeps his job if the offense doesn't improve tenfold.

Tenfold? Sign me up for 2,000 yards and 70-100 points per game!
That's a tough limit to keep a job though.:noidea: You would be one tough AD to work for.

 

[anomander]

My only point is that they identified who they wanted and got them. In essence, that tells me they can recruit.

In terms of whether or not they'll pan out, who the hell knows. I completely agree that you cant judge these classes at this point, or quite honestly, probably for the majority of the next 3 years.

Delone Carter was a solid pickup, Marcus Sales, not so much. For every Carter there are 4 Averin Colliers, Lavar Lobdells, Marcus Sales and David Oku's. Stars be damned.

And part of the reason Shafer says what he says is because he needs to appease the fan base when they're constantly screaming over star ratings. The reality is that it's hard to get kids here, especially the cream of the crop.

That's fair to say they are good recruiters when they target certain kids, but sometimes you have to look at who we are going up against. In some cases it was nobody. I don't exactly think that makes them good recruits. It makes the recruits smart for jumping on the offer though.

 

[anomander]

Marrone was recruiting MAC kids and we were winning battles for kids with 1 offer from Akron. That's where we were 3 - 5 years ago. His first year coming in right before LOI he signed Charley Loeb and even guys with FBI, DEA, and milk carton connections couldn't figure out who the hell Charley Loeb was. In retrospect it was pretty funny, we were all on here trying to talk up a guy that even his High School didn't know who he was. A true diamond in the rough.

But Marrone with real MAC level recruits could coach and I felt I knew what he was trying to do. His ability at times not to do it, to me was based on the talent and not coaching... most of the time (all those freaking penalties for a real hard nosed coach, ugh).

Moral of the story. Talent isn't our problem. Coaching is. A better coach would have produced significantly better offensive efficiency, NO... DOUBT... ABOUT... IT

I know what you're getting at, and this really doesn't even relate to the point you were making, but I disagree with Marrone not being able to recruit. He gets far too bad of a rep just because he didn't like recruiting. When he first started we had bottom of the barrel facilities, and 3 wins over 2 seasons. No matter who you are, you aren't going to be pulling kids in. Fast forward to his last class he had before he bolted, after the facility upgrades, and a couple decent seasons, and it was lining up to be a borderline to 40 class. The core guys at the time ended up going to all P5 programs (TCU, Miami, Indiana, Rutgers).

 

[qdawgg]

I know what you're getting at, and this really doesn't even relate to the point you were making, but I disagree with Marrone not being able to recruit. He gets far too bad of a rep just because he didn't like recruiting. When he first started we had bottom of the barrel facilities, and 3 wins over 2 seasons. No matter who you are, you aren't going to be pulling kids in. Fast forward to his last class he had before he bolted, after the facility upgrades, and a couple decent seasons, and it was lining up to be a borderline to 40 class. The core guys at the time ended up going to all P5 programs (TCU, Miami, Indiana, Rutgers).

I don't disagree at all. I never thought he was a bad recruiter, I think I was more shooting from the hip overall since people have painted him as a poor recruiter because he wasn't overly friendly to them in the grocery store. I think for where we were and what he had to work with, he did ok at first recruiting and got better. Where I think he did really well was really identifying diamonds in the rough and over the course of their time here, turning them into legit CFB players.

 

[tep624]

Davante Davis and Daiquan Kelly are shining examples of why it is hard to gauge our recruiting based on stars and rankings.

Both were 3 stars when they were committed to us at Rivals. Now they are both 4 stars. Some of this stuff is chicken or egg. In general, when we land early recruits, we aren't landing kids that are heavily recruited with 5+ P5 offer sheets in the Feb-May/June period, and to be honest, I don't expect that. The kids that have that pedigree are the ones that the factories hammer during that period, so if they're going to commit, it's likely they aren't committing here. We go after the kids that have a lot of upside but are in the next tier that the factories would likely go after in the Nov-Feb period if they still have holes in their class. This helps us from a perspective of landing quality kids, but hurts us from a recruiting rankings perspective because more often than not, the only way these kids are getting more pub is by camping, which they tend to not do once they commit, or getting more offers, which they tend to only do if they are looking around. And if they even do get more offers, it rarely helps their ranking if they stick with us, it only tends to show some improvement if they decide to visit elsewhere and/or decommit. Davis and Kelly are the examples of that.

For those that really value rankings, explain to me, all things equal, why Daiquan Kelly is now a 4 star at Rivals but Dontae Strickland is still a 3 star. Strickland was a top 15 Jersey recruit preseason, just like Kelly, and had a fantastic senior year. The only difference between the two is that one stayed committed to Syracuse and the other flipped to PSU.

For me, it's pretty simple. If you have faith in the staff's ability to recruit, then look at the guys that committed June or earlier, and if that's half your class or more, you have to be pretty confident. Then you look at the guys committing June or later, and you want those guys to be ranked 3 stars or better and have good offer sheets. If you look at this class, that's basically what we're doing - the early kids have the weaker rankings and offers sheets, the later kids the better rankings and offer sheets. And of our decommits, 2 look to have been dropped for either other positional needs or better prospects, 2 are now top 250 Rivals recruits, and 1 who was an early commit looks to be coming back in the fold (Grimes). I have faith in this staff's ability to recruit, and I know what our current profile is as a program, so I'm pretty content with this class. I like the kids we have, we've addressed a lot of needs, landed a pretty promising QB recruit in Dungey who may be able to enroll early, and we're still heavily involved with 5-6 higher profile guys, Fox, Sheppard, Crawford, Stocker, Ealey, Tears, Hale and my personal film favorite Steven Clark. And who knows, maybe a few surprises as well, new names keep popping. Now if we can get can close strong and somehow get Alin Edouard back on campus, I'll be really happy.

 

[reedny]

False choice.

It's not either or. This year's offense was bad. We have no real idea of how successful Lester's system will be. We know that they are decent/good recruiters.

Juries out on the offensive system. Recruiting is fine.

Our last recruiting class is ranked 14th in the ACC. Not sure how that is going to make us competitive.

 

[TheCusian]

Our last recruiting class is ranked 14th in the ACC. Not sure how that is going to make us competitive.

See: Tep264 post above.

 

[TheCusian]

Our last recruiting class is ranked 14th in the ACC. Not sure how that is going to make us competitive.

Also, we came in 3rd in our division last year with almost all old BE recruits (and much lower rates classes as the last two).