Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="billsin01, post: 427035, member: 837"] Figure this might be a distraction while I consider the distinct possibility that my favorite team will be playing no closer than 5 hours from my house in DC. Awesome. Happy to be in the ACC. Anyway, stuff on the field. I'll skip the two-deep since many others have contributed to a nice thread on the matter. I'll stick to the the general themes of what we've learned and what lies ahead. [B]Biggest storyline -- Sustainability [/B] What jumps out at me with this season, even though it was "only" a 7-5 campaign, is the fact that for the first time since the late 90s I get the feeling that we are building and truly have a foundation to go forward and compete. Will we win more games next season? I don't know, but I like the coordinators we have in place. I like the "new" offensive system (I put "new" in quotes b/c I know that some will argue that we didn't technically add anything to the playbook). I think DM has a solid handle on most things and the recruiting appears to be at least OK (more on this later). The baseline has been raised and whether or not we've truly "turned the corner" there is at least plenty of legitimate reasons to feel good about this program. [B]Many questions re: DM's recruiting were answered[/B] I know there are some here who are going to lose sleep at night about the number of commits we have and how many stars they have and what states they come from. But, realistically, the kids we are going to land are more often than not going to have 3 stars or fewer and take at least a year or two to get on the field. So, while I agree that DM hasn't blown the doors off on recruiting, he's built some pretty good depth here with his early classes which have yielded a bunch of kids who've actually arrived on campus and stayed in the program. This is different from P's last three classes, which is not a shot at P, whom I consider a good recruiter, as much as a statement of fact -- a huge chunk of those guys never arrived or transferred after a year. Consider: [B]Players who played big roles this season[/B] WR -- West TE -- Wales RB -- Smith/Gulley/Moore OL -- Chibane/Pugh (depending on who you credit him to)/Macky/Hickey/Foy/Trudo DL -- Bromley/Crume/Sharpe/MPB/Goggins LB -- Spruill/Diabate/Davis/Lynch DB -- Lyn/Anderson/Reddish/Eskridge Players poised to play big roles next season QB -- Loeb/Hunt/Allen RB -- Morris WR -- Foster/Flemming/Kobena/Clark/Funderburke TE -- Prince/Thompson OL -- Knapp/Palmer DL -- Robinson/Simmons LB -- Broyld? DB -- Whigham/Morgan That's just a quick and dirty accounting, but that's a pretty good haul of at least decently talented players. If Loeb ends up being a decent option at QB, there's really no reason this team shouldn't be a bowl contender again next year and, hopefully, things continue to get better. Sure, we'd love to see more big-time offensive playmakers, but I honestly think the ability to put together solid classes where the kids generally arrive on campus and stay on campus is the bigger issue. DM has done that. [B]Lingering concerns?[/B] Yes, there are some. Specials improved over the course of the season but remain a question mark in a general sense. DM's in-game decisions are sometimes puzzling. We need to be more consistent and more disciplined. Will be interesting to see how those four are addressed next season. [B]Looking ahead[/B] I think this is the more interesting subject. So here are a few things I'll be watching, for whatever that's worth, as we move toward '13. [B]What to do with Ashton Broyld?[/B] I keep hearing that Broyld is our most dangerous player and too good with the ball to put on defense. But I don't know. If he's either of those things he should be starting somewhere, yet on the projected two-deeps in the other thread he's rarely even mentioned. My thought is this -- and I don't claim to really know what I'm talking about -- I give him a loooooooonnnnnnnggggggg look at QB if I have any belief that he could even possibly play there. I'd watch all spring, put him on a summer throwing program and even give him some time in the fall. I want to rule him out there before I think of another position. If QB doesn't work out, or doesn't look like it will work out, I think about LB (as long as AB is into it). I know you'd love to have the ball in his hands but if you already like your WRs, RBs and TEs and he can't play QB, then why not let Shafer turn him loose on defense? I mean, he can have an impact. We saw that with Hogue and Smith and Spruill and Davis made a bunch of plays this year as well. [B]The QB quandry[/B] If we assume Broyld doesn't end up at QB, I have a hard time believing anyone other than Loeb starts Week 1. The interesting thing will be if we see a bit of the 09 treatment with Paulus/Nassib splitting time. If they like Allen/Hunt as the future, do they make an effort to get them some legit snaps? Interesting debate. [B]Are we still as aggressive offensively?[/B] It's pretty obvious that DM trusted Nassib/Lemon/Sales/Pugh, etc. to play a more up-tempo pace. Will he have that same trust with a pretty new cast of characters? [B]The RB question[/B] I can't really remember a time when we had four legit options at RB. Maybe back when we were all excited about Tebucky/Ali Culpepper/Mungro and company? Regardless, the hype on Morris is that he could be a home run threat. Hard to imagine Gulley losing PT since he's good in pass protection, a good receiver and a slippery runner. Moore to me is clearly down the list as an option at starter but could still fill a role as a short yardage guy. Which leaves Smith -- a guy coming off a 1,000-yard season and a 5.1 ypc. BUT, and I know people will hate this, he looks slow in the open field. He's quick and powerful through the hole but a bit on the slow side in the open field. Does that leave this spot open for some other guys to grab some carriers -- most notably Morris? Will be interesting to watch I think. Good problem to have. [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?