State of the offense

[GoSU96]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

What this shows in my opinion is:

1. They were handed what might have been the worst offense in D-1.
2. Substantial across the board improvement from where they started from.
3. Lots of room for improvement.

 

[rrlbees]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

What this shows in my opinion is:

1. They were handed what might have been the worst offense in D-1.
2. Substantial across the board improvement from where they started from.
3. Lots of room for improvement.

Could you run those from 2002 forward? Defense also. Thanks.

BTW, how did you embed a .pdf file? I haven't tried that or seen how it can be done. Pretty cool.

 

[GoSU96]

Could you run those from 2002 forward? Defense also. Thanks.

BTW, how did you embed a .pdf file? I haven't tried that or seen how it can be done. Pretty cool.

Not sure why you would want to take 2000 and 2001 out, but taking those two years out and the percentages are almost exactly in all four categories. The only deviation is by one or two percentage points.

 

[rrlbees]

Not sure why you would want to take 2000 and 2001 out, but taking those two years out and the percentages are almost exactly in all four categories. The only deviation is by one or two percentage points.

Because 2002 is the start of the downfall no matter how bad it got in 2005-2008.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

By those standards, there was no place to go but up.

 

[GoSU96]

Because 2002 is the start of the downfall no matter how bad it got in 2005-2008.

Ok? Not sure what you think the agenda was other than to provide context. The point is about now, not some debate over ancient history.

 

[GoSU96]

By those standards, there was no place to go but up.

Jesus.

I guess you don't believe they were faced with a complete rebuild. Actually look at the level of performance they inherited and think about it for one second.

 

[rrlbees]

Ok? Not sure what you think the agenda was other than to provide context. The point is about now, not some debate over ancient history.

The bigger question is how did you embed the .pdf file. The rest of it I am pulling your chain.

 

[orange79]

By those standards, there was no place to go but up.

Yep. So simple.

 

[orange79]

The bigger question is how did you embed the .pdf file. The rest of it I am pulling your chain.

Just click the 'Upload a File' button, in between 'Post Reply' and 'More Options'.

 

[rrlbees]

Just click the 'Upload a File' button, in between 'Post Reply' and 'More Options'.

Duh.

 

[Bayside44]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

What this shows in my opinion is:

1. They were handed what might have been the worst offense in D-1.
2. Substantial across the board improvement from where they started from.
3. Lots of room for improvement.

I like Marrone a lot, and think a lot of the criticisms aren't that bright (like going to the basketball board and asking Rick Jackson to shoot jumpers, expecting 10 men pressing, etc kind of not bright). But he was handed 2 guys on offense at skill positions that are playing on Sundays and some other solid pieces. I would junk the historical context, understand that some highly touted kids that would've been upperclassmen aren't here, and enjoy the fact that we're in bowl competition.

 

[Scooch]

Can someone just let me know when the statute of limitations runs out on comparing things to Robinson?

 

[JoeSU]

we should have hired deleone

Marrone has done more with far less talent.

 

[RF2044]

I like Marrone a lot, and think a lot of the criticisms aren't that bright (like going to the basketball board and asking Rick Jackson to shoot jumpers, expecting 10 men pressing, etc kind of not bright). But he was handed 2 guys on offense at skill positions that are playing on Sundays and some other solid pieces. I would junk the historical context, understand that some highly touted kids that would've been upperclassmen aren't here, and enjoy the fact that we're in bowl competition.

Would be interesting to see how things might be different with Sales and Collier. Would they have lived up to their ratings? Certainly, Sales at least would have made things easier for the other receivers by drawing the best defender in the secondary [and he was by far the best on the team at getting open].

I think help might have come from a lesser known offensive player, as well: Nick Speller. I'm pretty sure he would have helped our OL [bit of projection on my part, but I think he was pretty good, and probably better than Hay].

 

[rrlbees]

Would be interesting to see how things might be different with Sales and Collier. Would they have lived up to their ratings? Certainly, Sales at least would have made things easier for the other receivers by drawing the best defender in the secondary [and he was by far the best on the team at getting open].

I think help might have come from a lesser known offensive player, as well: Nick Speller. I'm pretty sure he would have helped our OL [bit of projection on my part, but I think he was pretty good, and probably better than Hay].

Speller would be starting at RT or LT. He'd be a senior right now.

 

[orange79]

Can someone just let me know when the statute of limitations runs out on comparing things to Robinson?

By my reckoning, 2027

 

[realcusefan888]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

What this shows in my opinion is:

1. They were handed what might have been the worst offense in D-1.
2. Substantial across the board improvement from where they started from.
3. Lots of room for improvement.

SORRY guys! after wvu you cant use the lack of talent excuse or go back and talk about how bad it was under robinson...these are mostly marrones guys and the talent is there...proven against wvu. the problem is with the approach (gameplan) and nassibs lack of consistency. we continually try and out muscle muscle teams instead of trying to light up the scoreboard. if we use west, provo, stevens, chew, graham, and lemon in combination routes this offense can be devastating! the talent is there...its the guys driving the bus who were the problem saturday...

 

[MadNY3]

In order to understand where you are and where you are going you need to know where you have started from and have some historical context.

What this shows in my opinion is:

1. They were handed what might have been the worst offense in D-1.
2. Substantial across the board improvement from where they started from.
3. Lots of room for improvement.

So why is the offense still consisting of the previous regime's players? Why are we still identity less on O? Is it because Marrone simply wants to claw the way to victory and in lieu of having a definable offensive strategy, we will go week to week to figure out what to do...until year five when theoretically it is all Marrone's players?

Not wise assing. Just want to know why we need to be historical when we all know our O has stunk since the decade began. That's what Marrone is here to fix...and it clearly needs a ways to go. But love the fact the program won 8 games last year and 5/8 this year despite the issues.

 

[RF2044]

Speller would be starting at RT or LT. He'd be a senior right now.

I wasn't sure if Spiller would have been a senior this year [or would have graduated last year]--but I'm with you. Having a more athletic RT [or LT], at 300 pounds would have helped this OL.

And maybe that would have enabled a guy like Hay to play inside, where his lack of lateral mobility wouldn't be as big of an issue.

I'm with you, Bees--Spiller would have improved this OL.

 

[kingottoiii]

Can someone just let me know when the statute of limitations runs out on comparing things to Robinson?

IMO next year. You can't use GRob as an excuse when Marrone has his first whole class as JRs and the first half class as SRs. If GRob's guys are so bad they should have been recruited over by now. The GRob guys left who will get major PT are Nassib, Chandler, Pugh, Stevens, Graham, Lemon, Sales (?), and Vaughan (?). So next year we should compare Marrone to the post McNabb P years. Anyone who still tried to use GRob is just making excuses.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Jesus.

I guess you don't believe they were faced with a complete rebuild. Actually look at the level of performance they inherited and think about it for one second.

If they were faced with a complete rebuild it seems accurate to me to say they had nowhere to go but up.

I've thought about this for many seconds. I'm not certain how many seconds you've really thought about it.

 

[orangenirvana]

Speller would be starting at RT or LT. He'd be a senior right now.

He'd be a redshirt junior this season.

It's a shame he couldn't buy in...

 

[orangenirvana]

So next year we should compare Marrone to the post McNabb P years.

Aren't we already there?

It only took Marrone a year and a half to reach that point. I'd say that's a pretty good accomplishment, no?

 

[rrlbees]

He'd be a redshirt junior this season.

It's a shame he couldn't buy in...

He'd be a senior the way Doug does redshirts.

Couldn't buy in? Oh Lord