Status of Syracuse University football tackle Justin Pugh

[OttoinGrotto]

No question--formations and tempo can make a difference in terms of how a defense reacts. But that is also contingent on having playmakers that the defense needs to account for.

We just have a fundamental disagreement here. I just don't see how a defense reacts to tempo is contingent on playmakers.

Either you play at a fast enough pace to stress the defense or you don't. We don't. Which would be fine if we were good at winning the TOP game, but we're not good at that either.

 

[RF2044]

We just have a fundamental disagreement here. I just don't see how a defense reacts to tempo is contingent on playmakers.

Either you play at a fast enough pace to stress the defense or you don't. We don't. Which would be fine if we were good at winning the TOP game, but we're not good at that either.

How a defense defends IS contingent on playmakers, though. And opposing defenses aren't apt to take as many chances if they are scared about the offensive personnel being able to burn them. You don't play 9-in-the-box if you are scared about getting beaten deep. You don't jailbreak pass rush if you're worried about someone getting outside the containment and churning up big chunks of yardage.

Establishing some playmakers means that teams will have to defend us honestly, which opens things up for everything else you try to do on offense.

And no worries--I don't see it as much of a disagreement [because I am a proponent of using the Dome to our advantage via spread, and have advocated that for years, ask Millhouse] as being misaligned on what is ailing this offense. I view the real root of the problem on OL and not having game changing playmakers the last few years. Hopefully, that starts to change on both counts this season.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

How a defense defends IS contingent on playmakers, though. And opposing defenses aren't apt to take as many chances if they are scared about the offensive personnel being able to burn them. You don't play 9-in-the-box if you are scared about getting beaten deep. You don't jailbreak pass rush if you're worried about someone getting outside the containment and churning up big chunks of yardage.

Establishing some playmakers means that teams will have to defend us honestly, which opens things up for everything else you try to do on offense.

And no worries--I don't see it as much of a disagreement [because I am a proponent of using the Dome to our advantage via spread, and have advocated that for years, ask Millhouse] as being misaligned on what is ailing this offense. I view the real root of the problem on OL and not having game changing playmakers the last few years. Hopefully, that starts to change on both counts this season.

Fair enough. What burns me is that I feel that tempo is something we can control. Before you listed OL, playmakers and formations/system as the ailments. In terms of what we can control though, formations/system is at the top of the list, and it makes more sense to wring my hands over why we don't make a choice to up the tempo over bemoaning talent deficiencies.

 

[billsin01]

That perspective overlooks the benefit that came with changing the program's culture--one of the most important things that happened when Marrone showed up.

And I don't think it was players "jettisoned" as much as it was player's self-selecting out after seeing what would be required of them under the new coaching staff. There's no doubt in my mind that a player like Speller would have helped us if he hadn't left. But if he wasn't willing to put in the work and buy into the culture that Marrone demanded, then we were probably better off letting him walk. And no hard feelings to those players--that wasn't what they signed up for when they came to SU under a different coaching staff.

That attrition hurt us--no question. But I DEFINITELY think it was worthwhile in other respects.

These are all fair points. I'm not sure we'll ever know on the "jettisoned" vs. "chose to leave" point. I'm guessing a mix of the two, though I would say when you get to a number like ~30 there were some very uncomfortable conversations being had.

But generally I agree. It's a means to an end. I only point out that it's a calculated risk as a coach and I'm just not entirely sure I buy that we needed that many kids gone to change the culture. I could be wrong.

 

[Scooch]

I think you're both right. We should be playing at a faster tempo, and we also haven't had playmaking talent that would scare anybody if we did.

And let's also be real, quality depth was a serious problem even when we were good, so it sure as hell is going to be a serious problem now. Our '97 team was wrecked in large part because of a rash of injuries that we had no answer for. And that was in an era when we were as talented 1-22 as any team in the country. But even if we get back to that level 1-22, we're never going to be as talented 23-44, and that's our burden. We're a small market team, that won't ever change.

So we can say that Pugh's absence is an "excuse", and it can be, but it's also a legitimately real challenge.

Basically I'm saying that it's a floor wax AND a cake topping.