Tell me why I shouldn't expect...

[Chip]

Can't rely on Broyld and Estime for they may still be injured in 2015.

Wouldn't that be a pisser. Does anyone know what Broyld's injury is?

 

[AZOrange]

Yards Smards - its points and only points that matter. Garbage yardages between the 20's means ZERO.

I completely agree.

 

[Scooch]

Wouldn't that be a pisser. Does anyone know what Broyld's injury is?

I think he developed alligator arms.

Really sad.

 

[Scooch]

6 QB's on scholarship next year doesn't count as too many in your mind? If you're planning on responding with the same repetitive crap in which you say none of them are good enough, save it. I'm just talking about numbers

Seriously, I'm sure we'll move 1 or 2 to another position.

Jokingly, we've never been deeper at QB!!!! Right board?!?!

 

[KaiserUEO]

6 QB's on scholarship next year doesn't count as too many in your mind?

If you're planning on responding with the same repetitive crap in which you say none of them are good enough, save it.
I'm just talking about numbers

Chicken or egg.

Why does Syracuse have so many QBs??

Because none are any good.

They don't need to find a 12 year NFL QB, those are nearly impossible to land, but there are plenty of good college QBs out there, need to find 1 of them.

And playing hardnosed ball won't do it,especially when you're not hardnosed.

I want the next coach to talk about what he will do...I will throw it 50x a game...and not talk about intangibles...we're gonna lock em in the Dome blah blah blah.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Hey man, I'm with you. I was throwing a bone to people and setting the bar low.

We were a sterling 121st in scoring offense this year (17.1 ppg). Thank God for Tulane and Kent State keeping us out of the basement.

2013 we were 100th (22.7 ppg).

To get to 60th in 2015 we'd probably need to get to 30 ppg. So essentially score a TD more each game over last year.

By the way, our remarkable 2012 season that everyone gets emotionally erect over... was 56th in scoring offense.

84th in 2011, 97th in 2010, 99th in 2010... 74th in 2004.

Sweet merciful crap, we are always HORRID at offense.

You know, the more I think about this, the more I start to feel really TOed.

Not just because we are the only P5 team that plays our home games in a controlled environment so we have unique, attractive things to offer really good offensive players, but because for all of the scoring everyone else is doing that we're not, we still have people thinking that the answer is for us to go heavy on tight ends and fullbacks and try to play smashmouth, grind it out football.

The people in Syracuse would have no idea what to do if they saw an offense every week that averaged 30 points a game. They'd go ballistic. Probably be confused. And the sad thing is - 30 points per game would rank you 61st in college football right now! 61st isn't really much to aspire to. In 2004, 30 points per game would have given you the 32nd best offense in college football - folks, the game has changed and it happened pretty quickly. We don't realize it because we haven't seen it first hand, but it has.

But hey, you know what, let's run some option, put a fullback in there, go double tight and play ball control and for field position and try to grind and white knuckle our way to the bare minimum for bowl qualification in our pristine playing conditions while everyone scores more TDs in 4 games than we do in a season.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I want the next coach to talk about what he will do...I will throw it 50x a game...

Preach on.

 

[SmilinBob]

If there is continuity on the O-line and they play well/stay healthy, I can see points and yards improving by quite a bit. My hope is that Hunt learned how to see the field better from being in the booth and puts this new knowledge to use. Need somebody to take it to the house from 30+ yards run or pass and not get tackled inside the 10.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Because we are Syracuse University.

 

[Millhouse]

Preach on.

one team averaged 50 pass attempts in wins this year.

that team went 3 and 8

teams that averaged 40 pass attempts in their wins went 62 and 115.

winning usually leads to rushes. there's something wrong with teams that need to throw 40-50 times to win

baylor should be pass happy enough for anyone

35 passes per game is just fine

negative 23% correlation between wins and passing attempts.

i like lots of wr and wide o line splits because it's easier to run and throw if you get people the out of the way rather than trying to block everyone

 

[RF2044]

...SU's offense to finish 2105 ranked 60th or better in total offense?

That would put is in the rarified air of "top half" of college football.

Hunt will be back as our starting QB, fresh off a season spent in the booth learning the game.

Brolyd, Estime and Ismael will all be back as WRs.

The "talented" young RB crew that people here have been hyping for 3 years will be getting significant carries.

Our top TE returns.

Marrone's emphasis on recruiting OLmen should be paying off, 5 years after his first full recruiting class.

We were 115th this season, which is a complete and abject embarrassment. But many are saying that's because of injuries and how badly McDonald bungled things.

We were 87th in total offense in 2013. Which of course, also sucks.

But to go from that 2013 level (377 yards/game) to 60th (using this year as the benchmark) we need to improve by all of 36 yards/game.

Why can't we improve by 36 yards a game vs two years ago?

Because the AD / coaching staff do not appear commited to address the systemic offensive deficiencies and offensive limitations of the staff as currently constituted, with the intent of correcting this year's ineptitude. So given that, why would anything change?

 

[TheCusian]

I completely agree.

I'll say it again: Normally, yards gained will translate to points better than any other stat. I don't know why we're rooting for one over the other. Points are better than yards - but I'd take the 1st half of the year in yards over the last two games (no yards, no points) in a heartbeat.

 

[TheCusian]

You know, the more I think about this, the more I start to feel really TOed.

Not just because we are the only P5 team that plays our home games in a controlled environment so we have unique, attractive things to offer really good offensive players, but because for all of the scoring everyone else is doing that we're not, we still have people thinking that the answer is for us to go heavy on tight ends and fullbacks and try to play smashmouth, grind it out football.

The people in Syracuse would have no idea what to do if they saw an offense every week that averaged 30 points a game. They'd go ballistic. Probably be confused. And the sad thing is - 30 points per game would rank you 61st in college football right now! 61st isn't really much to aspire to. In 2004, 30 points per game would have given you the 32nd best offense in college football - folks, the game has changed and it happened pretty quickly. We don't realize it because we haven't seen it first hand, but it has.

But hey, you know what, let's run some option, put a fullback in there, go double tight and play ball control and for field position and try to grind and white knuckle our way to the bare minimum for bowl qualification in our pristine playing conditions while everyone scores more TDs in 4 games than we do in a season.

You're guessing at what the offense will be based on the "12 personnel"? As a really knowledgable poster said on this board (too lazy to find it) - you can run out of it heavy (your nightmare apparently), split your TE out wide for a mismatch, run motion and get into spread principles quickly.

Watch the Eagles. They run tons of 12 personnel, and have made Sanchez look like a pro-bowler. It helps to have McCoy and Ertz - but it's all relative. Custis, Dunkelberger, Phillips, Parris, Fredricks, etc. might be enough.

What I'm hoping for is something similar to what Marrone was running with Lemon; not in actual x's and o's - but in philosophy. Simple in execution and diagnosing things at the line or in play - but hard to stop.

 

[Millhouse]

I'll say it again: Normally, yards gained will translate to points better than any other stat. I don't know why we're rooting for one over the other. Points are better than yards - but I'd take the 1st half of the year in yards over the last two games (no yards, no points) in a heartbeat.

we broke that connection. like some high OPS baseball team that loads the bases all the time and strands everyone.

 

[TheCusian]

we broke that connection. like some high OPS baseball team that loads the bases all the time and strands everyone.

Yeah - I agree. It was maddening. But I'd take that over what we've seen the last two weeks. Hunt was a major factor in the Red Zone (even though he wasn't great this year) running the ball.

 

[Millhouse]

You're guessing at what the offense will be based on the "12 personnel"? As a really knowledgable poster said on this board (too lazy to find it) - you can run out of it heavy (your nightmare apparently), split your TE out wide for a mismatch, run motion and get into spread principles quickly.

Watch the Eagles. They run tons of 12 personnel, and have made Sanchez look like a pro-bowler. It helps to have McCoy and Ertz - but it's all relative. Custis, Dunkelberger, Phillips, Parris, Fredricks, etc. might be enough.

What I'm hoping for is something similar to what Marrone was running with Lemon; not in actual x's and o's - but in philosophy. Simple in execution and diagnosing things at the line or in play - but hard to stop.

serious understatement there

if you're going to replace WR with TE, the TE better be really good. If you have a WR in a TE's body, great, have him do it all.

i think it's a giant gamble. look at Stanford. Ertz, Fleener and Luck made the offense good. This year, their offense is bad and they're scrambling to patch something together.

It makes sense for a nobody like Lester to roll the dice on being the tight end offense guy to differentiate himself from the pack but it doesn't make much sense for us.

 

[Millhouse]

Yeah - I agree. It was maddening. But I'd take that over what we've seen the last two weeks. Hunt was a major factor in the Red Zone (even though he wasn't great this year) running the ball.

i fully expect hunt to start and that's fine. unless they get LICATA

 

[Scooch]

You know, the more I think about this, the more I start to feel really TOed. Not just because we are the only P5 team that plays our home games in a controlled environment so we have unique, attractive things to offer really good offensive players, but because for all of the scoring everyone else is doing that we're not, we still have people thinking that the answer is for us to go heavy on tight ends and fullbacks and try to play smashmouth, grind it out football. The people in Syracuse would have no idea what to do if they saw an offense every week that averaged 30 points a game. They'd go ballistic. Probably be confused. And the sad thing is - 30 points per game would rank you 61st in college football right now! 61st isn't really much to aspire to. In 2004, 30 points per game would have given you the 32nd best offense in college football - folks, the game has changed and it happened pretty quickly. We don't realize it because we haven't seen it first hand, but it has. But hey, you know what, let's run some option, put a fullback in there, go double tight and play ball control and for field position and try to grind and white knuckle our way to the bare minimum for bowl qualification in our pristine playing conditions while everyone scores more TDs in 4 games than we do in a season.

I share your frustration but we don't need to fill the Dome air with footballs to score points.

Running a wide open offense should mean being able to run and pass.

I love watching a team spread the field and run.

I honestly don't give a flying $&k *how* we gain more yards and score more, I just want to see us do it.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

You're guessing at what the offense will be based on the "12 personnel"? As a really knowledgable poster said on this board (too lazy to find it) - you can run out of it heavy (your nightmare apparently), split your TE out wide for a mismatch, run motion and get into spread principles quickly.

Watch the Eagles. They run tons of 12 personnel, and have made Sanchez look like a pro-bowler. It helps to have McCoy and Ertz - but it's all relative. Custis, Dunkelberger, Phillips, Parris, Fredricks, etc. might be enough.

What I'm hoping for is something similar to what Marrone was running with Lemon; not in actual x's and o's - but in philosophy. Simple in execution and diagnosing things at the line or in play - but hard to stop.

Chip Kelly's 12 > Lester's 12

 

[RF2044]

I share your frustration but we don't need to fill the Dome air with footballs to score points.

Running a wide open offense should mean feign able to run and pass.

I love watching a team spread the field and run.

I honestly don't give a flying $&k how we gain more yards and score more, I just want to see us do it.

Agree 100%, across the board. I used to bang the drum of the offense having to be a wide open air assault, to capitalize on having perfect conditions in the Dome for half the schedule.

But after years of general offensive futility, I'm at the point where I just want us to run something and run it well. At this point, I couldn't care less WHAT we run--just score some @#$ points and make it exciting.

 

[Millhouse]

Agree 100%, across the board. I used to bang the drum of the offense having to be a wide open air assault, to capitalize on having perfect conditions in the Dome for half the schedule.

But after years of general offensive futility, I'm at the point where I just want us to run something and run it well. At this point, I couldn't care less WHAT we run--just score some @#$ points and make it exciting.

some offenses are easier to run well than others. hoping for big strong fast guys with hands seems like doing it the hard way

 

[TheCusian]

serious understatement there

if you're going to replace WR with TE, the TE better be really good. If you have a WR in a TE's body, great, have him do it all.

i think it's a giant gamble. look at Stanford. Ertz, Fleener and Luck made the offense good. This year, their offense is bad and they're scrambling to patch something together.

It makes sense for a nobody like Lester to roll the dice on being the tight end offense guy to differentiate himself from the pack but it doesn't make much sense for us.

The Eagles are a nice mix of talent and scheme. I'm saying - we have no hope of having that talent - how about the scheme? Ertz was 4th in catches in the Dallas game. The WR's were lighting them up.

12 personnel doesn't need elite talent at TE, it needs talent. I think we have that.

 

[TheCusian]

some offenses are easier to run well than others. hoping for big strong fast guys with hands seems like doing it the hard way

I know you don't think much of where Lester's O was ranking at Elmhurst (top 50, har-har). But I'm taking a wild shot in the dark and guessing he didn't have NFL talent at TE either. I know it's all relative - but scheme can get guys open. Guys with average talent can become great in the right system (Lemon, Sales, etc.).

I'm most worried about a QB to get the ball to these guys on time and in the right place. Hoping a half year in the booth works some magic for Hunt.

 

[Millhouse]

12 personnel doesn't need elite talent at TE, it needs talent.

are you sure about that?

boise? even they had NFL TE.

 

[Millhouse]

I know you don't think much of where Lester's O was ranking at Elmhurst (top 50, har-har). But I'm taking a wild shot in the dark and guessing he didn't have NFL talent at TE either. I know it's all relative - but scheme can get guys open. Guys with average talent can become great in the right system (Lemon, Sales, etc.).

I'm most worried about a QB to get the ball to these guys on time and in the right place. Hoping a half year in the booth works some magic for Hunt.

when was elmhurst great?