The accumulation of statistics matters

[OttoinGrotto]

Listen up, ya meatheads. We've tried emphasizing defense. We've tried playing pro-style. It put us in the cellar among our peers.

We went from being one of the most innovative football programs in the 80s and 90s to one of the most boring and uninspired programs after Y2K. We got a step slow in what is required to compete in college football (facilities, etc.) and had to split the recruiting pie with a growing number of programs in our region. We lost our advantages, and tried to gut it out with a defensive identity and by trying to play like the pros. Which is a problem, when that's exactly what every school in our region was also trying to do, and also because it completely ignored the one truly unique advantage our program could offer, the Carrier Dome.

Meanwhile, the rest of the college football world went to work, revolutionizing the game with tempo, the spread formation, an openness to throwing the ball, and a better understanding of game situation probabilities (looking at you, punter that stays on the sideline). This produced unprecedented opportunity for scoring and yardage by the programs that made these leaps, and allowed programs with the right mindset to make the traditional powers uncomfortable.

Here's the point - we now find ourselves with a man at the helm that didn't just have a front row seat for the revolution, he had a hand in turning a program that was at the bottom into a force of nature. He proved that he can lead a lesser program. He understands the value of the Dome, and he understands that if we're truly going to be unique, and if we're truly going to find a way to upgrade our talent, we need to offer something more. It's not going to be facilities, and it's not going to be recent success. It's going to be opportunity.

And that's why concerns over our yards per play and the disparity between our yardage and scoring misses the forest for the trees. It's not a question that we need those things to improve. But while we're in the process of improving that we're going to have a QB that throws for somewhere in the vicinity of 4000 yards and 30 TDs, and have receivers catch 100+ passes. And then ask yourself, if you're a talented offensive player in the Northeast, would you rather play in the Dome and have the chance to do the things you love, score TDs and throw and catch and run, or go to BC where the top guy sees the ball once in a while, but if you're not the top guy, good luck?

This is the formula for success. It won't happen overnight. That's the price our program will pay to become relevant again. In the meantime, Dungey throwing a ton matters. ET and Philips and Salt Badger and Ish catching tons of passes matter. People that say what about the defense are too quick to forget that focusing on that buried us. People that hyperventilate over 4th down decisions are going to have to deal with it. People that grew comfortable with losing close and confused that with meaningful progress will find reasons to pick at the plan because they'd rather lose with the familiar than change. But all the while, Syracuse will become a different animal and become the destination for offensive talent in the Northeast. We're already seeing the ball rolling - DeVito is coming because he believes he can throw for 5000 yards in a season.

You can fight it, but you'll be left behind.

BUCKLE UP

WAR DAMN OTTO

 

[rrlbees]

You can have a fun high scoring offense and still have a competent defense.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

You can have a fun high scoring offense and still have a competent defense.

Not right now, not us. And that's fine.

 

[rrlbees]

Not right now, not us. And that's fine.

Why not? They weren't this bad last year or pretty much any year prior ever. The only possible explanation is that 2 of our opponents are strong offenses.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Why not? They weren't this bad last year or pretty much any year prior ever. The only possible explanation is that 2 of our opponents are strong offenses.

We were never going to have a competent defense this season. The defense sucked last season too. I'm not taking comfort in a difference in degrees of sucking when Robinson emphasized defense, Marrone openly favored placing his talent on the defensive side of the ball, and Shafer was a defensive coach. And where did that get us? A defense without any standout players, zero depth, and hardly any upperclassmen contributors on the defensive two deep.

Our only option is to try and differentiate with offense. Thank goodness that's also the smart choice because of the Dome. The defense can catch up later.

 

[SWC75]

It's a process, which is why i described it as "20-20 vision". In the meantime, we are free to comment on what we see as we go along. What we've seen the last two weeks has not been impressive.

 

[Chip]

Why not? They weren't this bad last year or pretty much any year prior ever. The only possible explanation is that 2 of our opponents are strong offenses.

Well it does appear that the best offense in college football has impacted 33% of our defensive stats so I do think that's some of the explanation. We'd have to assume that UConn, Wake, BC will normalize it from super terrible to regular terrible.

And it was pretty bad last year. 440 per game, 6.21 per play. Ron Thompson was removed from that, and replaced this year by a true freshman. That's a cupboard problem.

Cordy has been removed from it now too.

It really shouldn't be all that surprising. It was going to take some work to fix. Going to be a long process. Need different humans, and more of them.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

It's a process, which is why i described it as "20-20 vision". In the meantime, we are free to comment on what we see as we go along. What we've seen the last two weeks has not been impressive.

To you, as a bored historian, maybe so.

But I'm pretty sure recruits are noticing that we have two guys ranking among the national statistics leaders in receptions. And that matters.

 

[SWC75]

To you, as a bored historian, maybe so.

But I'm pretty sure recruits are noticing that we have two guys ranking among the national statistics leaders in receptions. And that matters.

I do think that will have a favorable impact as we go along. If we have two guys with 100 catches, quarterbacks and wide receivers won't be looking at the won-lost record. But we need recruits in other areas, as well.

 

[rrlbees]

Well it does appear that the best offense in college football has impacted 33% of our defensive stats so I do think that's some of the explanation. We'd have to assume that UConn, Wake, BC will normalize it from super terrible to regular terrible. And it was pretty bad last year. 440 per game, 6.21 per play. Ron Thompson was removed from that, and replaced this year by a true freshman. That's a cupboard problem. Cordy has been removed from it now too. It really shouldn't be all that surprising. It was going to take some work to fix. Going to be a long process. Need different humans, and more of them.

Yea but everyone returning should be a year stronger and a year better. And I hope it's just the fact we played 2 high powered offenses. The yards per play is historically bad.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Well it does appear that the best offense in college football has impacted 33% of our defensive stats so I do think that's some of the explanation. We'd have to assume that UConn, Wake, BC will normalize it from super terrible to regular terrible.

And it was pretty bad last year. 440 per game, 6.21 per play. Ron Thompson was removed from that, and replaced this year by a true freshman. That's a cupboard problem.

Cordy has been removed from it now too.

It really shouldn't be all that surprising. It was going to take some work to fix. Going to be a long process. Need different humans, and more of them.

Honestly, what were those planning meetings like?

Babers - OK, let's talk about defensive end. Who do we have there?

Staff - Well, we've got a guy coming off a redshirt year. Jake Pickard. Solid recruit, bright future, but due to the redshirt hasn't seen any game action.

Babers - Sounds promising, who else?

Staff - ...

Staff - Looks like a few walk-ons.

Babers - OK, thanks for running down our 3rd string. Who was on the 2 deep last season.

Staff - Well, uh, so those players, uh... they're all gone.

Babers - You're telling me we have one returning scholarship defensive end, and he hasn't played in a game yet?

Staff - Yeah, when you put it like that... yes, that is correct.

Babers - Alright. Belief without evidence I guess.

 

[Millhouse]

You need an editor

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I do think that will have a favorable impact as we go along. If we have two guys with 100 catches, quarterbacks and wide receivers won't be looking at the won-lost record. But we need recruits in other areas, as well.

When we were terrible on offense people told me that would appeal to offensive players because we could point to the opportunity in front of them for early playing time.

Shoe's on the other foot now.

Raising the profile of our offense and adopting a scoring identity is the only choice, even if it comes at the expense of other things.

There may come a time when we're so loaded with offensive talent that we're forced to flip guys that are great athletes over to defense because we're out of room on the offensive side of the ball.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

You need an editor

Doesn't hrlp

 

[Chip]

Yea but everyone returning should be a year stronger and a year better. And I hope it's just the fact we played 2 high powered offenses. The yards per play is historically bad.

Well, as has been speculated here, it's possible that the player we thought was the key returner of the defense (Zaire Franklin) might be a below average MLB.

Go back and watch him on the 20 yard USF run at the end of the half. Just very disappointing that he couldn't make that play.

I don't think we should be historically bad, and I hope as I said some of the worse offenses will get us looking slightly better. But I would probably expect something slightly worse than last year, which was really bad.

 

[Orangepace]

Well put.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Well, as has been speculated here, it's possible that the player we thought was the key returner of the defense (Zaire Franklin) might be a below average MLB.

Go back and watch him on the 20 yard USF run at the end of the half. Just very disappointing that he couldn't make that play.

I don't think we should be historically bad, and I hope as I said some of the worse offenses will get us looking slightly better. But I would probably expect something slightly worse than last year, which was really bad.

We have given up seven 30+ yard runs in three games, 3.33 per game. Last year we gave up 9 the ENTIRE season, 0.75 per game. This season TFL is at 3.67 per game. Last season it was at 6.5 per game. Both are huge differences in the D. Everyone expected the D to struggle, especially vs the pass. However the run D has been incompetent.

 

[TheCusian]

Why not? They weren't this bad last year or pretty much any year prior ever. The only possible explanation is that 2 of our opponents are strong offenses.

One could make the case that we were this bad, but we played keep away on offense, giving the opposition less opportunity to score. The extra possessions we give by choice (playing fast) and the ones we give be being less than efficient (so far) are compounding the final numbers just as they improve our offensive stats.

Comparing this system to anything we've ever done will break calculators. If we give up another 40+ points to UCONN, I'll reevaluate. I'd also look for our scoring to rise and YPP. A more efficient offense will be a good friend to the defense.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

One could make the case that we were this bad, but we played keep away on offense, giving the opposition less opportunity to score. The extra possessions we give by choice (playing fast) and the ones we give be being less than efficient (so far) are compounding the final numbers just as they improve our offensive stats.

Comparing this system to anything we've ever done will break calculators. If we give up another 40+ points to UCONN, I'll reevaluate. I'd also look for our scoring to rise and YPP. A more efficient offense will be a good friend to the defense.

Last season we faced 70.6 plays per game. This season the D has seen 67 plays per game.

 

[TheCusian]

Last season we faced 70.6 plays per game. This season the D has seen 67 plays per game.

Sure. Big plays are the big problem. But if you give up a big play and follow it up with a really fast three and out or a really fast 6 and out, you're compounding the issue.

Last year we'd put up slightly more resistance (more plays) and take longer to flame out on offense - leaving less opportunity for big plays.

That's why I used the word compounding.