The cupboard was bare defensively for this staff

[two3zone]

When Marrone left, I implored the AD to conduct a national job search, and to open up the coffers with the ACC revenues we'd soon be earning to bring in a qualified candidate with head coaching experience.

Instead, we made an inside hire citing "continuity" as the basis. Then, 75% of the coaching staff left, so continuity went out the window. What made matters worse--in addition to Shafer not having any proven qualifications--was that he went out and cobbled together a staff that was more about putting the band back together instead of getting more proven commodities.

I don't know that Hackett would have been any more successful, frankly. I think the offensive concept would have been more competent, but the previous staff did not replenish the offensive talent that departed in 2012. It would have been an uphill challenge.

What upset me about Shafer is there seemed to be ZERO plan in place. What was the goal? What did you want to do? What "type" of players were you looking for to build a system around? I think he was far too over his head and really didn't have an idea of what he was doing. I'm not trying to kick the man while he's down, but we were a season or two away of winning 1 or 2 games a year and to a point where we probably couldn't of hired a coach even the caliber of Babers.

 

[Finwad32]

Our offense is obviously light years better. But, I find it comical that it's FHCSS's fault that we gave up 62 tonight when he didn't give up close to that last year.

 

[PhatOrange]

Bs

You want to lay this on depth and less talent, fine. But don't act like a 62 burger is on the feet of the players, because it's just not true.

Might have went over my head what your saying, but how does someone rationalize our DEnds continually crashing down on the RB when we all knew Jackson was going to keep it and run around the end? Once or twice fine but he did it every time.

In what defense is the RB taking the ball there DEnd responsibility?

 

[two3zone]

Our offense is obviously light years better. But, I find it comical that it's FHCSS's fault that we gave up 62 tonight when he didn't give up close to that last year.

No, we gave up 34+ points 7 times though with an extremely slow offense that burned a lot of the clock. We probably give up 45 against Louisville if SS was coaching, not because we would have played better defense, but because they wouldn't have had the opportunity to score more because they wouldn't have ran nearly as many plays.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Bs

You want to lay this on depth and less talent, fine. But don't act like a 62 burger is on the feet of the players, because it's just not true.

The blown coverages and assignments are definitely concerning. We knew we would be limited at defensive end and in the secondary. We sure looked limited.

 

[two3zone]

Might have went over my head what your saying, but how does someone rationalize our DEnds continually crashing down on the RB when we all knew Jackson was going to keep it and run around the end? Once or twice fine but he did it every time.

In what defense is the RB taking the ball there DEnd responsibility?

After he ran for his first 100 yards you'd figure they'd recognize it.

 

[Finwad32]

Might have went over my head what your saying, but how does someone rationalize our DEnds continually crashing down on the RB when we all knew Jackson was going to keep it and run around the end? Once or twice fine but he did it every time.

In what defense is the RB taking the ball there DEnd responsibility?

What I'm saying is we didn't give up 62 bc we have terrible talent.

 

[Finwad32]

No, we gave up 34+ points 7 times though with an extremely slow offense that burned a lot of the clock. We probably give up 45 against Louisville if SS was coaching, not because we would have played better defense, but because they wouldn't have had the opportunity to score more because they wouldn't have ran nearly as many plays.

Doesn't matter, we didn't give up 62 tonight bc of SS

 

[Finwad32]

The blown coverages and assignments are definitely concerning. We knew we would be limited at defensive end and in the secondary. We sure looked limited.

The 1st 2 touchdowns tonight could've been thrown to more than 1 receiver, that's not a talent issue

 

[two3zone]

Doesn't matter, we didn't give up 62 tonight bc of SS

I don't think anybody said we did.

What I'm saying is we didn't give up 62 bc we have terrible talent.

Well, replace our defense with better talent and we don't give up 62, I'll disagree with you on this point.

 

[Cuse House]

Honestly, nothing has changed. I'm still more excited than I've ever been about Cuse football and the only thing that matters now are these next few winnable games. USF will be better than most think and would be a great opportunity to get a win. I am going to try and get back down to the dome next weekend. If anything, tonight showed me that I won't get as much immediate gratification as I was hoping. I know it will be a few years before we compete near the top. The process of getting there is in place and our culture is changing. On to next week, have a good weekend everyone!

 

[Finwad32]

I don't think anybody said we did.




Well, replace our defense with better talent and we don't give up 62, I'll disagree with you on this point.

Well, replace our DC with a better scheme and we don't give up 62, I'll disagree with you on this point.

 

[TheCusian]

I wish Marrone never left. There, I said it.

Well sure... But

Babers > Marrone

 

[RF2044]

Well, replace our DC with a better scheme and we don't give up 62, I'll disagree with you on this point.

Nonsense. No defensive system would make this group of players successful.

It wouldn't matter if we ran a 3-4, a 4-3, or anything else today. No system would have slowed down that train.

"Better scheme" is a fallacy, and I love your posts finwad--I just disagree with your conclusion here.

 

[Finwad32]

Nonsense. No defensive system would make this group of players successful.

It wouldn't matter if we ran a 3-4, a 4-3, or anything else.

"Better scheme" is a fallacy, and I love your posts finwad--I just disagree with your conclusion here.

You're a strong poster, I'll never say otherwise, but there was some flat out terrible Defense tonight. LJ literally could've hit 2 out of 3 of his eligible targets for untouched TD's on the 1st 2 possessions tonight, that's not a talent issue.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Well, replace our DC with a better scheme and we don't give up 62, I'll disagree with you on this point.

Ward's part of the deal for this season. If he's not getting it done, we'll see what happens then.

 

[TheCusian]

Our offense is obviously light years better. But, I find it comical that it's FHCSS's fault that we gave up 62 tonight when he didn't give up close to that last year.

If we'd run our offense at this pace we'd have vs GTech and FSU.

 

[Briancuse]

Ward's part of the deal for this season. If he's not getting it done, we'll see what happens then.

Your not going to give up on your Dc after one game, obviously changes need to be made, but he still believes in him.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Your not going to give up on your Dc after one game, obviously changes need to be made, but he still believes in him.

I agree.

 

[TheCusian]

Ward's part of the deal for this season. If he's not getting it done, we'll see what happens then.

Yep. Babers demoted his best friend after one year at Bowling Green.

 

[RF2044]

You're a strong poster, I'll never say otherwise, but there was some flat out terrible Defense tonight. LJ literally could've hit 2 out of 3 of his eligible targets for untouched TD's on the 1st 2 possessions tonight, that's not a talent issue.

Absolutely. Our defense was terrible.

The tackling sucked. Our coverage sucked. Our pass rush sucked. We didn't contain. We barely slowed them down. It would have been worse if we didn't force some turnovers at key times.

But do you honestly believe that them converting those long, downfield plays or long runs wasn't indicative of a talent differential? When they have 6-3 receivers going up top 50 yards downfield against a 5-10, less athletic CB trailing the play, you don't think that's a talent issue? C'mon.

It absolutely was a talent issue. It was also an execution issue, which also pertains to the talent.

I'm not sure if it was a game plan issue--welcome input on that. I just think that we lacked the capacity to slow them down, which is largely on personnel. And that there isn't a magic silver bullet we could have played tonight if the defensive scheme were something different, that would have improved results.

 

[Finwad32]

Absolutely. Our defense was terrible.

The tackling sucked. Our coverage sucked. Our pass rush sucked. We didn't contain. We barely slowed them down. It would have been worse if we didn't force some turnovers at key times.

But do you honestly believe that them converting those long, downfield plays or long runs wasn't indicative of talent? When they have 6-3 receivers going up top 50 yards downfield against a 5-10, less athletic CB trailing the play? C'mon.

It absolutely was a talent issue. It was also an execution issue, which also pertains to the talent.

I'm not sure if it was a game plan issue--welcome input on that. I just think that we lacked the capacity to slow them down, which is largely on personnel. And that there isn't a magic silver bullet we could have played tonight if the defensive scheme were something different that would have improved results.

I won't say our talent is top notch, that much is obvious. But, you can eliminate big plays and unsound defense regardless of talent.

Ward may be fine, but, he was thoroughly out coached tonight.

 

[RF2044]

I won't say our talent is top notch, that much is obvious. But, you can eliminate big plays and unsound defense regardless of talent.

Ward may be fine, but, he was thoroughly out coached tonight.

"Out coached" is a euphemism for poor talent / lack of execution.

This reminds me of that classic Steve Martin bit about how to become a millionaire and never pay taxes.

Step one, get a million dollars...

 

[Finwad32]

"Out coached" is a euphemism for poor talent / lack of execution.

This reminds me of that classic Steve Martin bit about how to become a millionaire and never pay taxes.

Step one, get a million dollars...

That's just not true, poor talent is an excuse. Lack of execution is evidence of poor coaching.

 

[Briancuse]

That's just not true, poor talent is an excuse. Lack of execution is evidence of poor coaching.

It really isn't, where are the playmakers on our defense?