The Impact of Recruiting on Marrone's Extension

[OttoinGrotto]

Wow...style over substance. Problem is, you continually move the goal posts to justify you're negativity.

That's crap.

I have been ENORMOUSLY consistent promoting the need for style for years now. I haven't moved the goal posts at all. I praised Marrone for the excitement the offense injected vs Northwestern. Now it's not as exciting, and yeah, I'm more critical.

The truth is, it's easier for you to discount my opinion if you can paint me as irrationally negative and unfair, but that's not the case at all.

 

[Millhouse]

That's crap.

I have been ENORMOUSLY consistent promoting the need for style for years now. I haven't moved the goal posts at all. I praised Marrone for the excitement the offense injected vs Northwestern. Now it's not as exciting, and yeah, I'm more critical.

The truth is, it's easier for you to discount my opinion if you can paint me as irrationally negative and unfair, but that's not the case at all.

what's different about the offense?

don't start with the number of plays or yards because you have a bad habit of confusing cause and effect.

one thing that is different is a healthy lemon in the lineup. i think that hurts us indirectly despite lemon being a good player.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

what's different about the offense?

Well, the first difference is that it isn't as successful.

We're also not playing at as frantic a pace. Faster than we're used to yes, but not as fast as the first two games.

I haven't checked a participation report, but I also think we're playing fewer guys - no Broyld, Clark not seeing the field much, Flemming's back but not in the mix much. It's weird since we've got Stevens, Pugh and Lemon and we're now less successful. It seems like we're not rotating personnel as much - Sales, Lemon and West are the wideouts, that's it.

We've also stopped attempting to throw long. Nassib's not accurate, but earlier in the season we were at least getting some PIs on throws down the field, and we did complete a few long-ish passes.

Lastly, Marrone likes to be content again. Against Buttgers he's content to have the half run out without taking a crack at regaining possession, and is content for a field goal. Against Northwestern we rushed up to the line twice before the quarter ended to get a play off.

 

[GoSU96]

what's different about the offense?

don't start with the number of plays or yards because you have a bad habit of confusing cause and effect.

one thing that is different is a healthy lemon in the lineup. i think that hurts us indirectly despite lemon being a good player.

10 more plays, 100 more yds, per game.

 

[Millhouse]

Well, the first difference is that it isn't as successful.

We're also not playing at as frantic a pace. Faster than we're used to yes, but not as fast as the first two games.

I haven't checked a participation report, but I also think we're playing fewer guys - no Broyld, Clark not seeing the field much, Flemming's back but not in the mix much. It's weird since we've got Stevens, Pugh and Lemon and we're now less successful. It seems like we're not rotating personnel as much - Sales, Lemon and West are the wideouts, that's it.

We've also stopped attempting to throw long. Nassib's not accurate, but earlier in the season we were at least getting some PIs on throws down the field, and we did complete a few long-ish passes.

Lastly, Marrone likes to be content again. Against Buttgers he's content to have the half run out without taking a crack at regaining possession, and is content for a field goal. Against Northwestern we rushed up to the line twice before the quarter ended to get a play off.

we are 2 seconds slower per play against Rutgers as Northwestern and USC

i'm sure that now that I point it out to you, those will be the most important 2 seconds ever.

but the rest of us will just think that you work backwards from the number of plays and assume the pace must by why the number of plays are down

i do think we might be foregoing riskier passes because Nassib is always looking for Lemon

 

[OttoinGrotto]

we are 2 seconds slower per play against Rutgers as Northwestern and USC

i'm sure that now that I point it out to you, those will be the most important 2 seconds ever.

but the rest of us will just think that you work backwards from the number of plays and assume the pace must by why the number of plays are down

i do think we might be foregoing riskier passes because Nassib is always looking for Lemon

I'm not sure what 2 seconds per play means. I suspect there might be some kind of multiplier to that though.

N'western TOP (in seconds)= 1960
Plays = 95
Time per play = 20.63

USC TOP = 1754
Plays = 87
Time per play = 20.16

SB TOP = 1782
Plays = 80
Time per play = 22.27

Minny TOP = 1582
Plays = 64
Time per play = 24.71

Pitt TOP = 1530
Plays = 64
Time per play = 23.90
Just for fun, subtracting the last drive when we were trying to kill clock...
TOP = 1238
Plays = 53
Time per play = 23.35

Buttgers TOP = 1681
Plays = 74
Time per play = 22.71

So, again, I'm not really certain what this means, but it does appear as though we played at a faster pace the first two games and are at least somewhat slower the last four with Minny and Pitt being the worst.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm not sure what 2 seconds per play means. I suspect there might be some kind of multiplier to that though.

N'western TOP (in seconds)= 1960
Plays = 95
Time per play = 20.63

USC TOP = 1754
Plays = 87
Time per play = 20.16

SB TOP = 1782
Plays = 80
Time per play = 22.27

Minny TOP = 1582
Plays = 64
Time per play = 24.71

Pitt TOP = 1530
Plays = 64
Time per play = 23.90
Just for fun, subtracting the last drive when we were trying to kill clock...
TOP = 1238
Plays = 53
Time per play = 23.35

Buttgers TOP = 1681
Plays = 74
Time per play = 22.71

So, again, I'm not really certain what this means, but it does appear as though we played at a faster pace the first two games and are at least somewhat slower the last four with Minny and Pitt being the worst.

22-20=2

 

[OttoMets]

Well, the first difference is that it isn't as successful.

We're also not playing at as frantic a pace. Faster than we're used to yes, but not as fast as the first two games.

I haven't checked a participation report, but I also think we're playing fewer guys - no Broyld, Clark not seeing the field much, Flemming's back but not in the mix much. It's weird since we've got Stevens, Pugh and Lemon and we're now less successful. It seems like we're not rotating personnel as much - Sales, Lemon and West are the wideouts, that's it.

We've also stopped attempting to throw long. Nassib's not accurate, but earlier in the season we were at least getting some PIs on throws down the field, and we did complete a few long-ish passes.

Lastly, Marrone likes to be content again. Against Buttgers he's content to have the half run out without taking a crack at regaining possession, and is content for a field goal. Against Northwestern we rushed up to the line twice before the quarter ended to get a play off.

We did hustle to the line to end the first quarter on Saturday. I liked it. Quick Nassib first down and snuck in another run for Smith as the clock ran down.

But the close to the half was disappointing. It'd be nice to maximize the number of possessions; Marrone didn't seem to want to do that.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

We did hustle to the line to end the first quarter on Saturday. I liked it. Quick Nassib first down and snuck in another run for Smith as the clock ran down.

But the close to the half was disappointing. It'd be nice to maximize the number of possessions; Marrone didn't seem to want to do that.

That's a fair point. It seemed like we were fully committed to it vs Northwestern, and slowly but surely since we've been less interested in that priority.

 

[SoBristol]

You're not asking for a lot. I think that's kind of the problem. The expectations are so low.

Why? East Crapper State can field an offense that scores points. What makes us so special that we can't score? I mean really ask yourself that. So many people here treat it like defenses should always be stout and asking for anything more than token scores from the offense is unreasonable. That's so backwards. More realistic to expect your defense to have problems and your offense to be explosive.

My comment wasn't about what we want to achieve when we have better talent at QB, RB and WR.

Realistically, from what I have seen on the field, and evaluating what we actually have after six games, we better be aiming to limit mistakes and win ugly.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

My comment wasn't about what we want to achieve when we have better talent at QB, RB and WR.

Realistically, from what I have seen on the field, and evaluating what we actually have after six games, we better be aiming to limit mistakes and win ugly.

It's year 4!

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Chip]

If you expected more than five wins you were not being realistic.

I sure hope you're not revising this to 3 in a couple of weeks.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[syr02esq]

This post is a monumental fail, with all due respect.

First off, recruiting would be aided with the extension of Marrone simply because kids wouldn't be worrying if the current staff will be here by the time they get on campus. Recruits have been drawn to the likes of Wheatley, Anselmo and Marrone mainly. They are down-to-earth guys who are very good when speaking with a kid and his family. Sure, they haven't been able to land the hyperbolic "5-star". Most teams don't. They don't need to either. There are alot of good players on this team that haven't had their shot yet because they are exactly that, young. It isn't that they aren't good enough to play, it is that they needed more time to develop and understand the concepts. Next year's team will be feature every one of DM's recruits thus far. I will hold my true talent judgement until then.

Secondly, getting to a bowl game would take a monumental upset? Um, who on our schedule is unbeatable? LMAO. Somebody above said we aren't exactly playing Oregon and Alabama. Amen. We are in the BE with Mizzou left as well. Every game remaining will be tough for a mistake-prone team, but we can certainly beat any of them. We mostly beat ourselves, teams certainly haven't been waxing the floor with us for crying out loud. If we can cut down on turnovers and mind-boggling mistakes, we can win every game left on the schedule. Our D is playing fast, gang-tackling and overall has been very good. Our O has the ability to move the ball, but they somehow shoot themselves in the foot inside the 35 yd line. If we score like we move the ball, we win most of the games. That is TBD.

We certainly can beat anyone on the schedule. But, the probability of beating anyone on our schedule is very low. We have to play a perfect game which as history has shown is impossible for this team.

 

[Rocco]

We certainly can beat anyone on the schedule. But, the probability of beating anyone on our schedule is very low. We have to play a perfect game which as history has shown is impossible for this team.

Perfect? C'mon bro-ski. That BFG return for a TD was the one mistake against Rutgers that cost us the game IMO. After that, the team (mainly Ryan) played way too nervous. Lemon dropping TD's didn't help either... to stick up for Ryan.

We need to play very well to beat any team on our remaining schedule, not perfect. If we were playing LSU or FLA, then yes we would need to play perfect. Against LVille or Cincy, not quite.

 

[SoBristol]

It's year 4!

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

yes - and we are good enough to win ugly.
I am not commenting about where we should be in year 4. We don't have a lot of firepower (haven't won many recruiting battles) but we can mix up some Smith and some passing and move the sticks. It is what we are.

No point in griping that we aren't WVa or Oregon.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

yes - and we are good enough to win ugly.

I think we could be good enough to do more than win ugly.

I think we have a coach that likes to win ugly.

 

[Stern]

It now appears that SU will (hopefully) end up 5 & 7. It would take a monumental upset to get to a bowl game. That, to me, is another year of underachieving.

5-7 is being kind. I don't see SU getting to 5 wins

 

[syr02esq]

Perfect? C'mon bro-ski. That BFG return for a TD was the one mistake against Rutgers that cost us the game IMO. After that, the team (mainly Ryan) played way too nervous. Lemon dropping TD's didn't help either... to stick up for Ryan.

We need to play very well to beat any team on our remaining schedule, not perfect. If we were playing LSU or FLA, then yes we would need to play perfect. Against LVille or Cincy, not quite.

Ok, perfect is a little hyperbole on my end. But the fact is, there is very little margin for error with this team. And we commit too many errors to win!

As an aside, even if we played a perfect game, don't think we would beat an LSU or FLA.