The issue with the play calling

[SWC75]

Oh, so it's simply a matter of what plays we call.

So, you do have a problem with play calling.

I have to believe that that you understand the reality of football that play calling - whether it occurs in the first half or second half or first quarter - is dictated in part by what the defense does?

I mean, why was it that we couldn't continue to do against USC what we initially were able to do? Was that a function of our play calling?

Why don't you use your post as the template for your weekly question to Coach Marrone? I think it would go something like this "Coach why can't we do all the time what we did against USC in the first quarter, at the end of the game against WF, during the entire second half against UConn and the entire game against WVU?"

I'll be asking him why we don't do what we do best from the beginning of the game. And yes, we certainly did go to the pass because the gameplan of running the ball up the middle wasn't working.

By the way, the good teams dictate to the defense. They don't get dictated by the defense.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I guess I don't understand your point.

Clearly.

The offense had 405 yards against USF, including about 300 yards passing.

As SWC said, the bulk of those yards come at the end out of desperation.

And, if I recall correctly, there were three apparent TD passes that were dropped by SU.

Where in my post discussing issues with the play calling did I point to the dropped passes as being examples of bad play calling? Hint: I didn't.

So, I don't think it's play calling - I think it's a combination of talent and execution.

I argue that execution is a part of play calling.

Do I disagree with a particular play call from time to time? Sure I do. But I try to remind myself that I have not studied tape, I know very little about the x's and o's of offensive or defensive football, and I do not know the specific attributes of my players or the opposing players. So, I try to stay away from the hackneyed "play calling" complaints.

That hackneyed comment was a very polite and roundabout way to dismiss my post without considering anything I actually wrote. The observations I listed above do not require tape study, a profound knowledge of x's and o's, or scouting profiles on the opponents. That was pretty much the point of my post. There are issues with the play calling that the standard fan can see. You haven't addressed them.

I more frustrated by things that most on this board don't seem to address: (1) poor KOs; (2) stupid personal fouls; (3) poor tackling; and (4) an inability to truly pressure the QB.

At least for myself I know I've bemoaned the personal fouls, and Go told me they weren't a problem we usually have. What is there to say about poor kick offs - we need a guy that can kick the ball farther?:noideaeople have mentioned poor tackling, but what can you say about that - Shafer needs to teach better tackling technique? I suppose people could talk about ways that we could better pressure the QB, but I think that one is a true talent issue. Our LBs are young and our interior DL isn't all that great.

No matter where you go, no matter what fans you listen to, it is always play calling that is the culprit. I think that's because we can see and understand the offensive play call. We can't see the defensive play call, for the most part, and can't see or understand things like OL blocking or secondary coverage, or least we don't perceive the subtleties of those aspects of the game.

Putting aside that other people point to play calling I tried to make an honest attempt at sharing some thoughts on what some of the issues with play calling really appear to be. You keep wanting to point to talent. Well, the talent is what it is, but the play calling can, should and needs to improve.

I'm encouraged that some people get what my post was about, and discouraged that others continue to make excuses.

 

[OrangePA]

I'll be asking him why we don't do what we do best from the beginning of the game. And yes, we certainly did go to the pass because the gameplan of running the ball up the middle wasn't working.

By the way, the good teams dictate to the defense. They don't get dictated by the defense.

We all look forward to your weekly question.

As far as your maxim is concerned, I think it is a generalization that misses the point to certain degree.

Ultimately, ability dictates the game - schemes work if the players have the ability to make them work. Of course coaches try to fit the scheme to the player and I'm sure that's what Marrone is trying to do on the Hill.

Ultimately, play calling work if the players have the ability in the given situation - considering the ability of the opponent - to make them work.

BJ Daniels is a more talented QB than Ryan Nassib. He can make plays that Ryan cannot make.

The USF lines appeared to me to be stronger and more agile than the SU counterparts.

I think those factors were the most important ones this past Friday. It certainly did not help that SU made a series of boneheaded plays like the dropped passes and the bad KO and penalty at the end of the first half that really hurt.

 

[OrangePA]

Putting aside that other people point to play calling I tried to make an honest attempt at sharing some thoughts on what some of the issues with play calling really appear to be. You keep wanting to point to talent. Well, the talent is what it is, but the play calling can, should and needs to improve.

I'm encouraged that some people get what my post was about, and discouraged that others continue to make excuses.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate the conversation. That's what makes the board fun.

But, the idea that because certain teams on the west coast use a spread formation that seems to work Marrone is making a mistake by not implementing that system I think is the kind of lay assessment that fans tend to give when their teams lose.

Hey, I'd like to see a fast, dynamic offense that moves the ball and uses an option/spread approach. That would be great. And I'm sure Marrone wants to move the ball and score a lot of points while keeping the defense off balance.

I suspect that he has done the math and has determined that what you see on the west coast doesn't work with what he has right now. If Marrone has the talent to run an offense that is more productive and could result in more wins, than yes, I would agree that he is not coaching well. I don't believe that that is what is happening on the Hill.

Ultimately, I don't think that the scheme or the play calling led to our loss on Friday.

 

[OrangePA]

^^and a lot of passing yards in garbage time when USF already had the game one

Oh, so the play of the defense has a bearing upon what the offense can do?

Got it.

 

[Stern]

Oh, so the play of the defense has a bearing upon what the offense can do?

Got it.

settle down junior don't get all pissy.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

But, the idea that because certain teams on the west coast use a spread formation that seems to work Marrone is making a mistake by not implementing that system I think is the kind of lay assessment that fans tend to give when their teams lose.

In fairness to myself (I'm totally doing this on my own behalf), I've been calling for this even during the winning. Can't speak for others, but I've been pretty consistent in saying what direction I think we should be going in regardless of the week to week results.

The Dome is built for the spread. The Dome is built for speed. The Dome is built for throwing.

 

[OrangePA]

My wife knows little about football but came to the game with me last night. These are comments she kept making: Why do they have #29 run the ball on every first down? Why do they have him run into a bunch of people instead of where there are openings? Why do they have #29 then run again? Doesn't the other team know what play they will run? Why don't they pass more, they are better at it?

Even a wife who knows nothing about football has a better feel for play calling than the SU offensive coaches?

Wow.

 

[OrangePA]

43 yards, 3 punts and no points when trying to "establish the run". I credit the coaches with recognizing that that didn't work and going to the pass. But all season long we've fucntioned better when we used the pass to set up the run rather than the other way around. Why didn't we come out passing from the beginning in this one? It's not an issue of wanting the coahes to call plays they never call. It's about using the plays that have worked the best from the beginning of the game.

Again, what does it mean when you refer to "use the pass to set up the run"?

Do you mean throwing on first down?

 

[OrangePA]

settle down junior don't get all pissy.

Rapier-like.

 

[OrangePA]

In fairness to myself (I'm totally doing this on my own behalf), I've been calling for this even during the winning. Can't speak for others, but I've been pretty consistent in saying what direction I think we should be going in regardless of the week to week results.

The Dome is built for the spread. The Dome is built for speed. The Dome is built for throwing.

That seems like such an obvious point.

Why is it that the five HCs who have run the program in the Dome have not implemented the offense that you want?

 

[SWC75]

Again, what does it mean when you refer to "use the pass to set up the run"?

Do you mean throwing on first down?

I mean using the pass to spread the defense open to set up both runs and passes. I'm sure that would involve passing on first down but it's not about the downs.

Doug's last team in New Orleans, (with similar personel in that he had a scatback-like runner in Reggie Bush and a passing quarterback in Drew Brees), ran the ball 398 times and passed it 636 times (61.5%) of the time. This year's Syracuse team has run the ball 321 times and apassed it 348 times, (52.0%). Much of the year it's been less than 50% and in the first three possessions Friday night we ran the ball 13 times and passed it 5 times, (with one sack). That's just not tayloring the strategy to the personnel.

 

[SWC75]

That seems like such an obvious point.

Why is it that the five HCs who have run the program in the Dome have not implemented the offense that you want?

Why have so many other coaches in the country used it and done so with such success? You think they wouldn't use it here? "We didn't do it so therefore we shouldn't have done it" isn't much of an argument.

 

[RF2044]

The Dome is built for the spread. The Dome is built for speed. The Dome is built for throwing.

I haven't agreed with some of your positions on the system / talent chicken v. egg, but on this point I agree 100%.

We play in perfect conditions for all home games, constituting more than half of the schedule every season. That type of offensive system is perfect for the Dome.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

That seems like such an obvious point.

Why is it that the five HCs who have run the program in the Dome have not implemented the offense that you want?

We've been over this before. Our coaches have been unwilling to go against what they know. Instead we've had in recent history guys that thought a perfect game was 200/200 split, a guy that didn't have a clue, and a guy that three years in can't run what he wants to run.

 

[IthacaBarrel]

I haven't agreed with some of your positions on the system / talent chicken v. egg, but on this point I agree 100%.

We play in perfect conditions for all home games, constituting more than half of the schedule every season. That type of offensive system is perfect for the Dome.

Agreed, why we try to implement a power running game, year after year is amzing to me. Especially with what to me looks like an undersized line. flexbone running would be one thing which uses smaller, faster lineman, but trying to get smaller guys to push around bigger guys doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense...

Marrone needs to reaccess what he is looking at, quit teying to be multiple and do something really well, to me it looks like we need the pass to set up the run not vice versa

 

[Upstate]

Agreed, why we try to implement a power running game, year after year is amzing to me. Especially with what to me looks like an undersized line. flexbone running would be one thing which uses smaller, faster lineman, but trying to get smaller guys to push around bigger guys doesn't make a hell of a lot of sense...

Marrone needs to reaccess what he is looking at, quit teying to be multiple and do something really well, to me it looks like we need the pass to set up the run not vice versa

Spot on. We need to start playing pass-first ball, which will open up the run game. It's our strength, we need to utilize it. We've run for 200 yards maybe once this year...how many times have we passed for over 230ish? more times than we've run for over 200.

 

[OrangePA]

Why have so many other coaches in the country used it and done so with such success? You think they wouldn't use it here? "We didn't do it so therefore we shouldn't have done it" isn't much of an argument.

I still have no answer to my question.

What do you think Steve?

I am not advocating any position - I really couldn't care less what offense is run, so long as it works.

But, since you are the historian, answer my question, why hasn't the wide-open offense been used for the last thirty years by five different HCs?

I would be interested in your guess.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

I still have no answer to my question.

What do you think Steve?

I am not advocating any position - I really couldn't care less what offense is run, so long as it works.

But, since you are the historian, answer my question, why hasn't the wide-open offense been used for the last thirty years by five different HCs?

I would be interested in your guess.

You have an answer, you just don't want to deal with it.

We are the only BCS program that plays in a Dome. The fact that we don't advertise the crap out of that by tailoring our offense to the perfect field and wind conditions that environments provide demonstrates that either the coaches we have had are terrible strategists or just not very bright, or that our ad hasn't ever hired a person that grasps the power that a built in advantage provides.

Yankee stadium has a short porch in right field. They sign a lot of lefty power bats.

The Carrier Dome is not affected by the elements. We try to pound the ball down the other team's throat.

Which one wins?

 

[OrangePA]

You have an answer, you just don't want to deal with it.

We are the only BCS program that plays in a Dome. The fact that we don't advertise the crap out of that by tailoring our offense to the perfect field and wind conditions that environments provide demonstrates that either the coaches we have had are terrible strategists or just not very bright, or that our ad hasn't ever hired a person that grasps the power that a built in advantage provides.

Yankee stadium has a short porch in right field. They sign a lot of lefty power bats.

The Carrier Dome is not affected by the elements. We try to pound the ball down the other team's throat.

Which one wins?

Okay, there's the answer.

Over the past 30 years there have been many not bright people working for the University's football program.

The math on that is truly mind boggling. That one - just one person - didn't have the football acumen that so many have on this board.

Otto - Just curious. How long have you been watching SU Football? Just trying to better understand your perspective.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Okay, there's the answer.

Over the past 30 years there have been many not bright people working for the University's football program.

The math on that is truly mind boggling. That one - just one person - didn't have the football acumen that so many have on this board.

Otto - Just curious. How long have you been watching SU Football? Just trying to better understand your perspective.

We are agreed that it's mind boggling.

Since about 1990. I watched it before with my dad but didn't really "get" football then. Early 90s it started to make sense.

 

[Millhouse]

Okay, there's the answer.

Over the past 30 years there have been many not bright people working for the University's football program.

The math on that is truly mind boggling. That one - just one person - didn't have the football acumen that so many have on this board.

Otto - Just curious. How long have you been watching SU Football? Just trying to better understand your perspective.

coaches can't run any and every system. they specialize. even if deep down they know their offense isn't they best, they're not going to run something they don't know.

it might've been 30 years, but it's not a big sample of decisions. did great with mobile black qbs when other teams didn't think they were good (good for SU) and then when college football caught up in that regard, they tried NFL west coast which is a huge mistake. it's not like they've tried that many approaches in 30 years

 

[OrangePA]

coaches can't run any and every system. they specialize. even if deep down they know their offense isn't they best, they're not going to run something they don't know.

it might've been 30 years, but it's not a big sample of decisions. did great with mobile black qbs when other teams didn't think they were good (good for SU) and then when college football caught up in that regard, they tried NFL west coast which is a huge mistake. it's not like they've tried that many approaches in 30 years

So, the pro option was good?

Why didn't they continue to run that offense?

 

[OrangePA]

I mean using the pass to spread the defense open to set up both runs and passes. I'm sure that would involve passing on first down but it's not about the downs.

Doug's last team in New Orleans, (with similar personel in that he had a scatback-like runner in Reggie Bush and a passing quarterback in Drew Brees), ran the ball 398 times and passed it 636 times (61.5%) of the time. This year's Syracuse team has run the ball 321 times and apassed it 348 times, (52.0%). Much of the year it's been less than 50% and in the first three possessions Friday night we ran the ball 13 times and passed it 5 times, (with one sack). That's just not tayloring the strategy to the personnel.

So Marrone knows how to run a system that you feel works.

Why isn't he running that system on the Hill?

 

[Millhouse]

So, the pro option was good?

Why didn't they continue to run that offense?

because it stopped working

college football moved more to zone read. fewer turnovers (no backward pitches). easier to teach. qb and rb going different ways, fast defenses have a tougher time overwhelming the side of the field the regular old option would run to... simpler reads, bubble screens are very easy to run, simple decision for the qb when the defense gives it to them.
it doesn't asks qbs to do so much and it gets faster guys on the field

lots of coaching turnover comes from the game changing faster than coaches can

part of why i like air raid or run and shoot is that it's been successful for so long.