The Upside - C. Conn St.

[SWC75]

- Mission: accomplished. We beat a team we should dominate 50-7. We outgained them 586--167. We had 34 first downs to 8. We held them to 1 of 15 third down conversions. That’s the way it was supposed to be – and it was.

- Eric Dungey looked every bit the star quarterback. He put up great numbers: 28/36 for 328 yards and 3TDs with no interceptions. 9 runs for 51 yards and 2 more scores. That’s 379 yards and 5TDs accounted for. But more impressive than the numbers was the way he ran the offense: slick and fast. High efficiency. He methodically picked the Blue Devils apart. Even his sideline passes, which concern me sometimes, had plenty of zip.

- 11 different players caught 37 passes. Steve Ismael, reclaiming his spot as our #1 receiver, had 12 catches for 134 yards. Unfortunately he didn’t score, (he dropped a likely TD pass because he was anticipating contact). Erv Phillips added 6 catches for 71 yards and a score. But that was less than half the catches. We spread it out and played a lot of people.

- Moe Neal had the play of the day, leaping to catch and over-thrown pass, making a man miss, outrunning several defenders to the goal line where he was finally caught from the side but dived into the end zone a 52 yard play.

- Jamal Custis finally got a chance to show what he could, (and couldn’t), do. One thing he could do was to break away from a defender who appeared to be holding him and make a one-handed catch to set up the first touchdown.

- Markenzy Pierre had plenty of get-up-and-go with 46 yards in 8 carries, even if it was against Central Connecticut State reserves. We need to see more of him as the season progresses. He has a strong burst when he this the hole and he’s strong enough to carry guys with him.

- The defense held CCS to 54 yards rushing on 30 carries. Jake Dolegala completed only 6 of 19 passes. The Blue Devils punted a dozen times, SU only 3.


1-0 with 11+ to go

LET’S GO ORANGE!!!

 

[SUskibum]

50-7 and your Upside is about half of the length of your Downside. (I am aware of the talent discrepancy but still)

I have loved your contributions for more than a decade but I wonder if your personal bias (more running/multiple backs/multiplicity and misdirection vs simplicity and execution etc) is leading to a skewed analysis.

Not a criticism, just something for a data driven guy like you to think about.

Cheers!

 

[orangeinohio]

Another stat -

Syracuse averaged 20.3 seconds per play against CCSU (which was impacted with killing clock in the fourth).
Three takeaways from Syracuse’s 50-7 win over CCSU

In last year's season opener vs Colgate, Syracuse averaged 22.5 seconds per play.

Not a huge increase in speed but it's a move in the positive direction.

 

[721Comstock]

Another stat -

Syracuse averaged 20.3 seconds per play against CCSU (which was impacted with killing clock in the fourth).
Three takeaways from Syracuse’s 50-7 win over CCSU

In last year's season opener vs Colgate, Syracuse averaged 22.5 seconds per play.

Not a huge increase in speed but it's a move in the positive direction.

That's 10% faster - and probably the slowest we'll go all season.

 

[SUskibum]

That's 10% faster - and probably the slowest we'll go all season.

Not to mention we took our foot off the accelerator much earlier this year than last. Not only with respect to pace/play calling but also with backups coming in.

 

[SWC75]

50-7 and your Upside is about half of the length of your Downside. (I am aware of the talent discrepancy but still)

I have loved your contributions for more than a decade but I wonder if your personal bias (more running/multiple backs/multiplicity and misdirection vs simplicity and execution etc) is leading to a skewed analysis.

Not a criticism, just something for a data driven guy like you to think about.

Cheers!

Dino Babers would like more balance so I guess it's OK for me to want it too. We're going to need it against better opponents.

 

[SUskibum]

Dino Babers would like more balance so I guess it's OK for me to want it too. We're going to need it against better opponents.

Wanting to see something and letting it skew/bias your analysis are two different things.

Something tells me if we ran split back, one tight end, two wide outs all game and scored 30 points with 400 yards of offense (200/200) you would be happier.

 

[LAOrange]

I have a feeling that had we put up 200 and 200 in a game against this level of opponent, we would have been better served. The true values of this win were: 1) Dungey's back (and he's good) 2) our receiving corps, as a whole, is much better 3) Our O Line wasn't made of butter, and 4) we discovered Pierre at Running Back. In addition, with the insertion of Culpepper, the QB controversy was clarified. Mahoney doesn't need the reps, Devito is redshirting (barring disaster) and Culpepper is third.

 

[SUskibum]

I have a feeling that had we put up 200 and 200 in a game against this level of opponent, we would have been better served. The true values of this win were: 1) Dungey's back (and he's good) 2) our receiving corps, as a whole, is much better 3) Our O Line wasn't made of butter, and 4) we discovered Pierre at Running Back. In addition, with the insertion of Culpepper, the QB controversy was clarified. Mahoney doesn't need the reps, Devito is redshirting (barring disaster) and Culpepper is third.

See, and I think we are better served to get our offense reps with finding/taking what is open. When you are running at a talent deficit, like we will be in many games, the only way to overcome that is being very disciplined about attacking the soft spots of a defense (take what they give you).

Being better served getting 200/200 and scoring 30 points instead of getting 150/400 and scoring 50 points sounds a bit "old school/meathead" to me. Les Miles had top 5 talent and that method cost him his job. What makes you think would work for a team that is likely to be 25-50 in talent during good times?

 

[upperdeck]

we slowed down when we wanted to run because we tried to bring in a bigger package set. if the oline was functioning better we would be running out of the regular set more and keep the pace up.

 

[SWC75]

Wanting to see something and letting it skew/bias your analysis are two different things.

Something tells me if we ran split back, one tight end, two wide outs all game and scored 30 points with 400 yards of offense (200/200) you would be happier.

I suppose anyone with an opinion is 'bias' and their viewpoint is 'skewed'. That's not an argument against anything they might say.

I think we could still stretch the defense doing that and run the ball better. Yous till have 3 1/2 receivers. And we could switch to a one-back set or an empty backfield when we wanted to. If you can switch from one back to no back, you can switch to two backs as well. Neal's one big play was when he was sent out for a pass, Lenny Moore style. Extra receivers make the passing game more sophisticated but fewer running backs make the running game more primitive and sending the same guy up the middle on every running play is neanderthal.

We eon't have to have 200/200, (although I suspect that we've score a lot more than 30 points when we did that over the years). We need to establish capabilities. And right now, we don't have a capability to to run the ball from the running back position. And I'll guarantee you Dino wants to be able to do that.

 

[SWC75]

In 2012, Dino's first year at Eastern Illinois, they ran for 136 yards a game and passed for 335. They scored 36.5 points a game. Their top running back, Jake Walker, ran for 1,133 yards and 12TDs. Taylor Duncan ran for 466 yards and 8 scores. Their quarterback, Jimmy Garoppolo, ran the ball 83 times.
http://static.eiu.sidearmsports.com/custompages/football/2012/EIUFBStats2012.pdf

In 2013 they ran for 219 yards per game and passed for 376. They scored 49 points a game. Shepard Little ran for 1,551 yards and 15 TDs and Duncan Taylor ran for 1,003 yards and 10TDs. Each carried the ball 217 times. Garoppolo ran the ball 70 times.
http://static.eiu.sidearmsports.com/custompages/football/2013/2013_EIUFootball_Stats.pdf

In 2014, Dino's first year at Bowling Green, the Falcons ran for 173 yards a game and passed for 260. They scored 30ppg. Travis Greene rushed for 949 yards and 12 touchdowns. Fred Coppett ran for 764 yards and 6 scores. James Knapke, their quarterback ran the ball 66 times.
Bowling Green - Cumulative Season Statistics

In 2015, the Falcons ran for 180 yards a game and passed for 367. They scored 42ppg. Travis Greene rushed for 1299 yards and 16 touchdowns. Fred Coppett ran for 825 and 5 scores. QB Matt Johnson ran the ball 113 times.
Bowling Green - Cumulative Season Statistics

In 2016 at Syracuse, we averaged 120 yards rushing and 321 yards passing per game and scored 26ppg. Dontae Strickland ran for 588 yards and 4 scores while Moe Neal ran for 376 yards and 2 scores. Our two quarterbacks, Eric Dungey and Zach mahoney ran the ball a total of 169 times.
Syracuse University Athletics - 2016SUFinalStats.pdf

Friday night, we rushed for 155 yards and passed for 421 and scored 50 points. But Strickland and Neal rushed for 56 yards on 19 carries, 3 yards a carry. Most of the rushing yardage came from Dungey who was our leading rusher with 51 yards on 9 carries and Markenzy Piere, who played in the 4th quarter against the reserves of an FCS team and gained 47 yards on 9 carries.

What we are seeing is not what Dino Babers wants us to be. The better he has run the ball, the more his teams have scored. I'm all for coming out firing, making the defense cover the whole field and then gashing them with the running game but the running game has got to be more than what we've seen. Dino's highest scoring team had Taylor Duncan, 6-3 224 and Shepard Little, 5-10 198 both carry the ball 217 times and both ran for over 1,000 yards.

 

[SUskibum]

Great stuff. Leads me to next logical question. If Babers teams increased running efficiency in year two at two different stops then is our issue scheme (your take) or is it RB/lineman execution/talent?

Given fredricks 5.0 ypc last year and MP 5 ypc this game compared to 3.5 ypc for Strickland in both cases, I'm lead to believe it has more to do with our current RB1 then our scheme.

PS. I like strick as an athlete and as an Orangeman, I just don't see RB1 skills...

 

[SWC75]

Great stuff. Leads me to next logical question. If Babers teams increased running efficiency in year two at two different stops then is our issue scheme (your take) or is it RB/lineman execution/talent?

Given fredricks 5.0 ypc last year and MP 5 ypc this game compared to 3.5 ypc for Strickland in both cases, I'm lead to believe it has more to do with our current RB1 then our scheme.

PS. I like strick as an athlete and as an Orangeman, I just don't see RB1 skills...

Agreed. I'd like to see more of Pierre as we go along. But after last year...

 

[upperdeck]

the question is how well do we need to run to be effective. is 150 with 50 from the qb enough? I think it needs to be more like 150+ from the RBs and then add the QB on top. the blocking schemes friday make it hard to tell what we trying to do, they had 6 in the box much of the game, the oline held the blocks but we really just ran Dive plays all game over the center and someone was unblocked, it wasnt like the oline screwed up a block. we ran 7 on 8 runs a ton as well without trying to get outside at all.

 

[TheCusian]

Great stuff. Leads me to next logical question. If Babers teams increased running efficiency in year two at two different stops then is our issue scheme (your take) or is it RB/lineman execution/talent?

Given fredricks 5.0 ypc last year and MP 5 ypc this game compared to 3.5 ypc for Strickland in both cases, I'm lead to believe it has more to do with our current RB1 then our scheme.

PS. I like strick as an athlete and as an Orangeman, I just don't see RB1 skills...

Both Fredericks and Pierre played against backups with the game out of hand in one direction or the other. That skews things quite a bit, IMO.

I think it's likely a combo of OL and RB.

 

[SWC75]

Both Fredericks and Pierre played against backups with the game out of hand in one direction or the other. That skews things quite a bit, IMO.

I think it's likely a combo of OL and RB.

But Fredericks didn't play against back-ups in 2015, when he averaged 5.7 per carry.

But it doesn't matter now...

 

[TheCusian]

But Fredericks didn't play against back-ups in 2015, when he averaged 5.7 per carry.

But it doesn't matter now...

Yep... Frustrating for sure.

 

[nzm136]

See, and I think we are better served to get our offense reps with finding/taking what is open. When you are running at a talent deficit, like we will be in many games, the only way to overcome that is being very disciplined about attacking the soft spots of a defense (take what they give you).

Being better served getting 200/200 and scoring 30 points instead of getting 150/400 and scoring 50 points sounds a bit "old school/meathead" to me. Les Miles had top 5 talent and that method cost him his job. What makes you think would work for a team that is likely to be 25-50 in talent during good times?

Mathematically speaking, all other factors being equal, the team w/ a talent deficit is better off going slow and running because running burns clock, thereby shortening games. The same is also true for non-math reasons. And, short games help the less talented team in a variety of ways:
1. It increases the likelihood of luck dictating the outcome of a game (small reps = high random variance)
2. It decreases the likelihood of fatigue and injuries mattering (or it at least makes them matter less) and the difference in rested starters is usually less than tired backups.
3. Running offenses are generally more reliable, but slower. That extra time helps a defense because it lets them rest (while the other defense wears down), which matters because defenses usually fatigue faster than offenses.

So, while it's true that we should take what we're given, all other factors being equal, we should look to run first if we're trying to win.

(**w/ the obvious caveat that a more balanced approach makes it harder for the other team's defense to guess what to "give."**)

However, fast-moving pass offenses are better for recruiting because they make eye-popping stats and highlights. So we should look to pass first if we're trying to recruit.

I personally think that we should go for the win if we think that we can get 6 wins and go bowling (winning is the best recruiter). Otherwise, we should put up stats and try to get a talent advantage for future years.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Its a bad reflection on the running game if our QB consistently leads the team in rushing.
Dungey is not Lamar Jackson, and his constant improvising will likely lead to another injury shortened season (knock on wood).
At minimum, if we had just an adequate run game, Dungey's forays would likely be more effective and ultimately, he'd end up a better pocket passer as well. JMHO