There's no reason to think this team cannot go 10-2

[Scooch]

7-5 is what I think when I look at that schedule, too.

When I look at the schedule I think a very good team could easily win 10.

I just have absolutely no idea what kind of team we are.

 

[RF2044]

When I look at the schedule I think a very good team could easily win 10.

I just have absolutely no idea what kind of team we are.

Precisely why I believe that the hand wringing over the toughness of this schedule is off target.

Early Big 10 games are the key, IMO.

 

[JackBauer44]

I would love 7-5. I really want to get to a bowl to get some momentum going into ACC play.

Could this years USC game be Coach Marrone's equivalent to Coach Mac's win vs Nebraska?

I'll admit, I was born in 1987, so I odn't know much about that team, where they came from, or if Nebraska was deemed to powerful for them. I've heard people say that ushered SU into it's glory years. I see a bit of a parallel if that's the case.

 

[JeremyCuse]

I just hope we can keep perspective about the USC game, to many people on this board are starting to think we should be in this game and some are even saying we could win. This is a house money game and were likely to get beat and probably blown out, lets just come out healthy and take care of business the following weak.

 

[SUinNYC]

I'm not down with the cynicism. As a player, you should expect to win every game you play. Otherwise you'll lose every game you play. As a fan, I don't feel the need to to protect my feelings by saying "Oh, we can't beat USC." I think we can beat every team on the schedule. Will we? I have no idea. But that's why I watch--to find out.

 

[orangenirvana]

Sure. Because we certainly couldn't have called something else for him.

What else can you do with a 270 pound running back?

 

[RMH44]

kingottoiii said: ↑

We lost our best OL to injury for who knows how long. In addition we lost two 2 year starting RS SR OL, our starting TE, #2 & #3 WRs, our starting RB, and FB. We are replacing these guys with players who have very little PT. Our O has 13 main pieces to it and we only return five guys from last year's team to start the year. I rather have 10 guys returning and a true Frosh QB than 5 guys returning and a 5th year SR QB.​

In spite of that list of future HOF'ers, they managed to finish around #100 among all FBS teams in offense. I'm not shedding tears over their departures.

Agreed...and who were our #2 & #3 WR's? Chew and Graham? Chew was stifled by injuries the entire year and Graham saw the writing on the wall (underclassman taking his PT) and fled. And are we talking about the same FB that missed the last half of the schedule due to concussions?

I like this year's team far more than last year's version...bigger, stronger, faster, deeper and far more of them. 10-2 might be a stretch, but you never know. A dollar and a dream.

 

[SoBristol]

I would love 7-5. I really want to get to a bowl to get some momentum going into ACC play.

Could this years USC game be Coach Marrone's equivalent to Coach Mac's win vs Nebraska?

I'll admit, I was born in 1987, so I odn't know much about that team, where they came from, or if Nebraska was deemed to powerful for them. I've heard people say that ushered SU into it's glory years. I see a bit of a parallel if that's the case.

Yes, Nebraska was deemed too powerful. They were #1 in the polls, and had been for the entire previous season. SU was in rebuilding mode under Mac -- his fourth year. I believe SU started its season 2-1, but was coming off a loss at Rutgers. Mac had sharply improved recruiting (his true frosh and RF on that team were later to do big things); he had built a decent defense and had good OTs in place (Marrone was one of them). The Dome was packed and loud. Mac was a good motivator.
SU won that game with defense, ball control under an experienced QB, passes to possession receivers, and some luck.
Can it happen again?

 

[SoBristol]

kingottoiii said: ↑

We lost our best OL to injury for who knows how long. In addition we lost two 2 year starting RS SR OL, our starting TE, #2 & #3 WRs, our starting RB, and FB. We are replacing these guys with players who have very little PT. Our O has 13 main pieces to it and we only return five guys from last year's team to start the year. I rather have 10 guys returning and a true Frosh QB than 5 guys returning and a 5th year SR QB.​

Agreed...and who were our #2 & #3 WR's? Chew and Graham? Chew was stifled by injuries the entire year and Graham saw the writing on the wall (underclassman taking his PT) and fled. And are we talking about the same FB that missed the last half of the schedule due to concussions?

I like this year's team far more than last year's version...bigger, stronger, faster, deeper and far more of them. 10-2 might be a stretch, but you never know. A dollar and a dream.

Sure, lots of reasons to be positive about this team. The defense is bigger and stronger, especially at LB, and deeper in the secondary. It can make a huge difference. We need to be a team that causes turn0vers (similar to the 2010 team), and moves the chains on offense. Likely, we are a ball-control team without a quick strike capability, but we have a few weapons and some depth (except on the OL). We haven't had guys like Broyld & Thompson waiting in reserve. We need a few positive surprises from a couple of JUCOs and one or two of the frosh -- and a DL that can pressure the passer.

10-2? Well, all our opponents are undefeated with similar dreams at this stage.

 

[Millhouse]

In spite of that list of future HOF'ers, they managed to finish around #100 among all FBS teams in offense. I'm not shedding tears over their departures.

you should shed tears over the non-departures

 

[kingtidge]

The is one big reason why this team won't go 10-2.

It's called common sense.

Like the optimism, but it's blind positivity in the vein of RutgersAl...

That said, I'd love to eat crow and be proven wrong about this...

 

[OttoinGrotto]

What else can you do with a 270 pound running back?

The logic behind that question is weird.

Answer - you call the plays in your offense and run your offense.

 

[jcuse44]

It's August. August is the time for every football fan to believe that everything can fall his team's way and the best case scenario will prevail.

IMO, there are only two sure-fire losses on the 2012 schedule - USC and Mizzou. SU can beat Northwestern (in the Dome) and Minnesota, and there isn't a big east team that cannot be beaten.

Mizzou is hardly a sure fire loss. I think they are a sub par team this year.

So the best-case scenario is 10-2. And when I look at the roster, a head coach with extremely high expectations and a hard-working coaching staff, I believe 10-2 is possible.

I hate low expectations, which is what I see a lot of on this forum recently. It's one thing to expect 4 wins. It's quite another to expect 4 wins and be okay with 4 and happy with 5. This lowly hope can be attributed to three things: those who want to reflect criticism of the coaching staff and keep the heat off of Marrone and Co., those who are conditioned to a lousy football team after the last decade, and those who are just naturally pessimistic.

Reasons to realistically expect 10-2:

1. Nassib

We should love the fact that our starting QB is a fifth-year senior coming off of two seasons as the full-time starter. There certainly are Nassib doubters, but IMO the kid is much more talented than he is given credit for. And now he has just as much if not more experience than any QB the team will face. I think he has a breakout season.

2. Depth at the Offensive Skill Positions

I actually like our running backs, mainly because we have four legitimate threats there in Smith, Gulley, AAM and Broyld, plus a fifth in the highly-touted George Morris. Smith received rave reviews after the Spring he had. I was never impressed with Gulley until the Toledo game last year, where I was officially sold. He was breaking out right before he got injured in 2011 and should begin where he left off. AAM has reportedly dropped the weight that literally slowed him down. And then there's Broyld. No longer will we hold our breath with every carry our starter gets. No more should any RB be physically spent by November. This unit can get it done by committee.

Same goes for WR and TE. Lemon and Sales won't be 1st Round NFL draft picks, but are experienced Sr's who have accomplished quite a bit over their careers. Their backups and third-stringers are all relatively experienced and/or have shown glimpses of talent - West, Kobena, Flemming, Hale. Two reportedly talented true frosh (Lewis, Cornelius) as 7th and 8th men in case of emergency. I like our two starting Tight Ends a lot and feel that one or two of the rest will step up to be dependable in the regular rotation.

3. Our Defense is a year older

The defense struggled in 2011 because they were just too young and inexperienced. Most of them had no idea what they were doing. Is that an excuse for the coaching staff? No, not really. But it certainly didn't help. This year there is more experience and also depth across the board at all three units.

4. Scott Shafer

I'm high on Shafer as a DC and am more than willing to give him a pass after last season. 2011 was supposed to be the year where the offense stepped up while the D went through growing pains. The offense never did, so the defense got blamed. I fully expect us to see more of what we saw in 2010 than what we saw in 2011.

5. Jay Bromley / Marquis Spruill / Shamarko Thomas

Three beastly upperclassmen from each unit who are ready to break out and wreak havoc on opposing offenses.

Areas that must improve and/or surprise to reach 10-2

1. Doug Marrone

We have to see better clock management and overall gameday decisions from this man. You know he knows this, and you know he wants to. Just has to get it done. Also need to see him coach up the special teams unit. Big risk to take that on himself. We'll see what happens.

2. Nate Hackett

Do-or-die time. Struggled mightily in 2011, but that doesn't mean he can't greatly improve in 2012.

3. Offensive Line

Losing Pugh for the first month of the season really hurts. We'll need the rest of the unit to stay healthy and step up, specifically Hickey and Alexander. We need improvement from Chibane. We need one of the Redshirt Frosh at RG (Foy or Trudo) to step up and be a very dependable starter. Coach em up, Adkins!

4. Defensive End

We need a consistent pass rush to come from our DE's, whoever they may be. I want to see an improved and motivated Brandon Sharpe on one side. Opposite him, it will help tremendously if Pierce-Brewster is the real deal. Otherwise we need either Simmons or Robinson to step up and provide that pass-rushing threat that will be so critical to this team. It's important that Goggins plays at DT, imo. If that happens, it's an indication that DE is not a huge concern.

5. Shut-down corners

We need Lyn to play up to his potential and Reddish to grow up quickly. We don't have a Dwight Freeney so there will be times that QB's will have time to find their receiver. Our CB's have to help out our DLine (and vice versa), otherwise Saturdays will be long.

5b. Special teams

We need to see a few surprises on special teams, specifically from our returners. We also need a more consistent, fundamentally-sound unit all-around.

LET'S DO THIS!!!!

 

[KevMonstah]

The guys at orangefizz chuckled at me for suggesting that SU could win 9 games this year, but still.

You figure on certain losses to USC and Louisville, and a likely loss to Missouri, but I think all the
national predictions look at the games that are tossups, and think SU will lose. Is this too hard of
a group to not be able to win them all?

Minnesota, Northwestern, Stonybrook, USF, Pitt, Rutgers, UConn, Temple, and Cincy. Sure SU
will probably lose at least one of them, but that is not like playing in the SEC where five teams are
in the top 10. Those are all winnable games. Louisville just seems to have SU's number (boo), and
the trip to Missouri might just be when they are tired (it's game number 7 in a row with no bye week),
but again, not a game you'd say "they have no shot, none", like you would @Alabama, but no
national writer is going to pick SU to win the tossups after last year's fade.

I simply suggested if they win 9, then Ogundeko probably says "I'll be right there." 6-6 and he
probably doesn't.

Kev

 

[xc84]

10-2 is a stretch and COULD happen in the same way one may have thought we COULD beat Nebraska in '84 after getting shutout by a poor Rutgers team the week prior. There are many reasons to believe at 10-2 or better season won't happen. To say that there are none is a bit silly. With that said, I go into every season, as a fan rooting for them to win every game. I would love 10-2 but it there is no reason to believe they can't do it...then it won't be a surprise if they do. But really, if they go 10-2, 99% of fans will be happily surprised.

 

[reedny]

Bailey was more than a very good little RB. He was the best dual threat back in school history. That wasn't how he was used last season though, and that shouldn't take away from his talent. I think the staff handled running back horribly last season to be honest - they shoehorned Bailey into a role he wasn't built for, burned AAM's redshirt, and were very hesitant to give Gulley and Smith more than spot carries. I have high hopes for the unit believe it or not, but it's really, really green.

You make some good points, O/G. I agree with you about burning AAM's RS. I know we were strapped because of Gulley's injury, but we had plenty of depth with Bailey and Smith, and AAM was not ready for prime time. Why burn the kids eligibility for 12 rushing attempts and 40 total yards?

Also, I just don't know if we have the line play to have a 10-2 season (Nirv isn't predicting it, just saying it's possible). Last year, despite pre-season enthusiasm about the OL, we got abused by much smaller teams in the early games (Toledo and Rhode Island). Later, with the exception of the WVA game, we had no big play receivers to throw to and couldn't run the ball effectively enough to keep opposing defenses from teeing off on Nasib.

Our D-Line wasn't much better -- we gave up over 120 yards per game and nearly lost to Tulane because their QB had time to cherry pick receivers all over the field. Cinci hit us for almost 190 yards on the ground. We stopped Pitt on the ground, but again gave their QB all day -- he wound up going 25 fo 35, 260 yards and over 10 yards per catch.

This year, we have good possession receivers back (Lemon and Stevens as TE), and I like Sales as a big play guy (badly needed). Maybe this will open things up a little for the running game. But will our offensive and defensive lines be effective enough to get us to that next level that the thread is hoping for?

 

[OttoinGrotto]

And when those two weren't available, what choice did they have, and then he got hurt. And that's not you said before, they weren't hesitant, kids weren't available for stretches. Somebody had to play RB, and as you said, Bailey couldn't take 100% of the carries.

I'm working with imperfect knowledge here, but were Smith and Gulley injured at the beginning of the year last season? I thought they were both good to go.

Through the first 4 games last season (which included two OTs) Bailey had 25, 13, 11 and 28 carries.

Gulley went 1, 4, 3, 10.

Smith went 0, 1, 0, 0.

AAM had 0, 0, 0, 0.

If there were injuries to Gulley and Smith that makes some sense, but like I said, I thought by the start of the year they were all fine to go. If not, AAM could have been used earlier at least here and there. Bailey was clearly our best guy, but he had 80% of the carries for running backs through the first 4 games (I picked the first 4 since Gulley was injured after Toledo). That % seems way too high to me. If everybody else was injured during the first four games maybe it makes sense, but it sure looks like the staff was just hesitant to give anyone else run.

Suppose any of those other three are involved a little more in the running game during those 4 games. That doesn't mean Bailey plays less - maybe that gives us a chance to split him out and diversify the offense and take advantage of his skills as a receiving threat.

I think the staff had more choices than you suggest, and I'm not as wild about the choices they did make.

 

[Hoov50]

I have seen this from a few people, but I am still trying to figure out why Mizzou is an automatic L. It's a winnable game especially after running the SEC slate they have. Could we lose, absolutely, but its not an auto loss IMHO. I do like the optimism though and would be ecstatic anywhere from 7-5 to 11-1.

I agree, if he whom cannot be named can take terrible team into South Bend and get a win, Marrone can take what should be a much better team to Missouri and get a win!

 

[Aweart23]

I'm working with imperfect knowledge here, but were Smith and Gulley injured at the beginning of the year last season? I thought they were both good to go.

Through the first 4 games last season (which included two OTs) Bailey had 25, 13, 11 and 28 carries.

Gulley went 1, 4, 3, 10.

Smith went 0, 1, 0, 0.

AAM had 0, 0, 0, 0.

If there were injuries to Gulley and Smith that makes some sense, but like I said, I thought by the start of the year they were all fine to go. If not, AAM could have been used earlier at least here and there. Bailey was clearly our best guy, but he had 80% of the carries for running backs through the first 4 games (I picked the first 4 since Gulley was injured after Toledo). That % seems way too high to me. If everybody else was injured during the first four games maybe it makes sense, but it sure looks like the staff was just hesitant to give anyone else run.

Suppose any of those other three are involved a little more in the running game during those 4 games. That doesn't mean Bailey plays less - maybe that gives us a chance to split him out and diversify the offense and take advantage of his skills as a receiving threat.

I think the staff had more choices than you suggest, and I'm not as wild about the choices they did make.

AAM was out of shape and very overweight when he got to camp. In the article posted a few days ago, he had an injury that prevented him from working out last summer, hence, over weight and out of shape...plus true freshman, plus learning play book equals no PT early for AAM

This assumption that the staff beat Bailey to death because they are ignorant or stupid is flat out wrong

Once The Running Back Currently Known As Prince went down with his injury, it was Bailey and pray for Rain

 

[OttoinGrotto]

AAM was out of shape and very overweight when he got to camp. In the article posted a few days ago, he had an injury that prevented him from working out last summer, hence, over weight and out of shape...plus true freshman, plus learning play book equals no PT early for AAM

This assumption that the staff beat Bailey to death because they are ignorant or stupid is flat out wrong

Once The Running Back Currently Known As Prince went down with his injury, it was Bailey and pray for Rain

Was Smith injured as well? I'm asking this as a serious question.

 

[Millhouse]

I'm working with imperfect knowledge here, but were Smith and Gulley injured at the beginning of the year last season? I thought they were both good to go.

Through the first 4 games last season (which included two OTs) Bailey had 25, 13, 11 and 28 carries.

Gulley went 1, 4, 3, 10.

Smith went 0, 1, 0, 0.

AAM had 0, 0, 0, 0.

If there were injuries to Gulley and Smith that makes some sense, but like I said, I thought by the start of the year they were all fine to go. If not, AAM could have been used earlier at least here and there. Bailey was clearly our best guy, but he had 80% of the carries for running backs through the first 4 games (I picked the first 4 since Gulley was injured after Toledo). That % seems way too high to me. If everybody else was injured during the first four games maybe it makes sense, but it sure looks like the staff was just hesitant to give anyone else run.

Suppose any of those other three are involved a little more in the running game during those 4 games. That doesn't mean Bailey plays less - maybe that gives us a chance to split him out and diversify the offense and take advantage of his skills as a receiving threat.

I think the staff had more choices than you suggest, and I'm not as wild about the choices they did make.

you're really reaching if part of your argument against marrone is that any of bailey's snaps should go to a fat 18 year old

they needed everyone of those carries against Toledo and Wake

their two closest wins of the year were two of the games where he got the most carries

but hey they should've lost those games just to get aam more carries and then they would've beaten USF and Cincy

righhhhht

the myth of bailey breaking down continues

 

[IthacaBarrel]

you're really reaching if part of your argument against marrone is that any of bailey's snaps should go to a fat 18 year old

they needed everyone of those carries against Toledo and Wake

their two closest wins of the year were two of the games where he got the most carries

but hey they should've lost those games just to get aam more carries and then they would've beaten USF and Cincy

righhhhht

the myth of bailey breaking down continues

so true, Bailiey was fine for the college game, is he short? sure, small for the next level? sure. But he held up fine. Give the ball to AAM!!! He's fat and can take a beating. I hate when we start talking about things like carries and who should or should not play because we have no -ing clue. Bailey was the best RB we had last year and deserved the carries/ passes, everybody else was hurt as well. Crazy

The team stunk last year, and the offense has stunk for 14 years but not because of Bailiey carrying the load. I also enjoy discussions on heights and weight!

Bailey held up better than Carter did and he was a "big" back

 

[OttoinGrotto]

you're really reaching if part of your argument against marrone is that any of bailey's snaps should go to a fat 18 year old

they needed everyone of those carries against Toledo and Wake

their two closest wins of the year were two of the games where he got the most carries

but hey they should've lost those games just to get aam more carries and then they would've beaten USF and Cincy

righhhhht

the myth of bailey breaking down continues

so true, Bailiey was fine for the college game, is he short? sure, small for the next level? sure. But he held up fine. Give the ball to AAM!!! He's fat and can take a beating. I hate when we start talking about things like carries and who should or should not play because we have no -ing clue. Bailey was the best RB we had last year and deserved the carries/ passes, everybody else was hurt as well. Crazy

The team stunk last year, and the offense has stunk for 14 years but not because of Bailiey carrying the load. I also enjoy discussions on heights and weight!

Bailey held up better than Carter did and he was a "big" back

I don't want to ruin your fun, but you both glossed over the main point from my post in favor of recycling arguments I'm not making. Here it is again:

Suppose any of those other three are involved a little more in the running game during those 4 games. That doesn't mean Bailey plays less - maybe that gives us a chance to split him out and diversify the offense and take advantage of his skills as a receiving threat.

What's really funny is that last season we had three guys that people are saying weren't ready/incapable/injured/the staff didn't trust and I'm being told that all makes sense and there wasn't an alternative to how we decided to use Bailey, and this season we've got the same three guys and a lot of people are posting that they think we've upgraded at RB. I'm hoping they're right and that Broyld and Morris have something but geez that looks like a leap in logic to me.

 

[Millhouse]

I don't want to ruin your fun, but you both glossed over the main point from my post in favor of recycling arguments I'm not making. Here it is again:

Suppose any of those other three are involved a little more in the running game during those 4 games. That doesn't mean Bailey plays less - maybe that gives us a chance to split him out and diversify the offense and take advantage of his skills as a receiving threat.

What's really funny is that last season we had three guys that people are saying weren't ready/incapable/injured/the staff didn't trust and I'm being told that all makes sense and there wasn't an alternative to how we decided to use Bailey, and this season we've got the same three guys and a lot of people are posting that they think we've upgraded at RB. I'm hoping they're right and that Broyld and Morris have something but geez that looks like a leap in logic to me.

maybe marrone didn't want to throw more than he already did. i think there was good reason for that.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

maybe marrone didn't want to throw more than he already did. i think there was good reason for that.

Who's saying he ends up throwing more than he did?

Bailey could have been more involved in the passing game without it requiring us to throw more had the staff made different personnel choices.