Upon Further Review

[SWC75]

I believe his quote is "baseball is 90% mental, the other half is physical" or something to that effect.

That's probably what he meant.

 

[SWC75]

Just disagree.

Many recruits mention Ernie Davis and The Express.

And everybody knows Jim Brown - and of course Freeney and McNabb and probably Bulluck.

Part of the recruiting process involves exposing players to the history - SU has one and Duke for one, does not.

And that is why SU has over the years succeeded with very little financial support.

Doing well is preferable to doing badly of course, but the money and the infrastructure will mean more to the program in the future than the 2013 W-L record.

I've often heard coaches quoted as saying "Tradition means you won a game on TV last year". We have to remember we are recruiting 16-17 year kids. Tradition means a lot to fans and it can eventually come to mean something to the kids but, although they may feel it's necessary to acknowledge it in interviews, I think it takes time to become meaningful to them.

 

[OrangePA]

I've often heard coaches quoted as saying "Tradition means you won a game on TV last year". We have to remember we are recruiting 16-17 year kids. Tradition means a lot to fans and it can eventually come to mean something to the kids but, although they may feel it's necessary to acknowledge it in interviews, I think it takes time to become meaningful to them.

I've never heard that quote.

And, I'm not a psychologist.

I have heard/read many recruits mentioning Ernie Davis, Jim Brown, McNabb and others.

No need to debate this further - the point is that SU Football has a legacy that most in the ACC do not have.

That combined with what is really important - money and infrastructure - will allow the Orange to succeed in the new conference.

Not this year necessarily but as time continues and the money and IPF have their effect, the program will scale new heights in my opinion.

 

[gbo]

I've never heard that quote.

And, I'm not a psychologist.

I have heard/read many recruits mentioning Ernie Davis, Jim Brown, McNabb and others.

No need to debate this further - the point is that SU Football has a legacy that most in the ACC do not have.

That combined with what is really important - money and infrastructure - will allow the Orange to succeed in the new conference.

Not this year necessarily but as time continues and the money and IPF have their effect, the program will scale new heights in my opinion.

I agree that your program will hit new heights from what it has been the last decade but it may be hard to do it consistantly with FSU, Louisville, and Clemson in the same division. Heck it's going to be near impossible for any one team in the division to constantly be the best of the group.

 

[OrangePA]

I agree that your program will hit new heights from what it has been the last decade but it may be hard to do it consistantly with FSU, Louisville, and Clemson in the same division. Heck it's going to be near impossible for any one team in the division to constantly be the best of the group.

True.

There will be a lot of competition.

And it will be a lot of fun!

See you in the Dome and then Death Valley!

 

[SU2NASA]

I agree that your program will hit new heights from what it has been the last decade but it may be hard to do it consistantly with FSU, Louisville, and Clemson in the same division. Heck it's going to be near impossible for any one team in the division to constantly be the best of the group.

Personally, I think you'red f**ked with Syracuse in your division.

 

[SWC75]

I've never heard that quote.

And, I'm not a psychologist.

I have heard/read many recruits mentioning Ernie Davis, Jim Brown, McNabb and others.

No need to debate this further - the point is that SU Football has a legacy that most in the ACC do not have.

That combined with what is really important - money and infrastructure - will allow the Orange to succeed in the new conference.

Not this year necessarily but as time continues and the money and IPF have their effect, the program will scale new heights in my opinion.

I've heard it for years.

And the ACC schools have strong histories of their own. FSU, Clemson and Virginia Tech have had recent success. Miami is still "The U". Notre Dame isn't formally in for football but we will be playing them and recruiting against them. Louisville will be a strong addition. Georgia Tech was a national power for decades with coaches like Heisman and Dodd. Ditto Pitt with Warner, Southerland, Majors, Dorsett and Marino. UNC had Choo Choo Charley Justice and Lawrence Taylor. We are 0-6 vs. NC State. Virginia has had some good teams. Boston College has Flutie. That's the whole point with the ACC: we will be playing programs with strong histories, not like Rutgers, Connecticut, Cincinnati and South Florida. That's what makes it exciting- and challenging.Thinking "We'll do great because nobody in the conference has the history we have" is a bit naive.

I agree the extra money and infrastrtucture improvements will help but don't the other schools have that, too?

We need a good start. But I think we'll get one.

 

[OrangePA]

I've heard it for years.

And the ACC schools have strong histories of their own. FSU, Clemson and Virginia Tech have had recent success. Miami is still "The U". Notre Dame isn't formally in for football but we will be playing them and recruiting against them. Louisville will be a strong addition. Georgia Tech was a national power for decades with coaches like Heisman and Dodd. Ditto Pitt with Warner, Southerland, Majors, Dorsett and Marino. UNC had Choo Choo Charley Justice and Lawrence Taylor. We are 0-6 vs. NC State. Virginia has had some good teams. Boston College has Flutie. That's the whole point with the ACC: we will be playing programs with strong histories, not like Rutgers, Connecticut, Cincinnati and South Florida. That's what makes it exciting- and challenging.Thinking "We'll do great because nobody in the conference has the history we have" is a bit naive.

I agree the extra money and infrastrtucture improvements will help but don't the other schools have that, too?

We need a good start. But I think we'll get one.

UNC, UVA. Wake, NCST, Louisville, do not have our legacy in football.

Though Clemson and Va Tech have had success in the last two decades or so, the two school still do not have our history.

ND is tops in tradition. And FSU and Miami have star power still.

And yes I gather that other schools have great facilities.

But I think you've missed the point.

SU has never - never - had financial resources to compete with other schools in terms of facilities, coaching salaries and recruiting.

Now the program will have those resources.

And the new resources will couple with the legacy to finally give SU a chance to compete on equal terms. Something that it has never been able to do.

 

[007]

UNC, UVA. Wake, NCST, Louisville, do not have our legacy in football.

Though Clemson and Va Tech have had success in the last two decades or so, the two school still do not have our history.

ND is tops in tradition. And FSU and Miami have star power still.

And yes I gather that other schools have great facilities.

But I think you've missed the point.

SU has never - never - had financial resources to compete with other schools in terms of facilities, coaching salaries and recruiting.

Now the program will have those resources.

And the new resources will couple with the legacy to finally give SU a chance to compete on equal terms. Something that it has never been able to do.

Just wondering...is it possible to have an opinion that differs from yours and not "miss the point"?

 

[baggerbob]

I think everyone is missing the important point we need Syracuse, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Louisville, North Carolina St, Boston College, Florida St, Miami, Notre Dame, Wake Forest, and Duke to play well. The main priority is to be,[ The best football conference from top to bottom for the next 25 years.]

 

[HtownOrange]

I think everyone is missing the important point we need Syracuse, Clemson, Virginia Tech, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia Tech, Pittsburgh, Louisville, North Carolina St, Boston College, Florida St, Miami, Notre Dame, Wake Forest, and Duke to play well. The main priority is to be,[ The best football conference from top to bottom for the next 25 years.]

Everyone needs to carry their own weight, at least in OOC games. There is no other way to beat the SEC (Special Education Conference?) than on the field.

 

[SUinNYC]

Everyone needs to carry their own weight, at least in OOC games. There is no other way to beat the SEC (Special Education Conference?) than on the field.

Yep. And there are some big opportunities in the first two weeks of the season...

Clemson vs. Georgia
Va Tech vs. Alabama
North Carolina vs. South Carolina
Miami vs. Florida
Virginia vs. Oregon

And of course...

Syracuse vs. Penn State

Winning some of these high profile OOC games will go a long way.

 

[SWC75]

Everyone needs to carry their own weight, at least in OOC games. There is no other way to beat the SEC (Special Education Conference?) than on the field.

So we should root for conference teams in non-conference games because the results impact the reputation of everyone in the conference? What an interesting idea!

 

[SWC75]

UNC, UVA. Wake, NCST, Louisville, do not have our legacy in football.

Though Clemson and Va Tech have had success in the last two decades or so, the two school still do not have our history.

ND is tops in tradition. And FSU and Miami have star power still.

And yes I gather that other schools have great facilities.

But I think you've missed the point.

SU has never - never - had financial resources to compete with other schools in terms of facilities, coaching salaries and recruiting.

Now the program will have those resources.

And the new resources will couple with the legacy to finally give SU a chance to compete on equal terms. Something that it has never been able to do.

The point is we will be competing with schools that already have had the resources and have legacies of their own. If we get off to a bad start in the conference, we will be behind them.

Here is the precedent that worries me: The best basketball program in the east in the 60's and 70's was Providence. Joe Mullaney and Dave Gavitt were great coaches. Lenny Wilkens, Johnny Egan, Jimmy Walker, Jim Larranaga, Ernie DiGregorio and Marvin Barnes were great players. They had records like 24-2, 27-4, 28-4. They went to a Final Four when eastern teams rarely amd eit that far and might have won if Barnes hadn't gotten hurt. They won a couple of NITs when that meant something. As late as 1977-78 they were 24-8, their 17th 20 win season in 20 years, when that also meant something. Gavitt was the cataylist for creating the new conference and became it's Commissioner. League headquarters were in Providence and the next two commissioners after Gavitt were also Providence guys. The Friars should have been one the league's powerhouses.

But they had a downturn at exactly the wrong time. They went 10-16 in Gavitt's last year and 11-16 and 0-6 in the first year of the conference. The next year they were 10-18 and 3-11. They brought Mullany back but he couldn't turn it around. Pitino did briefly but left for greener pastures. Rick Barnes and Pete Gillen were prominent coaches but the Friars were a middle of the road team at best during their tenures. Providence just never got back to where they were.

There may have been other factors but I've always thought it hurt them to be bad at just the wrong time: when the new conference was getting started. Recruits were interested in the conference but looked at the standings and decided they didn't want to go there. And it proved such a strong conference that if you weren't a good team, the conference schedule would drive you into the floor like a hammer would a nail. It's just hard to get up off the canvas in a tough conference where you keep getting hit as you try to get up.

If we got off to that kind of a start in football in the ACC, it could have the same impact. I don't think we will, but I think the stakes are higher than you realize.

 

[HtownOrange]

So we should root for conference teams in non-conference games because the results impact the reputation of everyone in the conference? What an interesting idea!

I have always cheered on our opponents to win everything but our games.* Makes us stronger if we beat winners. Most of us understand that. However, after reading Clemson and FSU boards, they have no concept of this in spite of praising the SEC.

* Does not apply to Georgetown

 

[HtownOrange]

Yep. And there are some big opportunities in the first two weeks of the season...

Clemson vs. Georgia
Va Tech vs. Alabama
North Carolina vs. South Carolina
Miami vs. Florida
Virginia vs. Oregon

And of course...

Syracuse vs. Penn State

Winning some of these high profile OOC games will go a long way.

Imagine the ACC going 4-2, 5-1 or 6-0 in those games...

 

[gbo]

I have always cheered on our opponents to win everything but our games.* Makes us stronger if we beat winners. Most of us understand that. However, after reading Clemson and FSU boards, they have no concept of this in spite of praising the SEC.

* Does not apply to Georgetown

I think the reason for this is that we share territory with SEC teams. Those teams pull for the conference as if it's an actual football program. It gets annoying to constantly read or hear about how the SEC is the greatest conference in the history of America when only 4 teams have won titles.

I agree that the ACC needs its teams to collectively do well for the perception to improve. It's just hard for that to happen when you only have a small handful of teams that even care about football.

 

[SUinNYC]

Imagine the ACC going 4-2, 5-1 or 6-0 in those games...

Would be really great to see. But I'm guessing Oregon beats Virginia and Bama beats Va Tech at a minimum.

 

[gbo]

Imagine the ACC going 4-2, 5-1 or 6-0 in those games...

I hope you're right but it looks like at best 3-3 to me.

 

[OrangePA]

The point is we will be competing with schools that already have had the resources and have legacies of their own. If we get off to a bad start in the conference, we will be behind them.

Here is the precedent that worries me: The best basketball program in the east in the 60's and 70's was Providence. Joe Mullaney and Dave Gavitt were great coaches. Lenny Wilkens, Johnny Egan, Jimmy Walker, Jim Larranaga, Ernie DiGregorio and Marvin Barnes were great players. They had records like 24-2, 27-4, 28-4. They went to a Final Four when eastern teams rarely amd eit that far and might have won if Barnes hadn't gotten hurt. They won a couple of NITs when that meant something. As late as 1977-78 they were 24-8, their 17th 20 win season in 20 years, when that also meant something. Gavitt was the cataylist for creating the new conference and became it's Commissioner. League headquarters were in Providence and the next two commissioners after Gavitt were also Providence guys. The Friars should have been one the league's powerhouses.

But they had a downturn at exactly the wrong time. They went 10-16 in Gavitt's last year and 11-16 and 0-6 in the first year of the conference. The next year they were 10-18 and 3-11. They brought Mullany back but he couldn't turn it around. Pitino did briefly but left for greener pastures. Rick Barnes and Pete Gillen were prominent coaches but the Friars were a middle of the road team at best during their tenures. Providence just never got back to where they were.

There may have been other factors but I've always thought it hurt them to be bad at just the wrong time: when the new conference was getting started. Recruits were interested in the conference but looked at the standings and decided they didn't want to go there. And it proved such a strong conference that if you weren't a good team, the conference schedule would drive you into the floor like a hammer would a nail. It's just hard to get up off the canvas in a tough conference where you keep getting hit as you try to get up.

If we got off to that kind of a start in football in the ACC, it could have the same impact. I don't think we will, but I think the stakes are higher than you realize.

Yes, if we get off to a bad start - that's bad.

I get it.

But getting off to a bad start - when the impact of the new conference affiliation and the new revenue and new infrastructure has not even begun - will not be fatal to the Program - not even close.

I find the comparison to Providence College BB a difficult one.

First, it's BB - not FB.

In BB a small school with few resources can effectively compete by securing a single dominant player or two. That's why a Georgetown or St. Johns or Butler or Davidson or George Mason or that team from Florida this past year - I can't even come up with the name - can compete with teams like NC or UCLA or KY or SU. When Providence had Marvin Barnes and Ernie D - and Kevin Stacom - it competed. When it lost out on those players, it didn't compete. When Georgetown had Pat Ewing and others it won the NC. When it didn't - it didn't. When St. Johns had Chris Mullin and Walter Berry it won. When it failed to get those players - when the NCAA stopped it from giving housing money to players who went to school but who lived at home - it did not win. It was and remains all about talent.

And in BB securing one or two talented players can make all the difference in the world.

Football is a different game. It's driven by money. And it requires many talented players.

Syracuse University - because of great coaching and great tradition - has had success over the years without having a lot of money.

Though many - you included - were under the impression back in the early 2000s that SU had facilities and financial resources that were comparable to most other major programs, that was not even close to being true.

It's still not true.

But soon it will be closer to being true than ever before.

And that reality - combined with the truly remarkable legacy of the program for nearly 100 years - will make a significant difference - even if the team slips a little bit next year - something that I feel will probably not happen.

Second, looking at the Providence BB experience thirty three years ago is a stretch simply because college sports were in a different universe back then - it's hard to compare 1979 CBB to 2013 CFB for so many reasons.

So, yes, it would be good for the Orange to get off to a good start.

But time is on our side now.

 

[Bayside44]

Yes, if we get off to a bad start - that's bad.

I get it.

But getting off to a bad start - when the impact of the new conference affiliation and the new revenue and new infrastructure has not even begun - will not be fatal to the Program - not even close.

I find the comparison to Providence College BB a difficult one.

First, it's BB - not FB.

In BB a small school with few resources can effectively compete by securing a single dominant player or two. That's why a Georgetown or St. Johns or Butler or Davidson or George Mason or that team from Florida this past year - I can't even come up with the name - can compete with teams like NC or UCLA or KY or SU. When Providence had Marvin Barnes and Ernie D - and Kevin Stacom - it competed. When it lost out on those players, it didn't compete. When Georgetown had Pat Ewing and others it one the NC. When it didn't - it didn't. When St. Johns had Chris Mullin and Walter Berry it won. When it failed to get those players - when the NCAA stopped it from giving housing money to players who went to school but who lived at home - it did not win. It was and remains all about talent.

And in BB securing one or two talented players can make all the difference in the world.

Football is a different game. It's driven by money. And it requires many talented players.

Syracuse University - because of great coaching and great tradition - has had success over the years without having a lot of money.

Though many - you included - were under the impression back in the early 2000s that SU had facilities and financial resources that were comparable to most other major programs, that was not even close to being true.

It's still not true.

But soon it will be closer to being true than ever before.

And that reality - combined with the truly remarkable legacy of the program for nearly 100 years - will make a significant difference - even if the team slips a little bit next year - something that I feel will probably not happen.

Second, looking at the Providence BB experience thirty three years ago is a stretch simply because college sports were in a different universe back then - it's hard to compare 1979 CBB to 2013 CFB for so many reasons.

So, yes, it would be good for the Orange to get off to a good start.

But time is on our side now.

OPA, I buy some of it, but schools you are dismissing have given us the likes of Johnny Unitas and Lawrence Taylor...so if you want to go the bygone legacy route others can show that as well.

And UNC has more than their fair share of NFL players right now.

 

[BlazeOrange]

I'm not so sure recruits will bail or lose interest if we're not successful this year (bowl eligible?). Should we do poorly, I think SU will continue getting looks from top recruits. My reasoning is that with recruiting looking good right now, SU has pieces in place to be successful beyond this year, and that becomes part of the pitch to athletes. Heck, they're the ones who do the pitching as often as not once they're on board. But you're certainly right that we'd better get some more talent for the OL in the locker room pretty soon.

Yes, a sales pitch could be made to make up for an initial stumble in the ACC (not expecting one, just discussing that scenario). Something along the lines of we've upgraded our competition, are upgrading facilities, now we need players like you to get our team where we expect to be in the standings. Could also mention several teams that have had setbacks when entering new conferences, dating back to PSU in the B1G, and say that we took some knocks but are now familiar with our new opponents and expect to improve.

This "get on board for the ride" approach could work for a season or maybe two. After that, we would need to show some tangible progress or risk getting typecast as a cellar dweller.

We might lose some players, but with the higher-level talent we are now going after, we are going have to start to get used to more down to the wire battles even during good years.

 

[OrangePA]

OPA, I buy some of it, but schools you are dismissing have given us the likes of Johnny Unitas and Lawrence Taylor...so if you want to go the bygone legacy route others can show that as well.

And UNC has more than their fair share of NFL players right now.

Yeah, but we have many, many, many legends.

Okay - One school has a Lawrence Taylor and one has Johnny Unitas. Heck, Rutgers has Paul Robeson.

But I'm not talking about isolated examples.

I'm talking about many, many all-time greats - the best at their positions - Mackey, Jim Ringo, Walt Sweeney, Jim Brown, Gary Anderson, Harrison, Ernie Davis, Csonka, Johnston, Freeney - even Jim Nance - and on and on.

We have had all-time great coaches - Schwartzwalder, Howard Jones, Bud Wilkinson, Biggie Munn, Ossie Solem - even Nick Saban and Jim Tressel for gosh sakes.

We have many high profile Bowl games - Orange Bowls, Cotton Bowls, Fiesta Bowls and on and on.

We have what many [including Lee Corso] consider the greatest college football team of all time - 1959 (a team that gave up 180 yards rushing - for the entire season!)

I'm not dismissing other schools.

I am pointing out that when one looks at the entire history of SU Football one sees a program that is way up there - far beyond most schools, including NC, Louisville, NCST, Wake, UVA and many otherss.

So, I feel pretty good about SU Football right now - money and tradition.

 

[Lou_C]

Sounds like the radio hosts were overstating the ACC a bit. Yes, I do think the ACC plays a higher level of football than the Big East did. But I don't think it's as extreme as described.

It's pretty simple...the Syracuse that struggled so much in the Big East recently is going to suffer mightily in the ACC.

But the Syracuse of years past, they will not be outclassed on a week in, week out basis in the ACC. It isn't fundamentally impossible for Syracuse to compete in the ACC like it might be in the SEC.

 

[cpatrocks]

1) I Freekin Love Upon Further Review. It's really the only sports talk show I want to listen to anymore.

2) Anyone that doesn't acknowledge that moving from the Big East to the ACC is big step up for the Football Program, in terms of competition, prestige and $$$$, is smoking dope.