We are going 6-6 next year | Page 2 | Syracusefan.com

We are going 6-6 next year

Same old, same old:

We've been miserable for 15 years, we need to shorten the leash for a guy who has only been here a short time! It makes me feel better! Also - lets raise the bar and pretend we're still in the 90's! I demand instant success because I've been sad for a long time!

Dino: I've been here a year and we smashed a ton of our offensive records without a serviceable running game. Give me time and your support.
 
Irony is we played 5 ACC teams in 2004. I would argue that schedule wasn't chopped liver either. That BC team was pretty good.

The fake news about how terrible that 6-6 was in comparison to the non existent 6-6 for 2017 season is crazy ville USA.

RECORD: 6-6
9-5-04 at Purdue (Sun.) LOST 0-51
9-11-04 at Buffalo WON 37-17
9-18-04 CINCINNATI WON 19-7
9-25-04 at Virginia LOST 10-31
10-2-04 RUTGERS WON 41-31
10-9-04 FLORIDA STATE LOST 13-17
10-21-04 at West Virginia (Thur.) LOST 6-27
10-30-04 CONNECTICUT WON 42-30
11-6-04 PITTSBURGH WON 38-31 (2OT)
11-13-04 at Temple LOST 24-34
11-27-04 at Boston College WON 43-17
CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL @Orlando, FL
12-21-04 vs. Georgia Tech LOST 14-51
 
I don't see 6-6. Filling AET's shoes isn't a sure thing. The defense is still an issue, they gave up 35+ points in the final four games and don't show any signs of improvement and the D line is a mess. ED's health is always a concern however I am fairly optimistic in what we have behind him in Culpepper and Devito. Baber's comments about it taking longer than usual and the absolute gauntlet of playing the in the Atlantic don't sit favorably with me either. The good news is that I'm usually horribly wrong with my predictions and therefore we should probably count on being like 9-3.
 
Guy predicts we will make a bowl game, gets ripped. Guy says we have been poor (outside of some outliers) for 15 years, which is a fact, gets ripped.

Some of you need to freaking relax. He didn't say 0-12...Christ.
 
NineOneSeven said:
Guy predicts we will make a bowl game, gets ripped. Guy says we have been poor (outside of some outliers) for 15 years, which is a fact, gets ripped.

Some of you need to freaking relax. He didn't say 0-12...Christ.
Expand...

People see that he's a new guy so they give him a hard time a bit. Thus confirming that a sports message board full of adults is really no different than 2nd grade.

If Jake or JarheadJim posted literally the same exact thing it would have gotten 50 likes.
 
elimunelson said:
Irony is we played 5 ACC teams in 2004. I would argue that schedule wasn't chopped liver either. That BC team was pretty good.

The fake news about how terrible that 6-6 was in comparison to the non existent 6-6 for 2017 season is crazy ville USA.

RECORD: 6-6
9-5-04 at Purdue (Sun.) LOST 0-51
9-11-04 at Buffalo WON 37-17
9-18-04 CINCINNATI WON 19-7
9-25-04 at Virginia LOST 10-31
10-2-04 RUTGERS WON 41-31
10-9-04 FLORIDA STATE LOST 13-17
10-21-04 at West Virginia (Thur.) LOST 6-27
10-30-04 CONNECTICUT WON 42-30
11-6-04 PITTSBURGH WON 38-31 (2OT)
11-13-04 at Temple LOST 24-34
11-27-04 at Boston College WON 43-17
CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL @Orlando, FL
12-21-04 vs. Georgia Tech LOST 14-51
Expand...

The ACC wasn't coming off of 2 NC in 3 years back then. The conference right now is significantly better than both the ACC and the BE of 2004.

Also, we're playing LSU next year.
 
NineOneSeven said:
Guy predicts we will make a bowl game, gets ripped. Guy says we have been poor (outside of some outliers) for 15 years, which is a fact, gets ripped.

Some of you need to freaking relax. He didn't say 0-12...Christ.
Expand...

Cmon. That's not an intellectual argument. He was saying 6-6 then is the same now - which is the part he got ripped for.
 
For anyone needing to compare anything...the losses to Temple '02, Rutgers '03, Temple '04, and Akron '08 are far worse than anything DM, SS, or DB have given us so far. Team is better than back then, there is no comparison.
 
TexanMark said:
The Big East in 2004 was nowhere as strong as the ACC of now.
Expand...


You can only play the schedule you're given.

In 2004 the team played a Purdue team that was picked to win the Big Ten, Florida State and the usual opponents including Pitt, BC (with Matt Ryan) and improving UConn and Rutgers squads. The Orange also played a Virginia team that was better than its record and a Cincy team that went bowling that year.

So, no, we didn't play Clemson or Louisville but the differences between the two schedules is not all that significant.
 
elimunelson said:
Irony is we played 5 ACC teams in 2004. I would argue that schedule wasn't chopped liver either. That BC team was pretty good.

The fake news about how terrible that 6-6 was in comparison to the non existent 6-6 for 2017 season is crazy ville USA.

RECORD: 6-6
9-5-04 at Purdue (Sun.) LOST 0-51
9-11-04 at Buffalo WON 37-17
9-18-04 CINCINNATI WON 19-7
9-25-04 at Virginia LOST 10-31
10-2-04 RUTGERS WON 41-31
10-9-04 FLORIDA STATE LOST 13-17
10-21-04 at West Virginia (Thur.) LOST 6-27
10-30-04 CONNECTICUT WON 42-30
11-6-04 PITTSBURGH WON 38-31 (2OT)
11-13-04 at Temple LOST 24-34
11-27-04 at Boston College WON 43-17
CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL @Orlando, FL
12-21-04 vs. Georgia Tech LOST 14-51
Expand...
the Big East was so bad in 2004, that all SU needed to do to be outright champion and go to the Fiesta Bowl was beat a 1-8 Temple team whose only win was against a 1-aa FAMU team. SU still tied for 1st in that big east - in a year where SU lost by a combined score of 102-14 to Purdue and GT. Purdue and GT each had conference records of 4-4 that season. The top ranked team on that schedule was FSU who finished ranked 15th.

Next year's schedule has 4 teams on it currently among the top 10 favorites to win the national championship in 2017 - plus three other teams that I'm seeing mentioned as teams which could end up ranked (Miami, NCSU and Pitt). Take 1 of the top 10 favorites, have them fall short of expectations, add Miami/NCSU/Pitt as the cream of the crop BE 2004 equivalents and then add a bunch of dog and next year's SU schedule would be on par with 2004.
 
OrangePA said:
You can only play the schedule you're given.

In 2004 the team played a Purdue team that was picked to win the Big Ten, Florida State and the usual opponents including Pitt, BC (with Matt Ryan) and improving UConn and Rutgers squads. The Orange also played a Virginia team that was better than its record and a Cincy team that went bowling that year.

So, no, we didn't play Clemson or Louisville but the differences between the two schedules is not all that significant.
Expand...

If this post had any more reach it might...well it just can't have more so there.

improving UCONN and Rutgers squads? UCONN was in their first year in the BE and only 3rd year of D1A ball. Rutgers was 1-5 in conference and that only win was against the crappiest of all crap, Temple, who we managed to actually lose to. VA better than it's record? no you are what your record says you are, i will debate that with you all day, in 10 years nobody is going to count their moral victories or how good they were on paper. As for Purdue, pre-season progs are worth about as much as my opinion after game day, diddly snot. The boilermakers finished 4-4 in conference and one game over .500 and they blew our friggin doors off. That was a weak schedule and we barely backed into a bowl game with it. Last year was a brutal schedule and we might have made a bowl if not for the refs giving the game to NCState.
 
Pyle said:
If this post had any more reach it might...well it just can't have more so there.

improving UCONN and Rutgers squads? UCONN was in their first year in the BE and only 3rd year of D1A ball. Rutgers was 1-5 in conference and that only win was against the crappiest of all crap, Temple, who we managed to actually lose to. VA better than it's record? no you are what your record says you are, i will debate that with you all day, in 10 years nobody is going to count their moral victories or how good they were on paper. As for Purdue, pre-season progs are worth about as much as my opinion after game day, diddly snot. The boilermakers finished 4-4 in conference and one game over .500 and they blew our friggin doors off. That was a weak schedule and we barely backed into a bowl game with it. Last year was a brutal schedule and we might have made a bowl if not for the refs giving the game to NCState.
Expand...


I just disagree with you.

Pitt, BC, Purdue, UVA, FSU, Cincy. It's pretty comparable to what we play these days.

But you're post is interesting.

Are you saying that we were better than our record last year???

Are you really hanging your hat on NC State?

My recollection of that game is different than yours. I recall feeling that State beat us up all over the field that day. I recall thinking that the Wolfpack had a far greater number of athletes than we did - bigger, taller and faster. I specifically recall my buddy and I talking about how much better the State athletes were than ours. The Pack had 544 yards and 27 first downs. We had ten first downs. We were soundly beaten that day.

The referees didn't lose that game.
 
Last edited:
OrangePA said:
I just disagree with you.

Pitt, BC, Purdue, UVA, FSU, Cincy. It's pretty comparable to what we play these days.
Expand...
It's really not - at all.

FSU was a top 15 team that year - now they are top 5. Pitt, BC, Purdue, UVA from 2004 were all middle of the pack teams - so if all SU played in the ACC were the teams that aren't ranked and end up around 4-4 in conference then sure - it would be comparable - however, SU also plays top 5 Clemson every season and top 20 Louisville every season. and next year will also have top 10 LSU. 2004 Cincy was a conference USA team - comparable to Central Michigan next year or maybe even Middle Tennessee. UConn/Rutgers of 2004 were similar to Central Michigan. UB and Temple were both similar to Central Connecticut.

It's not even close.
 
OrangePA said:
You can only play the schedule you're given.

In 2004 the team played a Purdue team that was picked to win the Big Ten, Florida State and the usual opponents including Pitt, BC (with Matt Ryan) and improving UConn and Rutgers squads. The Orange also played a Virginia team that was better than its record and a Cincy team that went bowling that year.

So, no, we didn't play Clemson or Louisville but the differences between the two schedules is not all that significant.
Expand...
You can't be serious? The 2004 schedule was really good but it lacked a 2016 Clemson, FSU and Louisville. It was filled good teams but no great teams.

Purdue was 7-5, FSU was a Gator Bowl team at 9-3, Virginia was 8-4 and WVU was 8-4 and lost to FSU in the bowl game by 2 TDs and step down from this year's FSU. Our BE champ 8-4 Pitt got blasted by Utah in the Fiesta Bowl. BC was the leagues best team at 9-3. We got blasted by GTech in the bowl game.
 
TexanMark said:
You can't be serious? The 2004 schedule was really good but it lacked a 2016 Clemson, FSU and Louisville. It was filled good teams but no great teams.

Purdue was 7-5, FSU was a Gator Bowl team at 9-3, Virginia was 8-4 and WVU was 8-4 and lost to FSU in the bowl game by 2 TDs and step down from this year's FSU. Our BE champ 8-4 Pitt got blasted by Utah in the Fiesta Bowl. BC was the leagues best team at 9-3. We got blasted by GTech in the bowl game.
Expand...


Calm down TM!

I didn't claim that 2004 presented the same degree of difficulty as 2016.

I just pointed out that it was not the kind of horrible schedule that some have suggested.

Obviously, with Clemson and FSU, we now face a two very difficult games every year. But the remaining schools are more or less in the same category as what we played ten years ago.

And, don't forget that there were years in the early 2000s when we played the equivalent of Clemson and FSU. The 2001 Miami Hurricane team is still the best college football team I have ever seen - and for me it's not even close. Plus, the Mike Vick Va Tech team that made it to the NC game was very good.

So, lets not go overboard and suggest that playing a rigorous schedule is something new for Syracuse Football. Because it's not.
 
Last edited:
I agree with your post in general...but I just compared 2004 vs 2016. Nothing more, nothing less...however the ACC overall in 2016 is a step above the 2004 BE.
 
the chancellor and the ad need to speak up about what is going on with dome. this is beginning to smell like the old administration which was delay delay delay. it all is beginning to look like bs. just like we never heard anything more about the "medical school". fans about to be scammed again with half filled obscure promises, or simply unfilled promises.
i am aware this is heresy to most here. i have been there done that with su for over 50yrs.
 
OrangeMojo said:
It's really not - at all.

FSU was a top 15 team that year - now they are top 5. Pitt, BC, Purdue, UVA from 2004 were all middle of the pack teams - so if all SU played in the ACC were the teams that aren't ranked and end up around 4-4 in conference then sure - it would be comparable - however, SU also plays top 5 Clemson every season and top 20 Louisville every season. and next year will also have top 10 LSU. 2004 Cincy was a conference USA team - comparable to Central Michigan next year or maybe even Middle Tennessee. UConn/Rutgers of 2004 were similar to Central Michigan. UB and Temple were both similar to Central Connecticut.

It's not even close.
Expand...
Except for that the teams you mentioned were not middle of the pack.

Virginia was ranked #12 when we played, and finished #23
Purdue was ranked #24 when we played them. They were ranked as high as #5 that year. Finished unranked, but just out of the top 25.
BC was ranked # 17 when we played them. Finished 9-3 ranked 21
Pitt was 8-4 ranked # 25 in the final poll

Throw in #15 West Virginia, and # 8 Florida State (we lost by 3) and that may be the toughest schedule we've had in some time.
6 ranked teams, and we got 6 wins. That would certainly be viewed as better than a 6 win 2017 team.
Granted there wasn't a true NC contender like Clemson this year, but what's the difference. If we played Clemson, or someone ranked 7th, the outcome would be a L either way.
 
Edfromsodus said:
i just looked at the schedule 3-0 and then 3-6.

6-6.

Same record as when we fired coach P. 13 years ago.
Expand...

Troll_2_poster.jpg
 
TheCusian said:
And? We should give up?

Ed. Most of us post here every day. We are aware of the sucky play. BUT - Dino is a good coach who deserves time. No need to tar him with 15 extra years of misery.

(Also, if the hill is steeper, it should take longer to run to the top.)
Expand...

Didn't we agree , one of the few times, right after the hire that HCDB had 3 years to get to 15 wins? Or am I misremembering?

What is the timeline? Or is it to early to tell? Being serious as to thoughts as to the staunch supporters. I'm not being difficult. Honestly would like to hear what people's opinions are at this stage.
 
elimunelson said:
Irony is we played 5 ACC teams in 2004. I would argue that schedule wasn't chopped liver either. That BC team was pretty good.

The fake news about how terrible that 6-6 was in comparison to the non existent 6-6 for 2017 season is crazy ville USA.

RECORD: 6-6
9-5-04 at Purdue (Sun.) LOST 0-51
9-11-04 at Buffalo WON 37-17
9-18-04 CINCINNATI WON 19-7
9-25-04 at Virginia LOST 10-31
10-2-04 RUTGERS WON 41-31
10-9-04 FLORIDA STATE LOST 13-17
10-21-04 at West Virginia (Thur.) LOST 6-27
10-30-04 CONNECTICUT WON 42-30
11-6-04 PITTSBURGH WON 38-31 (2OT)
11-13-04 at Temple LOST 24-34
11-27-04 at Boston College WON 43-17
CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL @Orlando, FL
12-21-04 vs. Georgia Tech LOST 14-51
Expand...

P might still have a job here if he could have figured out how to stop Walter Washington over left guard.
 
OrangePA said:
You can only play the schedule you're given.

In 2004 the team played a Purdue team that was picked to win the Big Ten, Florida State and the usual opponents including Pitt, BC (with Matt Ryan) and improving UConn and Rutgers squads. The Orange also played a Virginia team that was better than its record and a Cincy team that went bowling that year.

So, no, we didn't play Clemson or Louisville but the differences between the two schedules is not all that significant.
Expand...

don't care who picked Purdue to do what. Bottom line they were 7-5.
 
cuse309 said:
Except for that the teams you mentioned were not middle of the pack.

Virginia was ranked #12 when we played, and finished #23
Purdue was ranked #24 when we played them. They were ranked as high as #5 that year. Finished unranked, but just out of the top 25.
BC was ranked # 17 when we played them. Finished 9-3 ranked 21
Pitt was 8-4 ranked # 25 in the final poll

Throw in #15 West Virginia, and # 8 Florida State (we lost by 3) and that may be the toughest schedule we've had in some time.
6 ranked teams, and we got 6 wins. That would certainly be viewed as better than a 6 win 2017 team.
Granted there wasn't a true NC contender like Clemson this year, but what's the difference. If we played Clemson, or someone ranked 7th, the outcome would be a L either way.
Expand...
yeah they were - they were average.

UVA was 5-3 in a conference where the highest ranked team at the end of the year was #15, they were 0-4 against teams in the AP top 25
BC, WVU and Pitt were 4-2 in a conference where the highest ranked team at the end of the year was #21, the three of them were a combined 1-6 against the AP top 25
Purdue was 4-4 - it doesn't get any more middle of the pack than that - they reached #5 that year, great - 3 weeks later they were unranked and stayed unranked - give me a break

btw - Purdue got to #5 by beating 6-6 SU, 2-9 Ball State, 3-8 Illinois, 6-6 Notre Dame, 4-7 Penn State. they went 2-5 the rest of the way.

this is silly - the 2004 schedule was a walk in the park compared to what is coming up in 2017 - the only way to come to a different conclusion is to use alternate facts (played top 5 Purdue!)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
TE next year and beyond
Replies
6
Views
1K
upperdeck
U
SWC75
We're #6!
Replies
3
Views
1K
hungrychuck
hungrychuck
SWC75
Winning Plays - U of Miami
Replies
1
Views
329
SWC75
SWC75
NKR1978
    • Like
Random/scattered end of season thoughts
Replies
5
Views
804
Newhouser
N

Forum statistics

Threads
172,263
Messages
5,006,874
Members
6,025
Latest member
Upstate33

Share this page

Online statistics

Members online
210
Guests online
2,325
Total visitors
2,535
Totals may include hidden visitors.


...
Top Bottom