Where does firing coach p rank

Joined
Feb 2, 2017
Messages
242
Likes
679
#51
It was a horrific decision.

The individuals who pushed for the dismissal were not football people and did not understand why the program was having difficulty.

The basic problem was financial - the University's failure to sufficiently invest in the program - outdated training facilities, outdated weight training facilities, outdated locker rooms - the Carrier Dome AstroTurf and on and on.

By the time Marrone got here we were still way behind.

Robinson and his staff revealed just how effective Pasqualoni and his staff were.
Don't disagree with you regarding any of the points you make regarding Pasqualoni's dismissal. All I am going to say is that Pasqualoni allowed all those things to occur under his watch. That and keeping DeLeone ten years more than he should. Pasqualoni should have looked to go elsewhere if he wasn't getting what he needed to be successful at Syracuse. The bottom line is that he started the decline that has lasted for way too long. Go Orange!!!!!!
 

DoctorBombay

All American
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
4,526
Likes
7,054
#52
Can you say what’s changed at the admin level that has started to get funds flowing back into the program?

Are the “non-football” individuals who pushed for Coach P’s firing still apart of the admin or have others (presumably at the board level) been able to overrule their agenda.

Perhaps I’m not wording this correctly but I’m curious to know if the school’s recent investment in the program (e.g. coachs’ salaries, IPF, etc) is because those individuals’ minds were changed or they’re no longer part of the administration. Thanks.
I would think based on the terrible results alone, the “non-football” individuals influence would be greatly diminished at this point.
The ex-Hoya bringing in HCDB and Wildhack especially, tells me that this Admin finally gets how important the AD’s role in a big time university’s life.
The future looks bright, and we can’t go back.
 

Chip

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
16,060
Likes
30,065
#53
The firing of Coach P was the worst move in program history simply because we got the entirely inept G-Rob as his replacement. (fires burning everywhere)
I don't really agree with the cause and effect. If P was replaced with Marrone (who I believe was willing, able, and available) is it still the worst move ever to fire him?

Give GRob credit for one thing. He knew how to light a match. Buzz Shaw was the one pouring gasoline all over the program. He sat back polishing pennies while the competitors were rising up all around him. By 2004, Rutgers and Pitt had caught us. Both losing games in the Dome they easily could have won. And Temple, of course, beat us.

Even if that magical, improbable day in Chestnut Hill didn't happen, and we fired P at the end of a 5-6 season with plenty of time in the cycle, we still end up with a woefully in over his head GRob and a team that had Div 1AA wide receivers.
 

PAcuse

All Conference
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
3,262
Likes
7,060
#54
i never understand the notion that one can't physically ignore a thread that they deem unacceptable. Isn't a message board made up various topics one may or may not care about.
Oh I do ignore plenty of the nonsense put up on this board. It would just be nice to have the feature back so it gives me a cleaner look at what I actually want to read. I hope this helps you out!
 

elimunelson

All Conference
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,388
Likes
3,223
#55
I don't really agree with the cause and effect. If P was replaced with Marrone (who I believe was willing, able, and available) is it still the worst move ever to fire him?

Give GRob credit for one thing. He knew how to light a match. Buzz Shaw was the one pouring gasoline all over the program. He sat back polishing pennies while the competitors were rising up all around him. By 2004, Rutgers and Pitt had caught us. Both losing games in the Dome they easily could have won. And Temple, of course, beat us.

Even if that magical, improbable day in Chestnut Hill didn't happen, and we fired P at the end of a 5-6 season with plenty of time in the cycle, we still end up with a woefully in over his head GRob and a team that had Div 1AA wide receivers.
I don't buy other programs caught us as much as other programs starting to hire the right guys. I think we need to contextualize the 90s and how inept Rutgers and Pitt were with their hires. The Temple win was an aberration and it happens to EVERY program. A one off. Rutgers and Pitt were programs that hired Terry Shea and a way past his prime Johnny Majors and it sunk them, similar to Greg Robinson.

Pitt was bound to wake up and Rutgers was bound to find a guy who would recruit NJ and build a system to win games. Ironically we have stolen the Schiano template on scheduling weak OOC now. If we had built that template early in 2000s Pasqualoni wouldn't have been losing to those stout OOC opponents we were matching up against.

It doesn't mean P wasn't getting stale or the AD didn't see the impact of dumping more money into the program. But the money was gonna come from the ACC move, not some wave of a magic wand. School didn't have the cash to dump w the Big East payouts. It's timeless what if. I think we tend to bottom line things alot and forget how the downfall happened to some extent.
 

elimunelson

All Conference
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,388
Likes
3,223
#56
Oh I do ignore plenty of the nonsense put up on this board. It would just be nice to have the feature back so it gives me a cleaner look at what I actually want to read. I hope this helps you out!
i'm not angry at all. I just don't understand how one can't self police themselves from finding a thread that isn't that interesting to them and then reacting to other people who may find it interesting.
 

PAcuse

All Conference
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
3,262
Likes
7,060
#57
i'm not angry at all. I just don't understand how one can't self police themselves from finding a thread that isn't that interesting to them and then reacting to other people who may find it interesting.
I would hope you are not angry over me simply explaining why I like the ignore thread button.
I am more then capable of self policing myself, as I stated I just like to have a cleaner look when I log into the board. Since we haven't had it I've done fine "ignoring" threads I don't want to look at.
 

pacusewife

2nd String
Joined
Oct 19, 2015
Messages
646
Likes
1,785
#58
I would hope you are not angry over me simply explaining why I like the ignore thread button.
I am more then capable of self policing myself, as I stated I just like to have a cleaner look when I log into the board. Since we haven't had it I've done fine "ignoring" threads I don't want to look at.
I am less than capable of self-policing :D
 

OrangeDW

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
20,811
Likes
45,690
#60
We were a sinking ship. They botched the timing of it and the replacement obviously.

In hindsight they should’ve given him one more year and hoped for .500 again, and replaced him when they had a legit plan and some good candidates lined up. We should’ve been battling WVU for BE supremecy, once VT and Miami left.

Ridiculous that we became the worst program in that crappy league for half a decade.
 

reedny

Hall of Fame / 44 Degrees of Consanguinity
Joined
Oct 22, 2011
Messages
9,343
Likes
11,687
#61
I don't really agree with the cause and effect. If P was replaced with Marrone (who I believe was willing, able, and available) is it still the worst move ever to fire him?

Give GRob credit for one thing. He knew how to light a match. Buzz Shaw was the one pouring gasoline all over the program. He sat back polishing pennies while the competitors were rising up all around him. By 2004, Rutgers and Pitt had caught us. Both losing games in the Dome they easily could have won. And Temple, of course, beat us.

Even if that magical, improbable day in Chestnut Hill didn't happen, and we fired P at the end of a 5-6 season with plenty of time in the cycle, we still end up with a woefully in over his head GRob and a team that had Div 1AA wide receivers.
This is the key, IMO, not the coach. P was a good coach that put heart-soul into the program. I'm not saying spread option was the future, but it was working when we had the horses.
 

Chip

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
16,060
Likes
30,065
#62
I don't buy other programs caught us as much as other programs starting to hire the right guys. I think we need to contextualize the 90s and how inept Rutgers and Pitt were with their hires. The Temple win was an aberration and it happens to EVERY program. A one off. Rutgers and Pitt were programs that hired Terry Shea and a way past his prime Johnny Majors and it sunk them, similar to Greg Robinson.

Pitt was bound to wake up and Rutgers was bound to find a guy who would recruit NJ and build a system to win games. Ironically we have stolen the Schiano template on scheduling weak OOC now. If we had built that template early in 2000s Pasqualoni wouldn't have been losing to those stout OOC opponents we were matching up against.

It doesn't mean P wasn't getting stale or the AD didn't see the impact of dumping more money into the program. But the money was gonna come from the ACC move, not some wave of a magic wand. School didn't have the cash to dump w the Big East payouts. It's timeless what if. I think we tend to bottom line things alot and forget how the downfall happened to some extent.
It costs $ and resources to hire the right guys. I'm sure Pitt also shelled out some $ to be co-host of Heinz Field, something that was a great benefit.

We played on a parking lot surface that was used against us in recruiting battles. And no one would install field turf because of track. Thankfully Gross changed that one, but combined it with his cratering hire.

Also, for years, the school took the concession money from the program. It all operated from a general fund. Well documented here, and confirmed by Jake. That was all fixed (I'm pretty sure anyway).
 

orangecuse

All American
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,126
Likes
6,284
#63
Can you say what’s changed at the admin level that has started to get funds flowing back into the program?

Are the “non-football” individuals who pushed for Coach P’s firing still apart of the admin or have others (presumably at the board level) been able to overrule their agenda.

Perhaps I’m not wording this correctly but I’m curious to know if the school’s recent investment in the program (e.g. coachs’ salaries, IPF, etc) is because those individuals’ minds were changed or they’re no longer part of the administration. Thanks.
First & foremost, and nothing comes even close to this: What changed was the 'gift of a lifetime' from the ACC. That can never be undersold or undervalued in any way, shape or form. The most significant changes made up on the Hill all came after this 'falling out of the sky' striking the lottery winfall.

The powers that be that are now in place know how incredibly lucky & fortunate SU was to be granted such great fortune, and they, now as stewards of such a winfall, know that they have to manage these "winnings" and invest accordingly under the fiduciary obligations bestowed upon them. Period!!!
 

Scooch

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
9,589
Likes
18,743
#64
Firing Pasqualoni, in and of itself, was defensible. His program had been 39-33 in his last six years and it sure seemed to be trending in the wrong direction (16-20 the last 3 years, including soul-crushing losses to Rutgers and Temple). The life was totally out of the program, blame whatever you want for that, but it was the truth.

But when he was retained after the BC win in November 2004 they reallllly shouldn't have fired him after the bowl game. That was dumb. Of course P only had himself to blame since had we beaten a turrrible Temple team the week before BC we might have gotten a BCS bowl bid for winning the Big East. Get blown out by Utah in that Fiesta Bowl and he'd still have been back in 2005.

Still, while we likely wouldn't have hit the horrific lows of the GumpRob era, I'm not sure the ultimate outcome wouldn't have been similar had P made it another season or three. Maybe we scuffle along with 4-6 win years until a Marrone-like guy got us back to 8-ish wins in a weak Big East. I suspect we'd still be waiting for someone to return us to true national relevance, that was never going to happen until we re-invested in the program. P would have been long gone when that finally happened regardless.
 

GoSU96

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
12,279
Likes
14,210
#66
Firing Pasqualoni, in and of itself, was defensible. His program had been 39-33 in his last six years and it sure seemed to be trending in the wrong direction (16-20 the last 3 years, including soul-crushing losses to Rutgers and Temple). The life was totally out of the program, blame whatever you want for that, but it was the truth.

But when he was retained after the BC win in November 2004 they reallllly shouldn't have fired him after the bowl game. That was dumb. Of course P only had himself to blame since had we beaten a turrrible Temple team the week before BC we might have gotten a BCS bowl bid for winning the Big East. Get blown out by Utah in that Fiesta Bowl and he'd still have been back in 2005.

Still, while we likely wouldn't have hit the horrific lows of the GumpRob era, I'm not sure the ultimate outcome wouldn't have been similar had P made it another season or three. Maybe we scuffle along with 4-6 win years until a Marrone-like guy got us back to 8-ish wins in a weak Big East. I suspect we'd still be waiting for someone to return us to true national relevance, that was never going to happen until we re-invested in the program. P would have been long gone when that finally happened regardless.
Other than 2002 you have to go back to 1982 for season with less than 5 wins. Since P was let go, 9 out of 13.

P's four year record when he was fired was 26-23. The guy after went 10-37. This was not an inherently 10-37 program when P was fired. You could argue it has been since.
 
Last edited:

Rocco

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
10,819
Likes
22,799
#67
I don't really agree with the cause and effect. If P was replaced with Marrone (who I believe was willing, able, and available) is it still the worst move ever to fire him?

Give GRob credit for one thing. He knew how to light a match. Buzz Shaw was the one pouring gasoline all over the program. He sat back polishing pennies while the competitors were rising up all around him. By 2004, Rutgers and Pitt had caught us. Both losing games in the Dome they easily could have won. And Temple, of course, beat us.

Even if that magical, improbable day in Chestnut Hill didn't happen, and we fired P at the end of a 5-6 season with plenty of time in the cycle, we still end up with a woefully in over his head GRob and a team that had Div 1AA wide receivers.
The cause was the administration's lazy, yet cocky, attitude towards the football program. They were still sugar high off the 80's and 90's run.

The effect was Daryl Gross, followed by G-Rob, followed by years of abysmal football (still reeling, yet starting to improve [knock on wood]).

I agree with you.
 

elimunelson

All Conference
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,388
Likes
3,223
#68
Firing Pasqualoni, in and of itself, was defensible. His program had been 39-33 in his last six years and it sure seemed to be trending in the wrong direction (16-20 the last 3 years, including soul-crushing losses to Rutgers and Temple). The life was totally out of the program, blame whatever you want for that, but it was the truth.

But when he was retained after the BC win in November 2004 they reallllly shouldn't have fired him after the bowl game. That was dumb. Of course P only had himself to blame since had we beaten a turrrible Temple team the week before BC we might have gotten a BCS bowl bid for winning the Big East. Get blown out by Utah in that Fiesta Bowl and he'd still have been back in 2005.

Still, while we likely wouldn't have hit the horrific lows of the GumpRob era, I'm not sure the ultimate outcome wouldn't have been similar had P made it another season or three. Maybe we scuffle along with 4-6 win years until a Marrone-like guy got us back to 8-ish wins in a weak Big East. I suspect we'd still be waiting for someone to return us to true national relevance, that was never going to happen until we re-invested in the program. P would have been long gone when that finally happened regardless.

Wasn't there a scenario if USF beat Pitt the week after the BC game we still could have snuck into the Fiesta no matter the Temple game. I remember it was a massive thread on the old old old board where it was tied to ranking or something.

It's a fascinating study b/c no one is truly wrong on what happened, what should have happened, etc. The opinions are all valid and it's probably a "everyone's right to a degree" situation. The sliding doors theory is in full impact w syracuse football b/c we're never truly loaded with depth at every position. If McNabb goes to Nebraska, do we become SU Football in late 90s, does Vick give Pasqualoni a defacto lifetime contract if he propels 1999-2000 teams into BCS Games, does Ray Rice/Courtney Greene give us enough to be a 8 win team in 2006-2007 period. We will never know any of the answers but for a program that relies on big stars to carry them over a team of 4 stars, it's a forever "what if"
 

Scooch

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
9,589
Likes
18,743
#69
Other than 2002 you have to go back to 1982 for season with less than 5 wins. Since P was let go, 9 out of 13.

P's four year record when he was fired was 26-23. The guy after went 10-37. This was not an inherently 10-37 program when P was fired. You could argue it has been since.
I don't disagree that GRob took a scuffling program, stuffed dynamite in it, and blew it to kingdom come.

After that 4 years of sheer hell though, Marrone went 25-25. So he basically got us back to where we were when P was let go (record wise, anyway). That's my point. Even if P kept on with the 6-6-ish records we would have roughly been in the same place come 2012.
 

orangecuse

All American
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,126
Likes
6,284
#70
I don't disagree that GRob took a scuffling program, stuffed dynamite in it, and blew it to kingdom come.

After that 4 years of sheer hell though, Marrone went 25-25. So he basically got us back to where we were when P was let go (record wise, anyway). That's my point. Even if P kept on with the 6-6-ish records we would have roughly been in the same place come 2012.
As stated, record wise, yes. But to the abyss that GRob took this program, the fact that Marrone was able to get this program back to .500 over his tenure was simply astonishing. Not to mention, his team played to thier fullest potential based upon their talent, and, seldom if ever got embarrassed in a rout. At least I don't recall any relative embarrassments on the field.
 
Joined
Jan 25, 2017
Messages
530
Likes
435
#71
P never won 10 games with McNabb and all that nfl talent. That was a signal that it was trending in the wrong direction. How do you fire a guy when he underachieves to the BCS bowl games?
 

Scooch

Hall of Fame
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
9,589
Likes
18,743
#73
As stated, record wise, yes. But to the abyss that GRob took this program, the fact that Marrone was able to get this program back to .500 over his tenure was simply astonishing. Not to mention, his team played to thier fullest potential based upon their talent, and, seldom if ever got embarrassed in a rout. At least I don't recall any relative embarrassments on the field.
Sure. But I thought the exercise here was to opine on where we'd be today if P hadn't been let go in late December 2004.

If people want to argue that a P-led program would have been ripping off 10 win seasons in 2011 and 2012 that's cool. I don't know how to square that, though, with the argument that the program's decline was due to our lack of investment. That investment hadn't really happened in the late '00s so unless someone thinks a P-led program would have been at a 10 win level then it seems we'd have ended up in a similar place. That being, an 8 win, Big East program in 2012 that was (again) torpedoed by a bad hire in 2013.
 

RF2044

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 15, 2011
Messages
21,683
Likes
50,932
#74
Firing Pasqualoni, in and of itself, was defensible. His program had been 39-33 in his last six years and it sure seemed to be trending in the wrong direction (16-20 the last 3 years, including soul-crushing losses to Rutgers and Temple). The life was totally out of the program, blame whatever you want for that, but it was the truth.

But when he was retained after the BC win in November 2004 they reallllly shouldn't have fired him after the bowl game. That was dumb. Of course P only had himself to blame since had we beaten a turrrible Temple team the week before BC we might have gotten a BCS bowl bid for winning the Big East. Get blown out by Utah in that Fiesta Bowl and he'd still have been back in 2005.

Still, while we likely wouldn't have hit the horrific lows of the GumpRob era, I'm not sure the ultimate outcome wouldn't have been similar had P made it another season or three. Maybe we scuffle along with 4-6 win years until a Marrone-like guy got us back to 8-ish wins in a weak Big East. I suspect we'd still be waiting for someone to return us to true national relevance, that was never going to happen until we re-invested in the program. P would have been long gone when that finally happened regardless.
Spot on. The decision to let P go the way that it went down was an early sign of the general incompetence that was to follow from that "leadership" team.

But the reality is that our program was in a bad spot in relation to the arms race. We weren't getting much money from our Big East conference affiliation, and that put us in a huge hole relative to other programs. Our facilities were painfully antiquated, and the University didn't have the discretionary investment spend appetite to remediate the situation.

And on the P front, the program had gotten stale. We'd gone from having one of the more innovative offenses in college football to not being able to land QB prospects to get the job done. The fall off post-McNabb was stark, especially when Vick reneged on his verbal commitment. Part of the issue was that other programs suddenly saw value in recruiting our profile of athletes to play QB, and suddenly it wasn't just us and Nebraska chasing the same prospects anymore.

Add it all up, and it wasn't going to improve. The program was trending down at the end of the P era, our facilities were subpar, we didn't have a lot of $$$ to spend, and we had a collection of buffoons calling the shots -- which led to a nitwit like GRob getting paid several million dollars to run our program into the ground.

Thank god for the ACC. Not suggesting that everything is rainbows and unicorns with our program today, as things currently stand, but getting that influx of revenues into the Athletic Department coffers was a godsend, and actually enabled us to go out and hire an experienced head coach / staff, with a proven track record of success, and to begin incrementally tackling the infrastructure challenges.
 
.
Top Bottom