Who are we?

[SWC75]

Interesting stat on the radio, (from Chris McManus, who called into his old station):

Since 2002, one Power 5 team has had a worse record than Syracuse (64-103). It's Indiana, (55-111).

I went to a site where you can plug in years and get a ranking of team's records. It doesn't have 2015 incldued yet but this is what it looks like:
http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin...=2002&end=2014&rpct=30&min=5&se=on&by=Win+Pct

We were tied for 97th with Washington State, who is 8-3 this year and thus 69-98.

Kansas, just ahead of us is 0-11 so they are 62-107

Iowa State is 3-8 so they are 64-108

Colorado is 4-8 so they are 64-106

Vanderbilt is 4-7 so they are 62-107

Illinois is 5-6 so they are 61-108

Duke is 6-5 so they are 56-113

Indiana is 5-6 so they are 55-111

So McManus is incorrect but he's not wrong. That's what the SU football program is to recruits who will not know or care what they were before 2002. McManus did take the highly pessimistic view that we will never be any better than we are and any money spent to improve the program, whether is't on a new stadium or a new coach is "like burning money". His biggest point to support that view is that we won 3 bowl game sin four years and it didn't increase the attendance at the Dome. But the idea that we are seen as a plum job is, based on our recent history, delusional.

 

[orangenauburn]

Per recruits, the University of Syracuse
Per us, Syracuse Mother University!

 

[SWC75]

Per recruits, the University of Syracuse
Per us, Syracuse Mother University!

We need to get back to being "The 'Cuse'.

 

[orangenauburn]

We need to get back to being "The 'Cuse'.

No SwaggaCuse?

 

[cpatrocks]

Interesting stat on the radio, (from Chris McManus, who called into his old station):

Since 2002, one Power 5 team has had a worse record than Syracuse (64-103). It's Indiana, (55-111).

I went to a site where you can plug in years and get a ranking of team's records. It doesn't have 2015 incldued yet but this is what it looks like:
http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin...=2002&end=2014&rpct=30&min=5&se=on&by=Win+Pct

We were tied for 97th with Washington State, who is 8-3 this year and thus 69-98.

Kansas, just ahead of us is 0-11 so they are 62-107

Iowa State is 3-8 so they are 64-108

Colorado is 4-8 so they are 64-106

Vanderbilt is 4-7 so they are 62-107

Illinois is 5-6 so they are 61-108

Duke is 6-5 so they are 56-113

Indiana is 5-6 so they are 55-111

So McManus is incorrect but he's not wrong. That's what the SU football program is to recruits who will not know or care what they were before 2002. McManus did take the highly pessimistic view that we will never be any better than we are and any money spent to improve the program, whether is't on a new stadium or a new coach is "like burning money". His biggest point to support that view is that we won 3 bowl game sin four years and it didn't increase the attendance at the Dome. But the idea that we are seen as a plum job is, based on our recent history, delusional.

I miss Upon Further Review.

 

[ChrisMc]

Steve, I heard your call. Thanks for the updated research. Numbers I saw might have just been total wins. I'm all for trying to improve and hire the right coach; just sick of hearing people kick and scream about hiring someone proven and high-priced. It doesn't have the same potential for a return on investment like these places with 100K seat stadiums and huge potential football boosters. I think there are programs that have good seasons and good runs without dumping millions and millions into coaches and stadiums, and that's closer to our model. Coyle comes from a model like that. Point is, SU is about as awful as it gets in the power five (for as long as potential recruits have been alive), so expectations and patience probably need to be adjusted around here. I'm open minded on any of these candidates that are being discussed, but I'm not holding them to the bar that the 80s and 90s have set.

 

[xc84]

But the idea that we are seen as a plum job is, based on our recent history, delusional.

But then again, I don't know anyone who holds the view that coaching SU is a "plum job". It is an extremely challenging one that under the right circumstances, could be a pretty good job.

 

[CuseCrew08]

Based on your site, I don't think that stat is correct.

Iowa State is 64-108
Illinois is 61-108
Duke is 56-113

Those teams probably don't fit the agenda.

 

[Ozcuse]

I don't agree with Chris's assertion at all.

Ten years ago Baylor = Syracuse now. They had a longer Top 25 dry spell than Syracuse (1986 until 2011) Hired Art Briles who built what they are now.

Kansas State with Snyder, GOOD! Kansas State without Snyder, BAD! Same school, facilities, crowd, etc.

Boise State was nothing until a couple of coaches in a row made them into something. (Dirk Koetter 1998 - 2015 Bryan Harsin)

That's all it is. Hire good coaches. If they leave, hire more good coaches. If you hire a bad one (ala Florida and Zook, Florida and Muschamp) fire said coach and hire another good one.

I understand these are "exceptions" but that's how we need to think about this and build the program, not like we're Vanderbilt in the SEC and need to accept our lot in life.

 

[OrangeAggieArmy]

If schools like Duke and Northwestern can crack the top 25, so can we.

 

[SUFaninNJ]

So you want us to respond We are...? I just can't bring myself to doing that.

 

[Frozen]

 

[TheCusian]

I think it has less to do with patience and expectations than it has to do with being smart and making wise choices.

I think Kent started it, made a great hire in Coyle. Coyle will make a great hire. It won't be a proven guy with a large salary - but a smart guy with an exciting system and middle of the road salary (for now).

 

[SWC75]

Another point made was that since the rest of the athletic program seems to be doing well and we get the same money from the ACC no matter how well we do in football, what's the motivation for improving?

If we went to bowls regularly, would that increase our income or would the conference and the expenses involved just consume that? Would we have to make the playoff to make money that would make it worth the effort? Could we ever get the attendance to the point that would justify the effort?

What about the "branding" of the school. Isn't the football team advertising for the schools' product? I remember when we went to the Final Four in 1987 and then went to the Sugar Bowl the next football season, enrollment applications rose to the highest level since World War II and a poll of the applicant said they first head of the program though it's athletic teams. Is that enough of a reason to get a good football team?

 

[OrangeAggieArmy]

I think it has less to do with patience and expectations than it has to do with being smart and making wise choices.

I think Kent started it, made a great hire in Coyle. Coyle will make a great hire. It won't be a proven guy with a large salary - but a smart guy with an exciting system and middle of the road salary (for now).

I like this. Boise St and Cincy are the models of how you continue to ride success by making good hires as coaches leave you for bigger programs.

 

[Ozcuse]

I like this. Boise St and Cincy are the models of how you continue to ride success by making good hires as coaches leave you for bigger programs.

Exactly. Both of those schools are exactly the type we should try to emulate because just like us, if they screw up a hire they don't have Alabama or LSU booster money to just buy someone out and get a do-over. We need to make very smart, very calculated coaching decisions because we don't have the financial resources committed to buy our way out of mistakes.

 

[NKR1978]

All this football misery for stealing a loaf of bread to feed our sister's kids.

 

[690West]

All this football misery for stealing a loaf of bread to feed our sister's kids.

Yeah, but will attendance Saturday break 24601 !!??

 

[GoSU96]

Interesting stat on the radio, (from Chris McManus, who called into his old station):

Since 2002, one Power 5 team has had a worse record than Syracuse (64-103). It's Indiana, (55-111).

I went to a site where you can plug in years and get a ranking of team's records. It doesn't have 2015 incldued yet but this is what it looks like:
http://football.stassen.com/cgi-bin...=2002&end=2014&rpct=30&min=5&se=on&by=Win+Pct

We were tied for 97th with Washington State, who is 8-3 this year and thus 69-98.

Kansas, just ahead of us is 0-11 so they are 62-107

Iowa State is 3-8 so they are 64-108

Colorado is 4-8 so they are 64-106

Vanderbilt is 4-7 so they are 62-107

Illinois is 5-6 so they are 61-108

Duke is 6-5 so they are 56-113

Indiana is 5-6 so they are 55-111

So McManus is incorrect but he's not wrong. That's what the SU football program is to recruits who will not know or care what they were before 2002. McManus did take the highly pessimistic view that we will never be any better than we are and any money spent to improve the program, whether is't on a new stadium or a new coach is "like burning money". His biggest point to support that view is that we won 3 bowl game sin four years and it didn't increase the attendance at the Dome. But the idea that we are seen as a plum job is, based on our recent history, delusional.

1. Who said this was a "plum" job, and what exactly does that mean? BS straw man argument. It's a P5 job, single P5 program in one of the biggest states in the country, with a national brand. The difficulties of this job aren't going to scare away an ambitious guy. It might scare away a careerist hack like Edsall or Holtz, but not a real coach.

2. The four year record after the 2009 transition year was 28-23, so what's this about the program will never be any better than a .380 program, it's already been proven with the right hire and handful of guys you can compete quickly. Marrone likely would have strung together 8 and 9 win seasons the last three.

3. Who cares about attendance, it's the ultimate lagging indicator and it's a TV show. SU is a content provider multiples more money from TV and Conference then attendance. It's marginal uncaptured revenue, it's upside gravy, it doesn't drive anything.

 

[TheCusian]

I like this. Boise St and Cincy are the models of how you continue to ride success by making good hires as coaches leave you for bigger programs.

And that starts at the top. Hoping Coyle is that kind of AD.

 

[phil77]

Who we are isn't who we have to be

 

[Alsacs]

BS. To his premise.
Syracuse needs a coach who is going developing talent.
P was stale and while a change was probably going to happen after winning a portion of the conference title it was the wrong time.
Hiring Gerg set the program back 4 years. Awful coach all around.
Marrone showed he could develop talent but our facilities were awful and were in the Big East mindset. He left for the NFL no problem.
SS good man but not a good HC.

Syracuse football hasn't hired a HC with D-1 experience since Coach Mac and that at D-1AA UMass.

Syracuse FB needs to spend 2.5 million on a HC give that coach 600k for each coordinator and money for other assistants.

The idea we are a dumpster fire because of 12 years is beyond stupid. When you pay what we have paid you get what you pay for. Now obviously the coaches we had didn't deserve more money but we went with bad options.

If we went out and hired say Matt Rhule I think that by year 3 we would be 7-5/8-4.

SWC question for you I went back as far as Ben have we ever had a HC who coached at current FBS team before coaching at SU?

 

[PhatOrange]

The thing that Syracuse has over all of those schools except Colorado IS history. Syracuse will bounce back as will Colorado.

 

[KaiserUEO]

Steve, I heard your call. Thanks for the updated research. Numbers I saw might have just been total wins. I'm all for trying to improve and hire the right coach; just sick of hearing people kick and scream about hiring someone proven and high-priced. It doesn't have the same potential for a return on investment like these places with 100K seat stadiums and huge potential football boosters. I think there are programs that have good seasons and good runs without dumping millions and millions into coaches and stadiums, and that's closer to our model. Coyle comes from a model like that. Point is, SU is about as awful as it gets in the power five (for as long as potential recruits have been alive), so expectations and patience probably need to be adjusted around here. I'm open minded on any of these candidates that are being discussed, but I'm not holding them to the bar that the 80s and 90s have set.

not sure where you are hearing that, but its not (oddly enough for sure) on here...unless you consider frost and warner proven and high priced.

we certainly are about as awful a P5 as there is, but to think we cant get back to having fun with 8, 9 and even 10 win seasons like the 80s & 90s is ludicrous.

sure, Syracuse will likely always lose to 1 of clemson or fla st or lville or whomever the ACC du jour is, just like what happened in the BE with miami and vpi...but damn if they can be a 15-25 ranked team every year i think we all would be quite happy.

that 80s & 90s bar isnt that high.

got to get this hire RIGHT.

 

[HOFCeluck]

It's not getting a "high priced" guy. It's spending at a level higher than the bottom of the league. The move to the ACC, the IPF, and Dome renovations prove that we are committed to competing at this level. So why skimp on a head coach?