Who makes it to the 2016 season?

[IthacaBarrel]

Will our opinions matter?

Does it ever?

 

[TheCusian]

I understand your thought process, but, it's not a finite decision driven by record. If we end up 5-7 and lose 4 games by the skin of our teeth, it's a lot different season than 5-7 and getting our doors blown off 5 times. As I said, currently he's nowhere near it, but it changes and it changes quickly dependent on results.

I think the extension is in the works already. And won't be driven entirely by record.

During camp I said this:

- if we finish with 4 wins, but the offense looks to be on track and the defense slips, he's getting a modest extension.

We know what we have with our D coaches. We didn't know about Lester and the O (and MANY people were sure it was a clusterf hire doomed by Shafer being a D coach and hiring his friends)... If we continue to score 25+ but have a slide on D due to youth, he'll be back almost regardless of record... Barring utter disaster

 

[Crusty]

With the kids he has recruited it would lunacy not to let this play out for at least a couple of more years.
MC is not a lunatic.

 

[K Otto XLIV]

With the kids he has recruited it would lunacy not to let this play out for at least a couple of more years.
MC is not a lunatic.

If the results on the field are bad, which has not happened and hopefully will not happen, it would be in Coyle's best interest (and SU's) for him to ask guys like Coughlin, Marrone, Harsin, Petersen (or any other connection he has who can properly evaluate our talent) to look at one game film. If our talent is top third of the ACC of course Shafer should be given longer. If it is in the middle third then SU is in a gray area. And if it is in the bottom third, it makes the decision easier.

I know that you are very high on our recruiting. But not everyone else is. The recruiting rankings have SU in the bottom third. However since those are not the best judges, Coyle should seek out people who can judge. That would not be him, it would not be internet posters, it would not be recruiting websites. It would be coaches who see talent day in and day out.

Just because our recruiting has been better than the past few years, doesn't mean it is where it needs to be.

 

[TheCusian]

If the results on the field are bad, which has not happened and hopefully will not happen, it would be in Coyle's best interest (and SU's) for him to ask guys like Coughlin, Marrone, Harsin, Petersen (or any other connection he has who can properly evaluate our talent) to look at one game film. If our talent is top third of the ACC of course Shafer should be given longer. If it is in the middle third then SU is in a gray area. And if it is in the bottom third, it makes the decision easier.

I know that you are very high on our recruiting. But not everyone else is. The recruiting rankings have SU in the bottom third. However since those are not the best judges, Coyle should seek out people who can judge. That would not be him, it would not be internet posters, it would not be recruiting websites. It would be coaches who see talent day in and day out.

Just because our recruiting has been better than the past few years, doesn't mean it is where it needs to be.

It's not that simple. We've had the IPF for one cycle. That same cycle we were coming off a 3-9 season. (And many of those kids are contributing now).

The right question isn't "how is our talent right now" but "is our recruiting trending up with this staff enough to gauge an improvement in W-L"

 

[K Otto XLIV]

It's not that simple. We've had the IPF for one cycle. That same cycle we were coming off a 3-9 season. (And many of those kids are contributing now).

The right question isn't "how is our talent right now" but "is our recruiting trending up with this staff enough to gauge an improvement in W-L"

It should be trending up given the move to the ACC, 3 Bowls in 4 years, and the new IPF. How much of the trend comes from those factors and how much from Shafer?

 

[TheCusian]

It should be trending up given the move to the ACC, 3 Bowls in 4 years, and the new IPF. How much of the trend comes from those factors and how much from Shafer?

Agreed. That's for the AD to suss out. My opinion is that this staff is pretty good at recruiting and many factors point to an upswing - with only w-l record and "perception" holding them back.

Having an exciting and improving offense with a competent OC should help too.

 

[Rocco]

Unfortunately, Shafer is probably on that list as well

 

[Rocco]

Kyle Flood's seat is already in the raging dumpster fire that is all things Rutgers.

Randy Edsall is a complete clown and should be handing out darts at the state fair's balloon popping stand.

It is amazing Mike London has gotten a 6th year.

 

[SUalldway]

It simply can't be said enough - Randy Edsall is a douchebag. He is the epitome of douchebag.

Wish Edsall was still on our schedule so that we could help to show him the door.