other than the offensive system being in place, why have all those things you talked about not happened??
it happens all the time to other schools.
and whos this young QB better than hunt? if hes on campus, then start him. otherwise this is all just wishing on rainbows and looking for unicorns.
you call it a veil of negativity and that concerns me, because im not negative. but yeah its been a long time and i want results, and i most certainly can heap a lot of crap onto posters defending a guy who just went 3-9 and people are all happy to give him the 4th year right now while admitting this year will be a struggle.
thats insane.
Last year we saw some truly terrible punt calls that made me throw things while watching the game. Shafer can learn from those and get better. Will he? That one factor makes me wonder if he is the right long-term answer.
Shafer tends to hire guys from his "extreme" comfort zone. Plusses and minuses. Great, congenial coaching atmosphere. Echo chamber? Trading intangibles for tangibles? I don't know. Makes me uneasy, though.
Shafer's first year was partly the result of good fortune. We hit a couple teams in a down period, due to injuries etc. We probably should not have gone bowling that year. If we had an average D1 QB to replace Nassib, sure. But we didn't. Not Shafer's fault. Did he have time to recruit one in that first cycle? Not really. Kimble might have been good but for the persistent injury. Anyone they recruited in this past cycle would have to come in and start as a true freshman to affect this coming year, again not likely. The QB situation is what it is. If guys develop and we get competent play this year, great. We won't be having this conversation at year's end. If not, I'm not blaming the staff for it. Someone coming off a redshirt will get the nod in 2016, and then a fair judgment can be made.
If 2013 should not have been 7-6, 2014 should not have been 3-9. Mediocre both years, sure, and probably on the losing side. Until we find a competent multi-year QB, we aren't getting out of mediocre-ville.
Shafer's real issues dogging him are his bad choice at OC, and the lack of talent on the roster relative to peers. The first may be inexcusable. The talent level is increasing, though, across the roster average. The drop off in athleticism is not huge in most places beyond the 2-deep, but in experience, yes. And we still lack top-end talent at key positions where such talent can amplify its effects. Starting to see that change with this recruiting cycle.
So if we're going to replace Shafer, due to poor in-game decisions and management and poor staffing decisions, fine. But that happens after year 4, and not because anyone loves him or wants to defend him. Replacing a coach after year 3 is bad for the meta-game at SU. Might fly at a factory, but not here. I suppose you could make an argument that a truly incompetent, bungling moron should be fired after year 3 no matter what, but we haven't seen that.
Which brings me to the talent side. If your program needs an infusion of talent and you are going to judge the coach on his year 3 results, then he needs to knock it out of the park in his very first recruiting cycle. Assuming that those guys are so good they supplant the older guys, they will be Jr and RSo in year 3, and presumably with lots of playing time. Fair enough. The guys from cycle 2 recruiting will be So and RF, and it is lunacy to expect to judge a coach on how players that age perform. So, if a coach is being canned due to sub-par recruiting, and the next coach is to be judged in year 3, you might as well can that next coach right after NSD if his first class isn't stellar. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I'm not sold on Shafer, but I am sold on the process, and that means you don't can a coach after year 3 unless he breaks the law or proves to be spectacularly, undeniably incompetent.
