Why the fear over losing this class and system?

[baggerbob]

I'm not suggesting we should be reeling in Top 25 classes.

I am suggesting that if you hire an HC to keep your class intact it should be ranked better than 70.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Stop with the nonsense about scout ranking we have 6 juco's in this class. I'll give you some information class rankings, 2009-112 22players, 2010-99 17 players, 2011-61 26 players, 2012-85 27 players, 2013-54 16 players. They had 4-6-9-7-5 juco's in their classes. Terrible classes according to you, but that was Kansas St, so stop with the rant.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Stop with the nonsense about scout ranking we have 6 juco's in this class. I'll give you some information class rankings, 2009-112 22players, 2010-99 17 players, 2011-61 26 players, 2012-85 27 players, 2013-54 16 players. They had 4-6-9-7-5 juco's in their classes. Terrible classes according to you, but that was Kansas St, so stop with the rant.

Yeah, bc K State isn't an outlier.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OrangeDW]

I'm not suggesting we should be reeling in Top 25 classes.

I am suggesting that if you hire an HC to keep your class intact it should be ranked better than 70.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

We don't recruit at that level though, and if we did we wouldn't get credit for it anyway.

If they feel like it's a class that they need to keep, then I'll go with that. The rankings aren't going to be good anyway, and the next coach won't be reeling in highly ranked classes either.

As long as this class isn't filled with lemons like a lot of those guys who played here last decade, they can make it a priority to try to keep it together. I like what we've had going recently.

 

[bnoro]

I just want Allen, Arciniega, Edwards, Hodge, I. Johnson, and Williams. Don't really care too much either way about the others.

 

[xc84]

Losing a coach in college...in our situation, is not a good thing. It will hurt recruiting and may hurt next year's record due to getting a new offense installed, etc.. I know, I know, we should all be happy about it because we had a decent year last year and we have Zach Allen coming in . I don' t give a rat's ass about recruit ratings but do you star gazers who are touting Allen realize he's a "2 star" recruit (i.e. his rating does not help the overall class rating). Funny anyone who really cares about those ratings are, at the same time, touting Allen and "gotta make Allen happy".

 

[jekelish]

Honestly, regarding this class, I just want to retain Zach Allen. I think he has a chance to be truly special. We need that kid. I also think that if he reiterates that he's staying with SU, he can talk some other guys (I'm looking at you, Gus Edwards) into hanging with the Orange.

Zach Allen is the hero Syracuse both deserves AND needs right now.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Honestly, regarding this class, I just want to retain Zach Allen. I think he has a chance to be truly special. We need that kid. I also think that if he reiterates that he's staying with SU, he can talk some other guys (I'm looking at you, Gus Edwards) into hanging with the Orange.

Zach Allen is the hero Syracuse both deserves AND needs right now.

That's a lot of voodoo to be putting on a kid.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[OrangeDW]

Zach Allen is the hero Syracuse both deserves AND needs right now.

So he's better than Batman?

 

[timkay99]

People realize that last year's class was rated higher, right? Like, 20 some places higher.

And do people realize that while we did enjoy a very fun season on offense, that kind of success while new to us is actually pretty normal in college football and where things are trending?

Are people thinking about these things at all, or is everyone really convinced that the most important things for the program's future are to make Zach Allen happy and promote a 34 year old with a recognizable last name and whatever he brings to the table?

IMO, timing is the big thing.

At this stage of the coaching carousel, are there any true upgrades out there? If this happened as part of the carousel, then there were a number of coaches available. By now, most have gained a position that is a step up for them or used the carousel to leverage their employer into increasing their compensation.

Syracuse isn't a destination job. It is a stepping stone job - which I think some are struggling to realize.

I don't think Cuse will land Diaco and I don't think you want them to. He built a great defense with players Syracuse would never be able to recruit. At Virginia, he was there for two 5-7 teams. The 09 Cincy team he coordinated gave up 30+ points in 4 of the last 5 games to end the season, including 51 to a Florida team that had it out personelled.

Cristobal was fired from FIU after going 3-9 with a team of his own players in a better recruiting area then nearly everyone in their respective conference. Is a fired coach from a mid major the coach you really want to lead the team "over the hump"?

Wilder is the only name that intrigues me, but people have a point. Does an ACC team really hire a FCS coach? While it worked for Central Michigan, it failed miserably for Washington State (Paul Wulf).

I would like to see Syracuse make a play for Tressel or Bobby Petrino, but people seem scared. These coaches have been caught. If they get caught again, they are done in college. That is motivation to stay clean. What price do you want to win games? People that think college athletics are clean (by NCAA standards) scare me. Yet, these same people want to run a clean program that wins games. A lot of people that agreed Marrone ran a clean program wanted him fired after the 2-4 start.

This is more of the reason I want an in house candidate b/c every coach has significant flaws that is now available and are not clear upgrades over what Syracuse already has on staff.

 

[PhatOrange]

People realize that last year's class was rated higher, right? Like, 20 some places higher.

And do people realize that while we did enjoy a very fun season on offense, that kind of success while new to us is actually pretty normal in college football and where things are trending?

Are people thinking about these things at all, or is everyone really convinced that the most important things for the program's future are to make Zach Allen happy and promote a 34 year old with a recognizable last name and whatever he brings to the table?

If your whole argument is 'rankings' then you're a dipshit.

 

[PhatOrange]

I just want Allen, Arciniega, Edwards, Hodge, I. Johnson, and Williams. Don't really care too much either way about the others.

I'd add carter to the list but that's just cause I love his potential. Edwards is a big time prospect, losing him will sting as much as Allen IMHO. I can see Edwards turning ray rice numbers in a couple of years.

Might be imparitive to hang on to Wilson at his point to.

As to the OPs notion of promoting from within to save the class - no way. Most people seem to want to promote from with to save a staff that is real good

 

[OttoinGrotto]

If your whole argument is 'rankings' then you're a dipshit.

Good thing I've been posting all kinds of valid, relevant arguments all over the board today.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

 

[Mr. M]

We don't recruit at that level though, and if we did we wouldn't get credit for it anyway.

If they feel like it's a class that they need to keep, then I'll go with that. The rankings aren't going to be good anyway, and the next coach won't be reeling in highly ranked classes either.

As long as this class isn't filled with lemons like a lot of those guys who played here last decade, they can make it a priority to try to keep it together. I like what we've had going recently.

You're off your rocker again!! I would love a class filled with Alec Lemons!!

 

[TheCusian]

Shafer already said he's willing to lose a recruit or two to make the best hires. Question, moot.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Shafer already said he's willing to lose a recruit or two to make the best hires. Question, moot.

Which is 100% the right approach.

 

[TheCusian]

Which is 100% the right approach.

Agreed.

 

[sufandu]

Isn't one reason this class is rated so low, the number of commits? If I'm not mistaken, each kid is assigned points and they're all added together to get a final score/ranking. Obviously higher player ratings equal higher class ranking, but so does volume. Isn't this class, especially if we get Smith, considered to be of higher quality, top to bottom, than the previous 4?

 

[bnoro]

Isn't one reason this class is rated so low, the number of commits? If I'm not mistaken, each kid is assigned points and they're all added together to get a final score/ranking. Obviously higher player ratings equal higher class ranking, but so does volume. Isn't this class, especially if we get Smith, considered to be of higher quality, top to bottom, than the previous 4?

Ranked low because there aren't enough subscribers on Rivals/Scout.

 

[TheSpaz]

Loved how Shafer kind of called out the recruits who are wavering by saying if you don't choose Syracuse you better not play against us! Loved it!

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Ranked low because there aren't enough subscribers on Rivals/Scout.

That's too simple.

It's also ranked too low because a lot of our guys didn't attract the attention of schools with a lot of subscribers to Rivals/Scout.

 

[steve deberg]

That's too simple.

It's also ranked too low because a lot of our guys didn't attract the attention of schools with a lot of subscribers to Rivals/Scout.

I agree that is too simple but when some of our guys did attract attention from those schools, their lack of interest in being swayed didn't give Rivals/Scout enough reason to re-evaluate at a higher rating.

 

[GoSU96]

People realize that last year's class was rated higher, right? Like, 20 some places higher.

And do people realize that while we did enjoy a very fun season on offense, that kind of success while new to us is actually pretty normal in college football and where things are trending?

Are people thinking about these things at all, or is everyone really convinced that the most important things for the program's future are to make Zach Allen happy and promote a 34 year old with a recognizable last name and whatever he brings to the table?

Pretty normal? If it's normal why were they 17th in total offense. Wouldn't normal be in the 60s.

Actually for a team that four seasons prior was ranked 115th in total offense it's extraordinary. Here the list of teams that that had more yards passing and rushing than SU this season:

A&M, Baylor, Arizona, FSU, Okie St., La Tech, UCLA, UGA, Clemson. That's it, that's the list.

Yep, pretty normal year.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Pretty normal? If it's normal why were they 17th in total offense. Wouldn't normal be in the 60s.

Actually for a team that four seasons prior was ranked 115th in total offense it's extraordinary. Here the list of teams that that had more yards passing and rushing than SU this season:

A&M, Baylor, Arizona, FSU, Okie St., La Tech, UCLA, UGA, Clemson. That's it, that's the list.

Yep, pretty normal year.

You just want to pick a fight.

Offense overall is trending up in college football. For many years we were bottom of the barrel. Last season we got to see what offense can look like. You know, like when people play video games.

Offense is the easy part in college football. That's the point. P, Robinson and Marrone's first 3 years suckered us in to believing it's difficult to move the ball and score points.

 

[sufandu]

You just want to pick a fight.

Offense overall is trending up in college football. For many years we were bottom of the barrel. Last season we got to see what offense can look like. You know, like when people play video games.

Offense is the easy part in college football. That's the point. P, Robinson and Marrone's first 3 years suckered us in to believing it's difficult to move the ball and score points.

Sure it's trending upward, but being ranked 17th means 85% of the teams in the FBS were worse than us. 85th percentile is much better than normal. I'll give you that our scoring was probably only average (I didn't bother to look up the numbers).

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Sure it's trending upward, but being ranked 17th means 85% of the teams in the FBS were worse than us. 85th percentile is much better than normal. I'll give you that our scoring was probably only average (I didn't bother to look up the numbers).

Meh. I think you and Go are fixating too much on my use of the word "normal."

Good offense is everywhere in college pigskin these days. It's an era for offense. Even if we fall off a bit in total offense next season we can still have a "good" offense, which is "normal" for a lot of teams, even though it hasn't been "normal" for us.

I don't believe losing Hackett means our chances at having a "good" offense next season decrease that much, so long as we get another OC that understands that "good" offense is "normal" in college football these days.

There are a lot of good OCs out there.