Will the defense be significantly better next year?

[orangenirvana]

Not enough.

MLB is the most important position on defense IMO. We will be better if whomever starts there is as good as Diet Tab was. This will be the 4th straight year with a new MLB. It is key.

Didn't Spruill spend most of December practice at MLB?

 

[TheCusian]

A lot will depend on Chuck Bullough.

Bit off-topic - but I love the way SS says "Bullough." It's like he ingested a football whole and burped out his name.

 

[JoeSU]

No doubt. But I looked at the question as being personnel based.

The original topic was "Will the defense be significantly better next year", and I was trying to make the point that it will depend as much on Bullough as it does the personnel - in fact, I would argue more so. As evidence, I point to the significantly improved defense Shafer was able to cobble together from the players GRob left behind from a defense that was ranked near the bottom of D-I.

 

[007]

No doubt. But I looked at the question as being personnel based.

If Shafer stays true to his belief that he will "let the coaches coach," am I the only one that is a tad concerned by Bullough's performance when he was the DC at UCLA? I know that there were issues with Neuheisel and his preference for the 3-4. But Bullough's D national rankings were in the Robinson zone - 95th in total D, 108th for rushing D.

 

[rrlbees]

I agreed with your point that is why I said "no doubt". But I will assume the scheme or ar least the basics of it will be the same because of shafer. That's why I gave ny opinion based on personnel.

Sent using my Commodore 64 on Tapatalk 5.3

 

[HtownOrange]

If Shafer stays true to his belief that he will "let the coaches coach," am I the only one that is a tad concerned by Bullough's performance when he was the DC at UCLA? I know that there were issues with Neuheisel and his preference for the 3-4. But Bullough's D national rankings were in the Robinson zone - 95th in total D, 108th for rushing D.

Speaking for myself only, I am not as concerned for the following reasons:

1) Shafer is still in charge and he knows how to run a defense. It is unlikely that he will allow Bullough to fail.
2) Guys who like a 4-3 don't necessarily work well in a 3-4. It's hard to coach something you do not believe in, just like players playing in a system they don't buy into.
3) Shafer chose Bullough. I believe Shafer has made some good hires and will wait and see how they perform.
4) The defense is still stocked and recruited pretty well to our defensive style/needs. Sure, we can always use a few more hot shots, but we are still on the uptick and must use what we have.

 

[007]

Speaking for myself only, I am not as concerned for the following reasons:

1) Shafer is still in charge and he knows how to run a defense. It is unlikely that he will allow Bullough to fail.
2) Guys who like a 4-3 don't necessarily work well in a 3-4. It's hard to coach something you do not believe in, just like players playing in a system they don't buy into.
3) Shafer chose Bullough. I believe Shafer has made some good hires and will wait and see how they perform.
4) The defense is still stocked and recruited pretty well to our defensive style/needs. Sure, we can always use a few more hot shots, but we are still on the uptick and must use what we have.

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. It is what Syracuse fan should be thinking/hoping at this time. I guess my point was more that the only objective "data" out there on Bullough's performance as a DC is not very encouraging.

I am all for trusting Shafer's judgement and giving Bullough the benefit of the doubt. But, I do not see the D as being "stocked."

 

[HtownOrange]

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that. It is what Syracuse fan should be thinking/hoping at this time. I guess my point was more that the only objective "data" out there on Bullough's performance as a DC is not very encouraging.

I am all for trusting Shafer's judgement and giving Bullough the benefit of the doubt. But, I do not see the D as being "stocked."

I may still be under the euphoria of having a full team last season. After the GROB years and the Marrone house cleaning, we were pretty much empty. That is what I was referring to when I mentioned being stocked. I would prefer ND/USC/Bama talent but for now, we have to consider where we have recently been.

 

[007]

I may still be under the euphoria of having a full team last season. After the GROB years and the Marrone house cleaning, we were pretty much empty. That is what I was referring to when I mentioned being stocked. I would prefer ND/USC/Bama talent but for now, we have to consider where we have recently been.

If by stocked you are referring to sheer numbers and not necessarily talent, then I agree. My impression is that the D lacks playmakers, size (at all 3 LBs and S), and potential NFL caliber talent. Bromley has a shot, but I would be hard pressed to come up with anyone else, at least among the players we saw this year. I know some here think Lynn has a shot, I do not.

Bullough is not going to have the talent to work with that he ostensibly had at UCLA and Shafer did a really nice job hiding the weaknesses this year.