My thoughts
Scribbling some thoughts at ten thousand feet. Give me your ranks, 1-5, on the state of various aspects of the program:
5= robust
1= sickly
Offense
-lineup for next year (QB, OL, skill) - 4. Good, but QB and OL keep it from being a 5.
- lineup for 2016 - 4. 5 if Zaire gets serious experience in 2015.
- recruiting - 4
- scheme - 3. It's fine, but we score on talent and execution, not scheme.
Defense
- lineup for next year (front, coverage) - 3. So much experience, but much of it is either injured or not playing well.
- lineup for 2016 - 3.
- recruiting - 4.
- scheme - 3. Hard to form an opinion of BVG yet.
Special teams
- kicking - 2.
- punting - 2.
- return game - 3.
- cover teams - 3.
Program
- Strength and Conditioning. 4. Still seems good.
-Development. 3. Split this from S/C. It's been wildly uneven. The staff has worked miracles with some guys, some guys have played well but not really improved, and some guys have gotten worse.
- Nutrition. 4. Certainly much improved from Burger King and Chicago-Alfredo Pasta.
- Medical. 4. I trust we have good people on the medical staff.
- Facilities. 4. We don't have a palace, but we have nice facilities.
Other
- National Reputation. 4 when considering all of Division 1A. 3 when considering the Power 5.
- Conference affiliation / stability. 5. Thanks, Jack.
Complete thread:
- Program health check -
Jay,
2014-12-02, 16:51
- fun thread to read; thanks for the effort -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 12:02
- Ah, that's the level of analysis you were looking for. -
Greg,
2014-12-03, 12:13
- You're dumb! - Joe, 2014-12-03, 14:14
- Ah, that's the level of analysis you were looking for. -
Greg,
2014-12-03, 12:13
- More bullish than some but I have concerns - Brendan, 2014-12-03, 10:51
- mine - HumanRobot, 2014-12-03, 08:18
- Mine... - Mobster, 2014-12-03, 07:39
- Mine - Buffalo, 2014-12-03, 07:25
- Mine - Jason93, 2014-12-03, 07:11
- My own take -
HullieAndMikes,
2014-12-03, 06:55
- Nit w/r/t ST -
Pat (Moco),
2014-12-03, 07:08
- Yeah I'll defer to you on that - HullieAndMikes, 2014-12-03, 07:28
- Nit w/r/t ST -
Pat (Moco),
2014-12-03, 07:08
- Mine. - Bingo, 2014-12-03, 06:43
- could use some more ranks here -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 06:29
- Ranks (excl. 2016 parts) - Kevin, 2014-12-03, 06:44
- For special teams, how do you define "Immediate future?" -
Pat (Moco),
2014-12-02, 18:49
- I think our coverage teams have been pretty good this year -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:30
- I'm assuming Bryant takes over every role. - Pat (Moco), 2014-12-02, 20:07
- I think our coverage teams have been pretty good this year -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:30
- My ranks - Larry, 2014-12-02, 18:18
- ranks -
Jay,
2014-12-02, 17:45
- I think you're too low on the 2015 defensive lineup - BPH, 2014-12-02, 18:59
- I would downgrade our offensive scheme to a "2" -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 18:46
- I would be very surprised - Brendan, 2014-12-03, 06:39
- you just mean the run game, right? -
Jay,
2014-12-02, 18:59
- No, I mean having an offensive identity. - Bill, 2014-12-02, 19:01
- I think you're being a little unfair -
BPH,
2014-12-02, 18:56
- Do you know what our offense is going to be like next year? -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 18:59
- I think compentence is a much bigger issue than consistency. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 03:26
- Gravity game -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 06:17
- It's better but not good enough. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 06:37
- 31st scoring & total offense vs. FBS. - PAK, 2014-12-03, 07:51
- I do disagree -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 07:26
- I do think it's fair to say that the offense was better -
Bill,
2014-12-03, 07:50
- Please define "impressive" -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:07
- I think you would use the phrase - Greg, 2014-12-03, 08:38
- Well, I didn't introduce the term into the discussion. - Bill, 2014-12-03, 08:23
- Please define "impressive" -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:07
- Top 40 is not a "handful." -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 07:33
- 17th in S&P offense -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 07:51
- Does S&P consider how many points an offense surrenders -
Ken Fowler,
2014-12-03, 08:22
- Plenty of room for critique on S&P, sure - Eric M, 2014-12-03, 08:40
- I thought "points scored" seemed pretty accurate. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 08:10
- 11th highest scoring average since 1960 -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 08:22
- Special teams cost them > 2 ppg. 10 missed FGs. -
PAK,
2014-12-03, 08:40
- And Stanford was a lot closer than it should have been. - Pat (Moco), 2014-12-03, 16:45
- "Impressive" seems to be driving this subthread. - Kevin, 2014-12-03, 08:30
- Special teams cost them > 2 ppg. 10 missed FGs. -
PAK,
2014-12-03, 08:40
- Our offensive SOS was 18th per FEI. - PAK, 2014-12-03, 08:14
- 11th highest scoring average since 1960 -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 08:22
- So we're 24th out of 65 "Power 5" teams in that category. -
Bill,
2014-12-03, 07:54
- Without schedule adjusting, yes - Eric M, 2014-12-03, 07:58
- Does S&P consider how many points an offense surrenders -
Ken Fowler,
2014-12-03, 08:22
- National offensive rankings are essentially meaningless -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 07:49
- I think it means something when you consider what we needed. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 08:17
- We averaged 33 ppg. ASU (#19) averaged 37. -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:29
- Can one contribute to another? -
HumanRobot,
2014-12-03, 08:38
- Yes and no -
Greg,
2014-12-03, 08:51
- why were they running that route in the Navy game? - HumanRobot, 2014-12-03, 08:57
- Sure, but look at ASU's offense and look at ours -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:45
- I think our turnover problem was systemic. -
Bill,
2014-12-03, 08:55
- a Golson problem or not is almost immaterial -
HumanRobot,
2014-12-03, 09:01
- Efficiency matters, not absolute points for one team -
ndphilo,
2014-12-03, 11:42
- counterpoint -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 12:14
- True, but efficiency still matters - ndphilo, 2014-12-03, 12:22
- agreed -
HumanRobot,
2014-12-03, 11:57
- Depends if those conservative calls really would reduce - ndphilo, 2014-12-03, 12:10
- counterpoint -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 12:14
- Efficiency matters, not absolute points for one team -
ndphilo,
2014-12-03, 11:42
- a Golson problem or not is almost immaterial -
HumanRobot,
2014-12-03, 09:01
- I grant that some of those turnovers were fluky - HumanRobot, 2014-12-03, 08:53
- I think our turnover problem was systemic. -
Bill,
2014-12-03, 08:55
- Yes and no -
Greg,
2014-12-03, 08:51
- I think we have an offensive problem. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 08:30
- It's the elephant in the room -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:39
- It should not be. - Kevin, 2014-12-03, 08:46
- It's the elephant in the room -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:39
- Can one contribute to another? -
HumanRobot,
2014-12-03, 08:38
- We averaged 33 ppg. ASU (#19) averaged 37. -
Dylan,
2014-12-03, 08:29
- I think it means something when you consider what we needed. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 08:17
- 17th in S&P offense -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 07:51
- I do think it's fair to say that the offense was better -
Bill,
2014-12-03, 07:50
- It's better but not good enough. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 06:37
- we are actually much improved from last year -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 05:39
- True, though we had nowhere to go but up. - Kevin, 2014-12-03, 05:56
- Gravity game -
Eric M,
2014-12-03, 06:17
- What did you expect this year? - Spesh, 2014-12-02, 19:08
- It changes from year to year... -
BPH,
2014-12-02, 19:03
- It changes from year to year, which is precisely the point -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:06
- Consistency - Dylan, 2014-12-02, 19:51
- Right or wrong, his offense revolves around the QB -
BPH,
2014-12-02, 19:10
- Offenses will always look different - Spesh, 2014-12-02, 19:19
- Then we should give him an incomplete, in Year 5. -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:13
- You can give him whatever you want - BPH, 2014-12-02, 19:17
- It changes from year to year, which is precisely the point -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:06
- I think compentence is a much bigger issue than consistency. -
Kevin,
2014-12-03, 03:26
- Do you know what our offense is going to be like next year? -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 18:59
- Did we really get "exceptional" QB play in 2012? -
Spesh,
2014-12-02, 18:54
- Was that an excellent offense? -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 18:54
- Also a different guy calling the plays - Rob (Rakes of Mallow), 2014-12-03, 04:44
- You wrote -
Spesh,
2014-12-02, 19:14
- I don't think that's a fair criticism of Bill's point -
Ken Fowler,
2014-12-02, 19:28
- The point is -
Spesh,
2014-12-02, 19:43
- That says to me that there is no scheme -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:48
- of course there's a "scheme" - Jay, 2014-12-03, 05:44
- What is FSU's scheme? - BPH, 2014-12-02, 19:51
- How do you define scheme? - Spesh, 2014-12-02, 19:50
- That says to me that there is no scheme -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 19:48
- The point is -
Spesh,
2014-12-02, 19:43
- I don't think that's a fair criticism of Bill's point -
Ken Fowler,
2014-12-02, 19:28
- Was that an excellent offense? -
Bill,
2014-12-02, 18:54
- My thoughts -
CK08,
2014-12-02, 17:23
- makes sense to split S&C from skill development - Jay, 2014-12-02, 17:30
- Just numbers, no comments save for one hedge. -
Savage,
2014-12-02, 17:09
- are there any other aspects to add? -
Jay,
2014-12-02, 17:17
- Agree -- -
Savage,
2014-12-02, 17:52
- added Admin Support / Will to Win - Jay, 2014-12-02, 18:00
- Agree -- -
Savage,
2014-12-02, 17:52
- are there any other aspects to add? -
Jay,
2014-12-02, 17:17
- fun thread to read; thanks for the effort -
Jay,
2014-12-03, 12:02