forums

Avoiding the Portal trap

RightSaidFred said:
That's part of it, but read Lance's breakdown of the Oklahoma State game, it's a really good breakdown of what went wrong. Some of it is down to game planning, but a lot of it - maybe most of it - is just **** execution by our players. That comes down to them not working hard enough to perfect their craft.
Click to expand...
sorry man...but we have what you call recurring themes on our defense - meaning individuals all over the field(DLine, LBs, DBs) are out of place, make bad reads, bad angles...and not even lined up correctly...

We go through this over and over...that tells me either they are being taught these bad habits OR allowed to continue those bad habits... either way that falls on the coaching staff

When you allow 99 points in back to back games... that's coaching...when you allow back QBs...and QBs that are not even that good to look like Heisman candidates... that's coaching
 
Advertisement
dwreck27 said:
Look at the past national champs and you’ll see a bunch of teams even “elite” ones who have hit the portal

Fields
Burrow
Hurts
Murray
Sermon

Don’t discredit ANY tool that helps to build the talent level of your roster. And no one is saying that you need to be bringing in 50% of your total IC being transfers. But failure not to dip your toe in the portal pool and pull maybe a nice OT.. Dline.. CB especially if you have an unexpected NFL departure, injury (malek young, AR15), or you flat out missed in recruiting
Click to expand...
good point!
 
I know the portal is here to stay but I do not like it. I prefer to see players recruited and signed coming out of high school
 
CanesFootball said:
sorry man...but we have what you call recurring themes on our defense - meaning individuals all over the field(DLine, LBs, DBs) are out of place, make bad reads, bad angles...and not even lined up correctly...

We go through this over and over...that tells me either they are being taught these bad habits OR allowed to continue those bad habits... either way that falls on the coaching staff

When you allow 99 points in back to back games... that's coaching...when you allow back QBs...and QBs that are not even that good to look like Heisman candidates... that's coaching
Click to expand...

What about 99 points over three games? Or 123 over four?

We aren’t as bad as the UNC game or as good as the Duke game.
 
Advertisement
Go Canes!! said:
What about 99 points over three games? Or 123 over four?
Click to expand...
33 ppg is still terrible, and the one you tried to count in as a 0 was one of the worst teams in all of football this year. 99 vs UNC and Ok State, two teams we still have more talent than, should be concerning enough for you without having to make excuses for the staff.
 
wspcane said:
33 ppg is still terrible, and the one you tried to count in as a 0 was one of the worst teams in all of football this year. 99 vs UNC and Ok State, two teams we still have more talent than, should be concerning enough for you without having to make excuses for the staff.
Click to expand...

I’m not defending anyone. I’m pointing out the fact the numbers could be made to look however you like. We only gave up 34 points in the 10 quarters leading up to UNC against a range of opponents. It doesn’t make us a good defense.

Just like that stat doesn’t define us, the UNC game doesn’t either. It was an aberration in my opinion and we are somewhere in the middle.
 
Last edited:
Pentagon Cane said:
Our success with grad transfers has been very good. They have all at least contributed (except for Kennedy), most have started and have been good players for us as a stop gap.
Like I posted earlier taking an FCS lineman from a bad program from a bad conference is a mystery to me. He was no better than a preferred walk-on talent-wise.
Click to expand...

Was that Stacy Searles?
 
Advertisement
fraggle said:
I like King and hope he heals well enough to compete but, N'Kosi with the Lashlee offense might have done as well or better. These one and done guys are a temporary fix to serious recruiting and coaching problems. Our great teams developed depth, current team is looking outside too much and making potential problem players starters and not developing our committed Canes that have been with us since day one. Current staff seems to lean too much on these portal players whereas we recruit well and develop none.
Click to expand...
Fragg..idk what u be watching on Saturday. At the time king got hurt he was like 10-12 for a buck n change..kosi came in and as the back up played very admirable. Our Wr did not help. But he also missed some bunnies that’ showed the clear difference between he and king. Ball placement and consistency. Off the top he missed a easy screen, threw one in the dirt and behind on a 3rd dwn, threw one low n behind will that if he leads him 85 might hit his head on the goalposts..same for one to 9..if we comparing him to king it’s not close as far as consistent ball placement. As I said Perry came in and played well and looked prepared to run the show. but there’s certainly a big gap between the 2
 
DTP said:
I think there was definitely some desperation for a tackle. He had the length and athleticism but he was too weak to hold up against Division 1 talent. Texas and Oklahoma both offered him as well as FSU, Missouri and Rutgers. Maybe in a more finesse system he could have been useful but in Penos’ pro style offense, he was worthless.
Click to expand...
i never trust those ‘offers’ - what does that even mean for a transfer? it’s an ‘indication of interest’ to use a business concept. that usually means ‘based on what you’ve told me....’. but then you actually have to do your homework. validate or refute. it shouldn’t be that hard to directionally confirm someone’s strength. Send a GA to watch him work out in person, e.g. Talk to his coaches. If the issue was he was too weak, that’s on us that we didn’t know. Did he really have the athleticism, btw? Or is that just some throw-away phrase? How do we know?

IMO when we’ve been bad at OL evals as a general matter, I view the Kennedy issue as an eval one, not some general principle about which schools to take transfers from. Most of Osborne’s teammates if not all, we didn’t want. The school wasn’t the proof. It was Osborne’s abilities and character that set him apart.
 
DTP said:
I think there was definitely some desperation for a tackle. He had the length and athleticism but he was too weak to hold up against Division 1 talent. Texas and Oklahoma both offered him as well as FSU, Missouri and Rutgers. Maybe in a more finesse system he could have been useful but in Penos’ pro style offense, he was worthless.
Click to expand...
He would have worthless in Lashlee's inside zone concept.
 
Advertisement
Ethnicsands said:
Did he really have the athleticism, btw? Or is that just some throw-away phrase? How do we know?
Click to expand...
I have no idea. I didn't personally scout the kid. That's just the reasoning behind him getting interest from major programs. It's not like programs chase random FCS linemen all the time.
 
Go Canes!! said:
I’m not defending anyone. I’m pointing out the fact the numbers could be made to look however you like. We only gave up 34 points in the 10 quarters leading up to UNC against a range of opponents. It doesn’t make us a good defense.

Just like that stat doesn’t define us, the UNC game doesn’t either. It was an aberration in my opinion and we are somewhere in the middle.
Click to expand...
It would be an aberration if Clemson, Louisville, NC St, and Oklahoma State did not happen as well. But they did, and they represent nearly 1/2 of our schedule and 100% of the teams we played with a pulse.
 
Advertisement
wspcane said:
It would be an aberration if Clemson, Louisville, NC St, and Oklahoma State did not happen as well. But they did, and they represent nearly 1/2 of our schedule and 100% of the teams we played with a pulse.
Click to expand...

Louisville had six points at half time.
 
Go Canes!! said:
Louisville had six points at half time.
Click to expand...
It's good to know that a football game is now 30 minutes long. But seriously, please stop with the excuses and mental gymnastics. It was not a good night for the defense, and it is ok to say that. They scored 34 points, had 500 yards of offense, and were only down a touchdown in the middle of the third.
 
jmccomber5 said:
This is the only thing Manny has been good at from a roster building standpoint. Besides Tate, everyone has worked out on character. Even Hill.
Click to expand...
His first full year to recruiting class this year looks pretty impressive.
 
Go Canes!! said:
What about 99 points over three games? Or 123 over four?

We aren’t as bad as the UNC game or as good as the Duke game.
Click to expand...
When we played ranked teams with decent coaching we got this

UNC - 62
NC State - 41
Okl State - 37
Clemson - 42

We looked good against lower tier teams...even Louisville scored 34 points on us

And do you know how many teams scored on us on their first drive?🥺

Now if you're good with the status quo....so be it...but if you want to win the Coastal every year...we need a new DC calling plays and creating game planes
 
Advertisement
Back
Top