Duke Football -- Offseason Discussion

[johnb]

let's see what Cut can do. Certainly his "competing for championships" motto was ringing hollow last year.

A few thoughts:
1. Cut's a class act:
A typical head coach would see 2 problems, a disappointing season and suboptimal play calling, identify who called the plays, and then scapegoat and fire that person, if only to protect the HC from criticism. Cut's response: recognize the problem, identify who is the best person available in the world to call Duke plays (himself) and give himself the job--along with the potential for criticism. Cut also kept the play-calling coach, which might be a sign of excess loyalty, but it seems equally likely that the coach brings a lot to the team table.

2. Even in 6th place, we were competitive in the Coastal
a) Alabama and Notre Dame are on a different level, and while we belonged on the field, they are not teams that we need to beat in order to compete for the Coastal championship.
b) Virginia 14-48. In that game, 3 Duke fumbles led directly to 20 points. One of Virginia's touchdowns came as their player fumbled--review showed he'd crossed the plane of the end zone, but it was very close. Another UVa td came on a 95 yard kickoff return. Throw in a couple of Harris interceptions, and you can see how the game against the division champs would wind up a blow out even if the game could have tilted into a close one.
c) Syracuse 6-49. Yikes. Syracuse was a 10 point underdog and hadn't beaten a Power 5 team. Three Duke turnovers led directly to 3 td's, Syracuse had led the entire FBS in sacks given, and we only got one. Their new offense worked. As with Virginia, the final score--imho--doesn't reflect a talent/prep gap.
d) While unfortunate, the last-minute loss to Pitt and a near-end-of-season loss to Wake seem in the "competitive" category.
e) The last second loss to Carolina in October may have been a knife in the heart of the season, especially since it was Surratt who made the interception. The game was obviously competitive, but it might have contributed to some of the desultory games to come.
f) If we'd been lucky, we'd have won some turnover battles and close games, and then felt the wind at our back and had more of a late-season oomph. That's not reality, but it seems reasonable to assert that our basic talent level, play calling, and preparation could have been exactly the same, and, with some good fortune, have led to more wins (2, 3, more?). A couple more wins would have put us as "competitive."
g. Coaches don't make excuses or talk like this. I'm not a coach.

3. Duke hs player rankings don't compare well to some ACC teams
a) Number of 4 or 5 star players likely to be playing last season, according to 247 (grad hs between 2015 and 2019)
Florida State 66
Clemson 59
Miami 46
Virginia Tech 24
Carolina 21
Duke 6 (virtually the whole team has been rated as 3 star ever since Cut got his recruiting traction years ago; oh, except for Daniel Jones, who was a 2 star)

b) Duke hs player rankings compare well to Super Bowl teams.
Kansas City Starting Offense: one 5 star--Sammy Watkins; no 4 stars; four 3 stars [Mahomes: #29 best pro style qb], four 2 stars [Travis Kelce: #85 TE], and two unranked [including Tyreek Hill]
KC Defense: two 5 stars; two 4 stars; five 3 stars; and 2 unranked
San Francisco Offense: no 5 stars; one 4 star; three 3 stars [overall, the offense's 2nd highest rated starter was Laken Tomlinson at #625]; four 2 stars [Garoppolo #67 pro style qb]; and three unranked
SF Defense: two 5 stars [officially SF lists Bosa as 2nd string, but he can start here--Bosa was the top DE and #8 player overall in hs; the official starter was a 3 star]; four 4 stars; four 3 stars; one 2 star; and two unranked.

*My understanding is that some elite players may not be ranked if they aren't academically qualified to enroll in a division I college, but it seems that most of these just weren't ranked.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...hool-recruits/

[budwom]

^ what conclusions do you draw from all that?

I say competing for the Coastal championship rings hollow because over the past four seasons, our conference record is 10-22, and we haven't been above .500 since 2014. I've always thought Cut was a fine man,
he represents the University in a terrific manner, and what he accomplished back around 2013 was truly remarkable...

So I'm choosing to think that our sudden influx of talent and shuffling of responsibilities may (may) get us back on track to be viable competitors in our division.

[Bob Green]

...Cut saw what we all saw for several years. If he couldn't fix it as the head coach., I mean if he couldn't get his OC to call the plays that needed to be called over that period of time...I'm just not sure there is going to be a major change.

Coach Cutcliffe specifically stated running the offense as a consultant wasn’t working he needed to be fully in. I believe major improvement can take place with Coach Cutcliffe as OC. Time will tell.

I was hoping a new OC with fresh ideas would be brought in but Cut as OC is much better than the status quo.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

coach cutcliffe specifically stated running the offense as a consultant wasn’t working he needed to be fully in. i believe major improvement can take place with coach cutcliffe as oc. Time will tell.

I was hoping a new oc with fresh ideas would be brought in but cut as oc is much better than the status quo.

x zackly ^^^

[OldPhiKap]

Coach Cutcliffe specifically stated running the offense as a consultant wasn’t working he needed to be fully in. I believe major improvement can take place with Coach Cutcliffe as OC. Time will tell.

I was hoping a new OC with fresh ideas would be brought in but Cut as OC is much better than the status quo.

As CB&B said, The Buck Stops Here.

Put another way, if anyone doesn’t like the offense this year, it is unlikely to change. The boss is calling out how he wants us to play.

Fingers crossed!

[Acymetric]

Another outgoing transfer update, AJ Reed to Arkansas. Wish him the best of luck, and hope our young kicker is ready to step up!

https://twitter.com/AJReed48/status/...459373571?s=20

Arkansas fans generally appear excited to have him, don't know what their kicking situation was like last year.

[revmel53]

A few thoughts:
1. Cut's a class act:
A typical head coach would see 2 problems, a disappointing season and suboptimal play calling, identify who called the plays, and then scapegoat and fire that person, if only to protect the HC from criticism. Cut's response: recognize the problem, identify who is the best person available in the world to call Duke plays (himself) and give himself the job--along with the potential for criticism. Cut also kept the play-calling coach, which might be a sign of excess loyalty, but it seems equally likely that the coach brings a lot to the team table.

2. Even in 6th place, we were competitive in the Coastal
a) Alabama and Notre Dame are on a different level, and while we belonged on the field, they are not teams that we need to beat in order to compete for the Coastal championship.
b) Virginia 14-48. In that game, 3 Duke fumbles led directly to 20 points. One of Virginia's touchdowns came as their player fumbled--review showed he'd crossed the plane of the end zone, but it was very close. Another UVa td came on a 95 yard kickoff return. Throw in a couple of Harris interceptions, and you can see how the game against the division champs would wind up a blow out even if the game could have tilted into a close one.
c) Syracuse 6-49. Yikes. Syracuse was a 10 point underdog and hadn't beaten a Power 5 team. Three Duke turnovers led directly to 3 td's, Syracuse had led the entire FBS in sacks given, and we only got one. Their new offense worked. As with Virginia, the final score--imho--doesn't reflect a talent/prep gap.
d) While unfortunate, the last-minute loss to Pitt and a near-end-of-season loss to Wake seem in the "competitive" category.
e) The last second loss to Carolina in October may have been a knife in the heart of the season, especially since it was Surratt who made the interception. The game was obviously competitive, but it might have contributed to some of the desultory games to come.
f) If we'd been lucky, we'd have won some turnover battles and close games, and then felt the wind at our back and had more of a late-season oomph. That's not reality, but it seems reasonable to assert that our basic talent level, play calling, and preparation could have been exactly the same, and, with some good fortune, have led to more wins (2, 3, more?). A couple more wins would have put us as "competitive."
g. Coaches don't make excuses or talk like this. I'm not a coach.

3. Duke hs player rankings don't compare well to some ACC teams
a) Number of 4 or 5 star players likely to be playing last season, according to 247 (grad hs between 2015 and 2019)
Florida State 66
Clemson 59
Miami 46
Virginia Tech 24
Carolina 21
Duke 6 (virtually the whole team has been rated as 3 star ever since Cut got his recruiting traction years ago; oh, except for Daniel Jones, who was a 2 star)

b) Duke hs player rankings compare well to Super Bowl teams.
Kansas City Starting Offense: one 5 star--Sammy Watkins; no 4 stars; four 3 stars [Mahomes: #29 best pro style qb], four 2 stars [Travis Kelce: #85 TE], and two unranked [including Tyreek Hill]
KC Defense: two 5 stars; two 4 stars; five 3 stars; and 2 unranked
San Francisco Offense: no 5 stars; one 4 star; three 3 stars [overall, the offense's 2nd highest rated starter was Laken Tomlinson at #625]; four 2 stars [Garoppolo #67 pro style qb]; and three unranked
SF Defense: two 5 stars [officially SF lists Bosa as 2nd string, but he can start here--Bosa was the top DE and #8 player overall in hs; the official starter was a 3 star]; four 4 stars; four 3 stars; one 2 star; and two unranked.

*My understanding is that some elite players may not be ranked if they aren't academically qualified to enroll in a division I college, but it seems that most of these just weren't ranked.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-fo...hool-recruits/

Great work. Thanks for the analysis.

[Sixthman]

Coach Cutcliffe specifically stated running the offense as a consultant wasn’t working he needed to be fully in. I believe major improvement can take place with Coach Cutcliffe as OC. Time will tell.

I was hoping a new OC with fresh ideas would be brought in but Cut as OC is much better than the status quo.

I have competing reactions to Cut as OC. On the one hand, it is apparent that he is an exceptional person, who is likely to bring success to whatever endeavor he undertakes. Great leader, great manager, great mind,. These things bode well for offense at Duke with Cutcliffe running the offense. On the other hand, we have some evidence as to what he brings to the table as an offensive innovator. He’s been the head man at Duke for more years than I can count without looking it up (11?) and these have not been years of offensive innovation or even ones that suggested we might be a step ahead of the other team’s defenses in game planning. A QB guru, yes. Offense, not so much.

[75Crazie]

I have an opposite reaction, I see Cutcliffe more as an offensive coordinator than as a "QB guru", whatever the heck that is. He was fortunate to be OC for one transcendent quarterback (Peyton), coach for two potentially giant talents (Eli, Daniel Jones), and coach for several decent QBs who played very well for him but who were not NFL starter caliber (Lewis, Renfree, Boone). I would argue that Peyton and Eli would have blossomed without his influence and Lewis, for one, was very good before Cut became his coach. I tend to think he is considered a "QB guru" because, and only because, he coached both Mannings. I have no visibility behind-the-scenes, and maybe those in the know have good reason for considering him a guru, but I think he deserves much more praise for re-building a dormant Duke football program than for any other reason. And that is not faint praise, he did a job very, very few coaches could have done while staying within the principles of the program.

[billwh]

Do you think Cutcliffe tried to find an OC, but failed to find one that was suitable? I wondering because his announcement is relatively late and spring practice is not that far away. I thought he would look for an OC at the recent coaches meeting. In any case, I would not doubt that an OC that he liked was not available.

Side note: we have had 6 seats on the visitors side (50 yard line) since 1980. But, the visitors side gets direct sun and is open to rain. The weather last year was tough. We are moving across the field to Section 27 (still on the 50), but under the awning. Our ticket prices per seat are now almost 3X what they have been. Next year, I sure hope the team performs up to the cost, no matter who the OC is.

[budwom]

Do you think Cutcliffe tried to find an OC, but failed to find one that was suitable? I wondering because his announcement is relatively late and spring practice is not that far away. I thought he would look for an OC at the recent coaches meeting. In any case, I would not doubt that an OC that he liked was not available.

Side note: we have had 6 seats on the visitors side (50 yard line) since 1980. But, the visitors side gets direct sun and is open to rain. The weather last year was tough. We are moving across the field to Section 27 (still on the 50), but under the awning. Our ticket prices per seat are now almost 3X what they have been. Next year, I sure hope the team performs up to the cost, no matter who the OC is.

I pretty much suspect that Cut had this plan in mind all along...as others have noted, he believes in his particular offense, so I'm quite sure he wasn't looking for anyone with a different approach...he just wants his approach to be much better implemented, IMO. And he thinks he knows how to do that.

As far as your WW migration is concerned, I can tell you that we had season tickets in Section 6 ( 45 yard line) on the East for over 30 years, but eventually the early season heat just became too oppressive, so several years ago we migrated to Section 26, 50 yard ine on the West side and we're quite happy with the move...plus we tend to be always surrounded with Duke fans, whereas on the East side, we were often subjected to influxes of various visiting honyocks, some of whom were quite unpleasant to be around. So good move!

[WakeDevil]

I find it difficult to believe Thaddeus Lewis was not as good as some of the "talent" I saw Sunday afternoons.

[JetpackJesus]

I have an opposite reaction, I see Cutcliffe more as an offensive coordinator than as a "QB guru", whatever the heck that is. He was fortunate to be OC for one transcendent quarterback (Peyton), coach for two potentially giant talents (Eli, Daniel Jones), and coach for several decent QBs who played very well for him but who were not NFL starter caliber (Lewis, Renfree, Boone). I would argue that Peyton and Eli would have blossomed without his influence and Lewis, for one, was very good before Cut became his coach. I tend to think he is considered a "QB guru" because, and only because, he coached both Mannings. I have no visibility behind-the-scenes, and maybe those in the know have good reason for considering him a guru, but I think he deserves much more praise for re-building a dormant Duke football program than for any other reason. And that is not faint praise, he did a job very, very few coaches could have done while staying within the principles of the program.

I also have no behind-the-scenes insight, but I do think a compelling piece of evidence for the QB Guru label is that Peyton and Eli came to Cut to work with him on their games during the offseason. After Peyton had his neck surgeries, he was working out with Cut to recover. I'm not sure they're doing that if he isn't a QB Guru.

You are right that he deserves more praise for re-building Duke's program than for any other reason.

[Acymetric]

I find it difficult to believe Thaddeus Lewis was not as good as some of the "talent" I saw Sunday afternoons.

He did hang around the league for a pretty long time, getting some wins and starts notched on his belt along the way.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

I find it difficult to believe Thaddeus Lewis was not as good as some of the "talent" I saw Sunday afternoons.

Thad played a good number of games as a starter. He was one of those guys deemed too short to play QB, so those guys are on shorter leashes than, say, a 6-5 guy with the exact same stats would be. He did outplay Russell Wilson in one of their head to head games.

[Bob Green]

On the other hand, we have some evidence as to what he brings to the table as an offensive innovator. He’s been the head man at Duke for more years than I can count without looking it up (11?) and these have not been years of offensive innovation or even ones that suggested we might be a step ahead of the other team’s defenses in game planning. A QB guru, yes. Offense, not so much.

It is not all Xs and Os, it takes Jimmys and Joes. The offense certainly looked dynamic throwing the ball downfield to Conner Vernon and Jamison Crowder.

The offense hasn’t averaged 30 points per game since 2015. Let’s wait and see what happens in 2020 with Coach Cutcliffe as OC plus a new OL Coach.

[loran16]

It is not all Xs and Os, it takes Jimmys and Joes. The offense certainly looked dynamic throwing the ball downfield to Conner Vernon and Jamison Crowder.

The offense hasn’t averaged 30 points per game since 2015. Let’s wait and see what happens in 2020 with Coach Cutcliffe as OC plus a new OL Coach.

Throwing to Vernon, Crowder, and Varner while having multiple NFL caliber Offensive Lineman will definitely make an offense look dynamic. That was a rare confluence of talent basically everywhere on offense that we shouldn't expect to happen often. But there are some solid pieces coming back, and with an improvement at QB, we should see improvement, even if playcalling doesn't change.

God knows we complained about Kurt Roper even back in the triumphant ACC Coastal winning season.

[Bob Green]

Throwing to Vernon, Crowder, and Varner while having multiple NFL caliber Offensive Lineman will definitely make an offense look dynamic. That was a rare confluence of talent basically everywhere on offense that we shouldn't expect to happen often. But there are some solid pieces coming back, and with an improvement at QB, we should see improvement, even if playcalling doesn't change.

You and I are in agreement for the most part but the bolded sentence above should not be accepted as the status quo. Duke can attract talented football players although I’ll concede it is tougher than at other places.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

Throwing to Vernon, Crowder, and Varner while having multiple NFL caliber Offensive Lineman will definitely make an offense look dynamic. That was a rare confluence of talent basically everywhere on offense that we shouldn't expect to happen often. But there are some solid pieces coming back, and with an improvement at QB, we should see improvement, even if playcalling doesn't change.

God knows we complained about Kurt Roper even back in the triumphant ACC Coastal winning season.

FYI Thad Lewis did not have Crowder to throw to, and from what I can tell, Vernon nor Varner had much of a pro career. Neither ever caught an NFL pass IIRC. So Thaddeus did not have NFL talent to throw to. As for OL, he may have had better talent...but he started under Roof. It did seem like there was a more dynamic offensive play calling scheme back then, once Cut got there. I remember a game where Thad and Cut spanked NC State and Wilson in Raleigh. That offensive dynamism peaked in 2013 with Boone and Kurt Roper at the Peach Bowl, and Crowder was a big part of that.

Boone and the offense regressed some the next year, and has never been the same - even with Jones.

[Bob Green]

That offensive dynamism peaked in 2013 with Boone and Kurt Roper at the Peach Bowl, and Crowder was a big part of that.

Boone and the offense regressed some the next year, and has never been the same - even with Jones.

Depends on criteria...

Points per game: 36.3 (2015), 32.8 (2013), 32.0 (2014)
Wins: 10 (2013), 9 (2014), 8 (2015)

I agree with your larger point — offensive dynamism has trended down recently.