All trash talk aside, I have some Q's here.

[pj]

I kind of disagree there pj, I think that by going conservative, they were challenging the blockers and ball carriers on this offense to develop, and they need a ton of development in that area.

Yes, I understand that view, I just think there's more potential to develop the passing game than the running game, and so we should focus our energies there. If the passing game becomes more successful then play action, draws, and screens will give McCombs opportunities to make plays with more open space. I think a focus on passing game development will end up making the running backs as productive as they would be if we focus on running game development.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Not to mention - he almost coughed it up trying to make something out of nothing. Needs to know in that situation take a dive. If he had fumbled there it is a touchdown as there was no-one else there.

Imagine the state of the boneyard this week if that had happened. LOL.

The only thing that makes me nervous about our coaching staff, is when they've got time think late in a game. I think that during every TV timeout, adn every opponent timeout late, there need three "get back" coaches, who's only purpose in life, is to scream "get back" at P and D on the sidelines, and keep them away from the huddle, and for the third guy to rip Deleone's headset off in the booth, and scream at him to "get back" to his seat, and only give it back when the TO is over.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Yes, I understand that view, I just think there's more potential to develop the passing game than the running game, and so we should focus our energies there. If the passing game becomes more successful then play action, draws, and screens will give McCombs opportunities to make plays with more open space. I think a focus on passing game development will end up making the running backs as productive as they would be if we focus on running game development.

I agree, but what was wrong with passing game that it needed to be developed more on Saturday?

 

[Chin Diesel]

I'll give you my thoughts duncan, if you don't mind.

1st down McCombs for three yards. 2nd down. McCombs for 3 yards. 3rd and 4 - timeout Buffalo. If there's one thing that this coaching staff has problems with - it's too much time to think. Line it up again, and run it again. I say. Or play action and go for the throat.

3rd and 4. We come out in a wishbone formation? Have we done that at all, all year? Too much time for the offensive coach to think. SHowing something on the field to rutgers. Whitmer keeps the ball and TFL 6 yards, and I wonder if it was actually an option play at all. Want a play calling argument? there it is. Not this garbage everybody is spewing in the media and on this board about repeatedly running on first down.

I've got my problems with Deleone, I'm not a huge fan, but it's not what everybody else is talking about around here. So what happens?

Punt from the buffalo 46, touchback. Buffalo's got a minute and half and touchdown to score.

As for Buffalo's last possession - the defense played great. Sio's hit, I bet you could hear in the last rows.

Absolutely agree with the overanalyzing part (I intentially used overanalyze vice overthink) of the coaching staff. At least twice this year, the coaches have called a TO immediately after the opponent called a TO only to call in a play that needs 3 seconds to come up with. It's paralysis by analysis. Saw the same thing yesterday with Furyk in the Ryder Cup. He choked putting and chipping the last two holed because he spent about two minutes trying to figure out every quarter inch of the shot and his mechanics.
DeLeone and PP have enough experience where they should make the call early and show some confidence. A huddle full of young men aren't going to build a trusting relationship when the O Coordinator needs four minutes to call a play the players haven't run since they were playing Pop Warner.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Yes, I understand that view, I just think there's more potential to develop the passing game than the running game, and so we should focus our energies there. If the passing game becomes more successful then play action, draws, and screens will give McCombs opportunities to make plays with more open space. I think a focus on passing game development will end up making the running backs as productive as they would be if we focus on running game development.

run first to pass or pass first to run.... round and round we could go for ever. I'm not disagreeing with you, but my personal opinion, as a fan, as a long time observer of this program, is that our offensive line and blocking in the run game, is not as dominant as it has been in the past. Assuming that is actually the case - the only way that going to change, is if we line up call the running plays, and bloody some noses. If we're facing 8 or 9 defenders, or 7 close to scrimmage on a run play, the ability of the entire 9 or 10 man unit to block forcefully, violently, effectively, isn't going to change with a great passing game, again - unless we change it ourselves.

I loved watching Beatty go up against Cole last night. HOlding call on pass protection? well - if you're going to hold, might as well put the guy in a choke hold and body slam him by his head. If you'[re out on the move, run blocking, drive your DE or LB out of the play and if you're still upright and not on top of them on the ground, and whistle hasn't been blown yet, but the ball carrier is past you, and there happens to be a defender nearby, especially one of those smaller DB types - go ahead and shot put them. Beatty did it last night. The eagles won, but whatever - Donald Thomas? Plowing defenders in Buffalo yesterday - pass and run.

Beatty reminds me of a small Ogden. Beatty looks harmless and friendly, and is an accomplished home ec - cooks food for people off the field, does laundry. ON the field, he'd just as soon rip your arms off and beat you with them, and then smile at you after.

I just don't see that from these guys, and it's not dirty play I'm looking for, just consistent, hard nosed, this is my area of the field, don't come in it - attitude.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Absolutely agree with the overanalyzing part (I intentially used overanalyze vice overthink) of the coaching staff. At least twice this year, the coaches have called a TO immediately after the opponent called a TO only to call in a play that needs 3 seconds to come up with. It's paralysis by analysis. Saw the same thing yesterday with Furyk in the Ryder Cup. He choked putting and chipping the last two holed because he spent about two minutes trying to figure out every quarter inch of the shot and his mechanics.
DeLeone and PP have enough experience where they should make the call early and show some confidence. A huddle full of young men aren't going to build a trusting relationship when the O Coordinator needs four minutes to call a play the players haven't run since they were playing Pop Warner.

I agree, if there's one area the coach's need to improve, it's not in changing up play calls, because there's a break in the game. Let the players figure it out on the field, and call the TO if they need a change.

 

[Carl Spackler]

BTW - Pierre-Paul wasn't that effective last night, after he started bleeding from the mouth. and You don't have to hit dirty to do it.

 

[Husky25]

run first to pass or pass first to run.... round and round we could go for ever. I'm not disagreeing with you, but my personal opinion, as a fan, as a long time observer of this program, is that our offensive line and blocking in the run game, is not as dominant as it has been in the past. Assuming that is actually the case - the only way that going to change, is if we line up call the running plays, and bloody some noses. If we're facing 8 or 9 defenders, or 7 close to scrimmage on a run play, the ability of the entire 9 or 10 man unit to block forcefully, violently, effectively, isn't going to change with a great passing game, again - unless we change it ourselves.

I think that is over simplifying it. It's pretty tough for a 6-7 man front, including a tight end and possibly a fullback, to consistently block an 8 man defensive front and get consistent yards out of it. There is always one guy left unaccounted for. You say that our O-line and its blocking is not as dominant as it has been in the past. The first question is: Why is that? Someone hypothesized in the O-line thread that it has to do with a conversion in scheme to zone blocking. If that is the case, it calls for a specific type of back. McCombs dances too much in the hole. Hyppolyte seemed to be the type of big one-cut back more suited for a zone read offensive line.

 

[Srqhusky]

I have watched the game twice. At the feild and at home on SNY's power hour. I dont think this win was as bad as everyone is saying. We jumped to big lead and got complacent. Then Whtitmer almost through an INT and tossed an ill advised shuffle pass. Once that happend, the breaks were put on and they went into "dont lose" mode.
A lot of things ooked like night and day from the beginning of the season. I see vast improvement in Offense.

Areas of concern that i do see is we arent getting the QB like we were, and Gratz was picked on. He looked like a weak link to me accept on one beautiful play he made. If Gratz were up against a better QB he would have gotten burned for 6 three or four times.

What are your thoughts on why people are going nutzo on this W?
What do you think about the D getting to QB's?
Is Gratz a liability?

Cody coach p went for the jugular against vanderbuilt last year and it backfired. Mcentee threw an int and The boneyard was on fire with People were calling for the coaches head, and criticizing his coaching and callin him not aggressive enough . This year he choses to protect the lead and play it safe and the boneyard is on fire and the critics are out.

 

[junglehusky]

Cody coach p went for the jugular against vanderbuilt last year and it backfired. Mcentee threw an int and The boneyard was on fire with People were calling for the coaches head, and criticizing his coaching and callin him not aggressive enough . This year he choses to protect the lead and play it safe and the boneyard is on fire and the critics are out.

Rabble rabble rabble!!!

 

[Srqhusky]

Rabble rabble rabble!!!

Don't choke on the rocks

 

[Husky25]

Cody coach p went for the jugular against vanderbuilt last year and it backfired. Mcentee threw an int and The boneyard was on fire with People were calling for the coaches head, and criticizing his coaching and callin him not aggressive enough . This year he choses to protect the lead and play it safe and the boneyard is on fire and the critics are out.

What does one have to do with the other? Vandy was last year's loss with a different QB, with different skill sets. You get burned once, and you stop plying your game? Faulty logic, especially when you don't have the personnel to protect the lead either.

 

[CodyJ.]

Cody coach p went for the jugular against vanderbuilt last year and it backfired. Mcentee threw an int and The boneyard was on fire with People were calling for the coaches head, and criticizing his coaching and callin him not aggressive enough . This year he choses to protect the lead and play it safe and the boneyard is on fire and the critics are out.

Roger that. Sounds about right.

 

[CTMike]

Next time UConn is in a similar situation 24-7 lead against an opponent (even one better than Buffalo), let's keep our foot on their throat and run up the score. Run or pass, the name of the game is get in the endzone, not sit on a lead.

Ill state upfront that I want more variety and attack on offense, but I have to ask-

If UConn goes pedal to the metal in the name of "excitement" at 24-7, and CW throws a pick or two, or there's a fumble- what would your feelings be if UConn lost 42-41? Happy that they were aggressive or mad that they lost?

 

[Husky25]

Ill state upfront that I want more variety and attack on offense, but I have to ask-

If UConn goes pedal to the metal in the name of "excitement" at 24-7, and CW throws a pick or two, or there's a fumble- what would your feelings be if UConn lost 42-41? Happy that they were aggressive or mad that they lost?

False Logic. First of all, You don't go pedal to the metal in the name of "excitement." You do it in the name of crushing the will of an inferior opponent. Excitement is obviously a desired side effect, but all of the momentum was on our side and we gave it up way, way too early. Playing not to lose = preparing not to win.

 

[pj]

Ill state upfront that I want more variety and attack on offense, but I have to ask-

If UConn goes pedal to the metal in the name of "excitement" at 24-7, and CW throws a pick or two, or there's a fumble- what would your feelings be if UConn lost 42-41? Happy that they were aggressive or mad that they lost?

If I thought we were running plays we need to run to be a successful team and the players didn't execute, then I'd consider it a teachable moment and look forward to improved play the next week.

What I like about college sports is that you can see the progress in the team from week to week. It's sort of like having a behind the scenes look at sports and coaching. In the pros you don't have the same feel of being a part of a team as it grows.

One last point - I don't think we should design our offense for excitement. We should design it for wins. But we shouldn't over-optimize for today's win at the expense of developing a well rounded team with an attack that can beat good teams.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Cody coach p went for the jugular against vanderbuilt last year and it backfired. Mcentee threw an int and The boneyard was on fire with People were calling for the coaches head, and criticizing his coaching and callin him not aggressive enough . This year he choses to protect the lead and play it safe and the boneyard is on fire and the critics are out.

Why do you even think that the 2 circumstances are even remotely identical?

 

[CTMike]

False Logic. First of all, You don't go pedal to the metal in the name of "excitement." You do it in the name of crushing the will of an inferior opponent. Excitement is obviously a desired side effect, but all of the momentum was on our side and we gave it up way, way too early. Playing not to lose = preparing not to win.

Fine. For our resident logic expert, replace "excitement" with "crushing the will of an inferior opponent." What would your opinion be then?

 

[Husky25]

Fine. For our resident logic expert, replace "excitement" with "crushing the will of an inferior opponent." What would your opinion be then?

Beyond the fact that you missed my point, it's kinda obvious what I would have done? Stay aggressive in the play calling in an attempt to, not only bleed the clock but, keep the ball moving. Aggressive does not mean reckless...For example, I would have gone for it on 4th down from their 35, instead of giving them the ball on the 20. If we convert, the game is more or less over (at least 2:00 more minutes comes off the clock, their tired D is still on the field, and we are in better position for at least 3 points.). If we don't convert, it only cost us 15 yards. Put the pressure on them to change up their offensive philosophy. Instead, UConn let them off the hook from making that decision, played conservative, and let them back into the game.

 

[CTMike]

We actually largely agree. I was just curious what folks would think if aggressiveness backfired.

 

[Carl Spackler]

We

Thoughts on Gratz anyone??

Don't fall down.

 

[Husky25]

We actually largely agree. I was just curious what folks would think if aggressiveness backfired.

I thought so. Take it easy Mike, I gotta go...

 

[huskymedic]

I wanted a pick all that apply choice on the "vote"

 

[Uconnalliance]

Maybe instead of a pro-style offense how about a college style offense maybe the dogs don't get it?