Im still confused why UConn FB didnt pass the ball Friday night?

[rich1122]

Boyle was NOT NOT NOT available. If Whitmer is hurt who plays? The announcers had it right. It was set up to protect Whitmer because we could not block them.

 

[Bonehead]

You asked for a one line answer. You expected depth and subtlety?

The answer is I doubt it. I think the length of time it took before we threw our second pass was a combination of not just our inability to block but also the weather, the fact that Boyle wasn't really available, and USF's inability to put the game away without us moving the ball.

No I wanted a simple answer, and then maybe a follow up!!
Multiple reasons - now I got it.
Do you know if Boyle is available this week and if not who is the backup?

EDIT - see how I got different multiple answers Carl?
Its the OL.
Its the weather.
Its no backup.
Its the RB who cant pick up the blitz.

 

[freescooter]

If you are that worried about protecting a player in a football game, then leave him on the bench. Seriously. There is a huge difference between not doing something borderline criminal ala George DeLeon's using him as a receiver and just letting him play. If the thought is that UConn can't make the necessary adjustments to the attack and to the line to provide at least some level of protection, then one has to ask why we got rid of the Sunshine Boys. We get conditions were bad. We get field position was bad. We get that the oline struggled early. But it isn't like they were opening holes on the ground. I mean we got 2 rushing first downs, one on the first play from scrimmage. Seven 3 and outs.

 

[junglehusky]

Maybe if you start another thread you'll get the magic answer you're looking for.

 

[rich1122]

Curious if Boyle will play THIS week.

 

[Bonehead]

Maybe if you start another thread you'll get the magic answer you're looking for.

No magic answer just a straight answer. Can't get one.

 

[junglehusky]

No magic answer just a straight answer. Can't get one.

maybe you're asking the wrong question.

 

[Bonehead]

maybe you're asking the wrong question.

Must be

 

[Husky25]

Like others have said - if he was that concerned and still wanted to win - why not go wildcat? You get an extra blocker.

Because it's a gimmick and doesn't work. It was not practiced and is not a focus of this offense.

 

[HistoryMajor]

Bonehead's next question - and maybe Whaler and just maybe Pal - "Why don't we bring back Coach PP ?"

 

[whaler11]

Bonehead's next question - and maybe Whaler and just maybe Pal - "Why don't we bring back Coach PP ?"

Another one who is strong with the reading comprehension.

Can we get a list of the topics that can be addressed about the coach making $2 million for the season please?

How many games need to be played before any decisions can be questioned or commented on?

What's the shelf life of blind faith? How many years do we shut of our brains before we can react to what we see?

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

What's the shelf life of blind faith? How many years do we shut of our brains before we can react to what we see?

Gotta figure it has to be more than 1/3 of ONE !!!

 

[SubbaBub]

Another one who is strong with the reading comprehension.

Can we get a list of the topics that can be addressed about the coach making $2 million for the season please?

How many games need to be played before any decisions can be questioned or commented on?

What's the shelf life of blind faith? How many years do we shut of our brains before we can react to what we see?

The record is 28 games, before blind faith can be completely exterminated.

 

[whaler11]

Gotta figure it has to be more than 1/3 of ONE !!!

I still don't get why you can't question decisions. Contrary to the coach's stance the games actually count.

 

[Bonehead]

Bonehead's next question - and maybe Whaler and just maybe Pal - "Why don't we bring back Coach PP ?"

You obviously don't know me. Randy yes.

PP no - never.

Low blow dude!!! So what's the answer to the question instead of throwing a dart??

 

[pj]

I shutdown the passing. I believe in that,” Diaco said Sunday. “I am watching the special teams, I am watching the defense play, and got a chance to watch our first four passes. If I didn’t intervene, I was concerned the game would be 35-0, 28-0. I’m more inclined to play ping pong and win the game on special teams than just continue to call plays on offense just to call plays on offense.

So he was concerned the game would be 35-0 if he kept calling pass play - due to what?
Bad QB play?
Bad OL play?
Weather Conditions?

I should have asked the question differently I guess - sorry

He was apparently anticipating 5 pick 6s if he kept throwing. Not sure why, a few weeks ago Cummings said that in practice the number of INTs was quite low; and most of the turnovers have been fumbles, more by running backs on running plays than by the QB on passing plays.

Diaco seems to be emotional and goes to extremes. Then he starts to regret it when he calms down. In the 4th quarter, with the game slipping away, he started to regret not being more aggressive offensively, so he became willing to put his quarterback at risk.

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

Diaco seems to be emotional and goes to extremes. Then he starts to regret it when he calms down. In the 4th quarter, with the game slipping away, he started to regret not being more aggressive offensively, so he became willing to put his quarterback at risk.

Or he saw that the defense was backing off the rush, and playing a prevent, and knew (like most of us knew) that CW would have time to throw without getting killed, and we could move the ball.

 

[Husky68]

Or he saw that the defense was backing off the rush, and playing a prevent, and knew (like most of us knew) that CW would have time to throw without getting killed, and we could move the ball.

So, if USF did not go to prevent defense HCBD would have rushed the ball rather than throw the ball? I looked at 4th qtr. plays and it changed my perception a bit. HCBD was not as conservative in 4th qtr. as my perception and biggest "not playing to win" came on defense.

14:45 to go UConn gets ball on own 3 and run 3 rushes for little gain and put to USF net 34 yards to UConn 41. Maybe UConn thinking is lot of possession yet to be played.
12:43 and USF keeps ball for 6 minutes and get field goal for 10 point lead. Deciding play of game was 4th play @ 3rd and 16 where they run for 1st down. This defensive call was where I see game lost. 3 man rush and then big drops by LB's and DB's so lot of running room. This is where you bring up the heat and do what USF had been doing to UConn all night.
6:03 UConn gets ball and 3 and out. All pass attempts.
1:57 After 1 1st down and several time outs USF punts to UConn and we drive 75 yards for touchdown.

So, in final qtr. HCBD had 3 opportunities to run offense and on 1st with almost full qtr. to go and very bad field position he ran only. Both other possessions he passes or tried to pass on all 7 offensive attempts.

Relooking at 4th qtr. my biggest question is why not bring the heat on 3rd and 16, that's how you change a game where you are trying to win ugly. Stopping the 6 plus minute drive by USF and making them punt when 3rd and 16 was biggest missed opportunity to "play to win". Rewatched play and USF had 3 wide outs. UConn had 3 man rush, 3 guys on wide receivers, 1 middle backer about 8 yards deep and 1 DB shading to the single wide side. Other 3 defenders were so far back were not anywhere to be seen and that means at least 10 yards back. As soon as play started 3 lineman rushed, 4 DB's took off with receivers and left only #32 to cover the entire middle of field for run. Back had 17 yards before anyone could react. That's where "playing to win" did not occur.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

I still don't get why you can't question decisions. Contrary to the coach's stance the games actually count.

It's a fair question...I think there are two reasons why people (including me) get frustrated with the whaler..nelson....freescooter....jimmy type posters. First....it's too soon to have a STRONG opinion on what the coaching staff is doing. They need to time to get their legs under them and turning this ship around isn't going to happen in 4 games. Second....the opinions of the above posters are always very strong and filled with dramatic statements. Statements like "coaches quit on the team"...."diaco isn't playing to win"...."diaco decisions are insane"... Being a logical and rational person, I find these comments to be annoying only 4 games into the season. I don't focue on one or two soundbites from Diaco, I think about the longer term impact and worry more about where this team will be by the end of the year and where they will be next year.

Of course we all wonder about some of the decisions...but I try and realize that I don't know everything about the team and Diaco's plan, and I won't say he is "insane" or "quit" 4 games into his tenure.

It's just a difference in approach really versus a difference in opinion.

 

[businesslawyer]

It's a fair question...I think there are two reasons why people (including me) get frustrated with the whaler..nelson....freescooter....jimmy type posters. First....it's too soon to have a STRONG opinion on what the coaching staff is doing. They need to time to get their legs under them and turning this ship around isn't going to happen in 4 games. Second....the opinions of the above posters are always very strong and filled with dramatic statements. Statements like "coaches quit on the team"...."diaco isn't playing to win"...."diaco decisions are insane"... Being a logical and rational person, I find these comments to be annoying only 4 games into the season. I don't focue on one or two soundbites from Diaco, I think about the longer term impact and worry more about where this team will be by the end of the year and where they will be next year.

Of course we all wonder about some of the decisions...but I try and realize that I don't know everything about the team and Diaco's plan, and I won't say he is "insane" or "quit" 4 games into his tenure.

It's just a difference in approach really versus a difference in opinion.

THIS. FWIW (and it's not worth much), I think we made a mistake by only throwing once in the first half. But coaches make mistakes all the time, and on Monday it's always the fans who are armed with knowing what happened. Questioning tactics is fine. Criticizing tactics is fine (although there is way too much criticizing here for things that just don't work when the decision when made was perfectly rational). But the kind of over the top BS that many on here put us through all the time makes the board a less fun place and, frankly, does our program no good.

 

[whaler11]

It's a fair question...I think there are two reasons why people (including me) get frustrated with the whaler..nelson....freescooter....jimmy type posters. First....it's too soon to have a STRONG opinion on what the coaching staff is doing. They need to time to get their legs under them and turning this ship around isn't going to happen in 4 games. Second....the opinions of the above posters are always very strong and filled with dramatic statements. Statements like "coaches quit on the team"...."diaco isn't playing to win"...."diaco decisions are insane"... Being a logical and rational person, I find these comments to be annoying only 4 games into the season. I don't focue on one or two soundbites from Diaco, I think about the longer term impact and worry more about where this team will be by the end of the year and where they will be next year.

Of course we all wonder about some of the decisions...but I try and realize that I don't know everything about the team and Diaco's plan, and I won't say he is "insane" or "quit" 4 games into his tenure.

It's just a difference in approach really versus a difference in opinion.

I guess I thought everyone on a message board works under the assumption that everything everyone says is based on incomplete information. I didn't think we needed disclaimers about not being at practice and not knowing about what information they might not be sharing publicly.

I never said he quit in the USF gane. I do believe he took a sub-optimal approach to winning. I am hardly alone in that sentiment if you read the opinions of people who get paid to share them.

I never called him insane only some decisions he has made and a few things he has said. If you and others think the word is too harsh I get that.

I do worry what decisions mean for the future. What's the best way to predict the quality of future decisions? Current decisions. I actually look at the running back rotation and begin to wonder if he is adverse to even making decisions. Now is he new at this level and can his decision making improve? Certainly.

I don't deal in blind faith and I have a very negative visceral reaction when someone is peddling BS. And on a few occasions to date - he has already broken my BS meter. That being said he was more direct this week and that's a step in the right direction.

 

[whaler11]

THIS. FWIW (and it's not worth much), I think we made a mistake by only throwing once in the first half. But coaches make mistakes all the time, and on Monday it's always the fans who are armed with knowing what happened. Questioning tactics is fine. Criticizing tactics is fine (although there is way too much criticizing here for things that just don't work when the decision when made was perfectly rational). But the kind of over the top BS that many on here put us through all the time makes the board a less fun place and, frankly, does our program no good.

Which is fair but let's not act like the criticism started on Monday (or in this case Saturday). It was during the game.

You also have to understand that some of what you perceive as 'over the top' isn't directed at Diaco but is actually a reaction to posters.

 

[Carl Spackler]

There is an old saying that once you look at the film, and the emotions clear, it's never as good as it seemed, and it's never as bad as it seemed. It's pretty much accurate, I think.

That 3rd and 16 conversion, was the last of many plays I"ve seen through 4 games, that set me off into that fundamentals thing I've been harping about. Reuben Frank took the correct angle/leverage on his blocker out of a very deep linebacking position, but was incredibly weak on driving through it. Andrew Adams, while he's been very solid most of the time, through 4 games, when he needed his fundamentals most, made the worst arm tackle effort/miss, that would have stopped the play 4-5 yards short, with Frank, at least managing to keep the runner inside. It was a critical moment in the game, in the 4th quarter, and I'm sure everyone was fatigued, but that's - THAT is when you need your fundamentals to be rote muscle memory. If Adams simply keeps his head up, keeps a solid base tackling position running toward the ball carrier, and at least makes solid contact (Hopefully you can wrap your arms and lock too) but if he at least makes solid contact, there are other players closing in. Ball carrier broke through the arm tackle, got the first down, and we another set of downs to stop them, and with field position, after the short field, on the long punt, they kick the field goal.

I was kind of torn with myself after I harped on all that tackling business after the game on Saturday, because the reality is that our defense has been good, and improving. They've kept us in games, for the most part. I didn't want, and hope, people didn't get the wrong impressions. THis diefensive system is working. Even with Obi back there.

It's just a symptom of the poor level of fundamentals we have that pervades this team - and it's more than evident on the offensive side of the ball, when it comes to blocking.

THis is all expected, with a roster full of freshmen, and sophomores, and may recruits that were dual sport athletes in the high school, or may not have played much football at al, yadda yadda - that's the recruiting profile we need to have for UCONN - and we need coaches to coach them up.

I just worry, that our coaches are biting off more than they can handle, by trying to coach up and train, rotations of 3 or 4 or more raw players at multiple positions all over the field, especially on offense, by dividing reps as they are, almost equally, rather than favoring reps heavily for a starting lineup, and putting backups into a more traditional limited reps role, with lots and lots of film study and mental practice/reps.

Way back, after the BYU game, I remarked that I understand the plan, I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean it can't work, but I would really be wondering about things if we are still rotating players like that through 4 games. I am wondering.

http://uconnhuskygames.com/2014-football-game-replays/

the 3rd and 16 play is at 1:36:50

 

[Bonehead]

There is an old saying that once you look at the film, and the emotions clear, it's never as good as it seemed, and it's never as bad as it seemed. It's pretty much accurate, I think.

That 3rd and 16 conversion, was the last of many plays I"ve seen through 4 games, that set me off into that fundamentals thing I've been harping about. Reuben Frank took the correct angle/leverage on his blocker out of a very deep linebacking position, but was incredibly weak on driving through it. Andrew Adams, while he's been very solid most of the time, through 4 games, when he needed his fundamentals most, made the worst arm tackle effort/miss, that would have stopped the play 4-5 yards short, with Frank, at least managing to keep the runner inside. It was a critical moment in the game, in the 4th quarter, and I'm sure everyone was fatigued, but that's - THAT is when you need your fundamentals to be rote muscle memory. If Adams simply keeps his head up, keeps a solid base tackling position running toward the ball carrier, and at least makes solid contact (Hopefully you can wrap your arms and lock too) but if he at least makes solid contact, there are other players closing in. Ball carrier broke through the arm tackle, got the first down, and we another set of downs to stop them, and with field position, after the short field, on the long punt, they kick the field goal.

I was kind of torn with myself after I harped on all that tackling business after the game on Saturday, because the reality is that our defense has been good, and improving. They've kept us in games, for the most part. I didn't want, and hope, people didn't get the wrong impressions. THis diefensive system is working. Even with Obi back there.

It's just a symptom of the poor level of fundamentals we have that pervades this team - and it's more than evident on the offensive side of the ball, when it comes to blocking.

THis is all expected, with a roster full of freshmen, and sophomores, and may recruits that were dual sport athletes in the high school, or may not have played much football at al, yadda yadda - that's the recruiting profile we need to have for UCONN - and we need coaches to coach them up.

I just worry, that our coaches are biting off more than they can handle, by trying to coach up and train, rotations of 3 or 4 or more raw players at multiple positions all over the field, especially on offense, by dividing reps as they are, almost equally, rather than favoring reps heavily for a starting lineup, and putting backups into a more traditional limited reps role, with lots and lots of film study and mental practice/reps.

Way back, after the BYU game, I remarked that I understand the plan, I don't agree with it, but that doesn't mean it can't work, but I would really be wondering about things if we are still rotating players like that through 4 games. I am wondering.

http://uconnhuskygames.com/2014-football-game-replays/

the 3rd and 16 play is at 1:36:50

Are you trying to hijack my thread or is that your answer to "Im still confused why we didnt pass the ball Friday Night??"

 

[Carl Spackler]

Are you trying to hijack my thread or is that your answer to "Im still confused why we didnt pass the ball Friday Night??"

I'm responding to a post, that brought up a critical moment of the game, where we failed, and we failed not because of scheme, or play calling, or weather, or anything else but two players executing their roles poorly - due to simply fundamentals. Reuben Frank stopped moving his legs to drive his blocker, and got blown up by a TE win good blocking position, fundamentally, and Andrew Adams, unblocked, stopped moving his legs, and made a reach for an arm tackle, with his head down, and ended up with air, and then grass, on his stomach watching the ball carrier go by.

There was nothing wrong with the defensive design or play call. It was fundamentals. We need to get back to basics of football at UCONN. It's been far too sloppy, and undisciplined for far too long. THe Fiesta Bowl is very far behind us now.

If you watched that grainy black and white coaching film from ancient history I put up on Saturday night, or whenever it was, on tackling, it's pretty much all right there. This isn't new, and it's not rocket science or 400 level football we need to be at.

Edit: and fwiw - yes the players failed, but it is also the coaches fault that the players lacked the fundamentals at that moment, that would have put them in position to succeed.