Interesting question about Thursday

[Husky25]

Foley has had them for over a year without GDL. Let's hope they get better.

Foley was great under Edsall. Since then not so much. I don't know what to make of it, but I can't buy into the Foley can do no wrong line of thinking.

Great? Not so much. Many of the linemen who went to the Fiesta Bowl were 4-8 their Freshman year. Foley retaught a lot of experienced players to be competent last year. He has inexperienced Freshmen and Sophomores this year, just like in 2006.

 

[J187Money]

Great? Not so much. Many of the linemen who went to the Fiesta Bowl were 4-8 their Freshman year. Foley retaught a lot of experienced players to be competent last year. He has inexperienced Freshmen and Sophomores this year, just like in 2006.

The true freshman in 2006 were 4-8 (but none of them actually saw the field--if they had, they would have graduated prior to the Fiesta Bowl), but then we went to 4 straight bowls. Maybe not Alabama great, but compared to now?

There were only two RS Sr. on the Fiesta Bowl team from the OL (Hurd and Olivier) - and neither of them would have been on the field in 2006.

The line was "bowl worthy" for 4 straight years, and has been generally awful since then. Talent? Scheme? Foley is only as good as his head coach or OC? I have no idea.

I know I've said this before, but if Foley did have control and great results during the Edsall years, and then lost control during the PP years, it really makes me wonder why he would stay. I would never stay in a job where my bosses were causing me to perform poorly and destroying my professional reputation. And just because PP didn't focus on the weight room, Foley couldn't get his lineman into the gym? Was he asleep at the wheel? Despondent? Again I have no idea.

What I do know is this...as game after game goes by, and the OL continues to struggle, the only conclusions I can come to is that we really don't have a lot of talent, or Foley isn't anywhere near as good as he is perceived to be by BY folklore, or some combination thereof.

 

[J187Money]

Further - we had top of BCS running attacks, even when everyone knew we couldn't throw. If that isn't a "great" line...not sure what is.

 

[Husky25]

The true freshman in 2006 were 4-8 (but none of them actually saw the field--if they had, they would have graduated prior to the Fiesta Bowl), but then we went to 4 straight bowls. Maybe not Alabama great, but compared to now?

There were only two RS Sr. on the Fiesta Bowl team from the OL (Hurd and Olivier) - and neither of them would have been on the field in 2006.

The line was "bowl worthy" for 4 straight years, and has been generally awful since then. Talent? Scheme? Foley is only as good as his head coach or OC? I have no idea.

I know I've said this before, but if Foley did have control and great results during the Edsall years, and then lost control during the PP years, it really makes me wonder why he would stay. I would never stay in a job where my bosses were causing me to perform poorly and destroying my professional reputation. And just because PP didn't focus on the weight room, Foley couldn't get his lineman into the gym? Was he asleep at the wheel? Despondent? Again I have no idea.

What I do know is this...as game after game goes by, and the OL continues to struggle, the only conclusions I can come to is that we really don't have a lot of talent, or Foley isn't anywhere near as good as he is perceived to be by BY folklore, or some combination thereof.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Foley was the TE Coach During the 2.5 year debacle, a position that performed pretty well despite the rest of the offense. DeLeone was the O-Line coach and Offensive Coordinator.

Scheme is part of it, but so is talent and experience. I don't know why Diaco declared he was going back to zone blocking when we saw that it didn't work over the last two years AND he said that the line will line up and punch their opponent in the mount. Obviously, you can throw huge blocks in a zone scheme. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but if he is tailoring his schemes to the talent on the field, this line must collectively svck at man-over blocking.

I am more convinced each week that the, "Pasqualoni is a great recruiter," meme was at best a smoke screen from the CT HS coaching community. If the cupboard was bare when he got there, then he used the cupboard for fire wood.

 

[BNich]

I'm not worried about the defense.

And I love Foley but I'm not seeing them get better.

I thought the running game improved last game. If Newsome doesn't cough it up twice deep in Tulane territory the final score could have been totally different. Not only did the turnovers give Tulane the football and keep Uconn from scoring, I would imagine they were also morale deflating plays to the entire offense.

 

[J187Money]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but Foley was the TE Coach During the 2.5 year debacle, a position that performed pretty well despite the rest of the offense. DeLeone was the O-Line coach and Offensive Coordinator.

Scheme is part of it, but so is talent and experience. I don't know why Diaco declared he was going back to zone blocking when we saw that it didn't work over the last two years AND he said that the line will line up and punch their opponent in the mount. Obviously, you can throw huge blocks in a zone scheme. The two aren't mutually exclusive, but if he is tailoring his schemes to the talent on the field, this line must collectively svck at man-over blocking.

I am more convinced each week that the, "Pasqualoni is a great recruiter," meme was at best a smoke screen from the CT HS coaching community. If the cupboard was bare when he got there, then he used the cupboard for fire wood.

You are right. He was the TE coach. And maybe he spent 2.5 years never having a conversation with the OL. There is just so much of this that doesn't add up to me. And if Foley is great, but he needs 2 years to work with a specific guy to turn him into a good OL, then fine. Let's just stop watching and hope it is better by the middle of next season.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I thought the running game improved last game. If Newsome doesn't cough it up twice deep in Tulane territory the final score could have been totally different. Not only did the turnovers give Tulane the football and keep Uconn from scoring, I would imagine they were also morale deflating plays to the entire offense.

Where are people getting this idea from? Diaco? We ran 28 times for 76 yards. That's awful. Are people only remembering the 2 or 3 nice runs by Newsome & Johnson and forgetting the rest?

 

[Husky25]

You are right. He was the TE coach. And maybe he spent 2.5 years never having a conversation with the OL. There is just so much of this that doesn't add up to me. And if Foley is great, but he needs 2 years to work with a specific guy to turn him into a good OL, then fine. Let's just stop watching and hope it is better by the middle of next season.

I didn't mean to imply that he was forbidden from having a conversation with an O-lineman, but if a coach was giving advice or teaching technique counter to what the OC/position coach and HC wanted (who are best friends and have demonstrated they always have each other's back over every other one of the 319,000,000 people in America), he wouldn't be long for his job. You stated earlier that, "[You] would never stay in a job where [your] bosses were causing [you] to perform poorly and destroying [you] professional reputation." The other side of that coin is insubordination. He'd leave that job all right, but it wouldn't be on his own terms. Foley has a job right now because the TEs performed well over the last 3+ years and the OL improved when he was reappointed as that position coach last year.

 

[Excalibur]

Where are people getting this idea from? Diaco? We ran 28 times for 76 yards. That's awful. Are people only remembering the 2 or 3 nice runs by Newsome & Johnson and forgetting the rest?

Statistically speaking, the YPC, adjusted for sacks, has been better over the last two games. Tough to confirm that with the eye test, however.

 

[joey3$trike$]

Foxx will have more snaps than Boyle at qb, that's probably the better question. Points scored is irrelevant since their only trying to get better as a team. Thanks ECU for playing on Thursday and for Uconn getting valuable experience going against a top 25 team on their field. What a epic night it will be. Ugh!

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Statistically speaking, the YPC, adjusted for sacks, has been better over the last two games. Tough to confirm that with the eye test, however.

Adjusted for sacks:

USF debacle - 24 attempts/88 yards/3.67 ypc
Tulane - 24 attempts/92 yards/3.83 ypc

 

[Excalibur]

Adjusted for sacks:

USF debacle - 24 attempts/88 yards/3.67 ypc
Tulane - 24 attempts/92 yards/3.83 ypc

Sorry, meant to say three. Including Temple at 4.16 YPC.

The numbers from earlier in the year were really ugly. I feel like I posted the numbers for each game through Temple at some point, but I can't find it.

 

[J187Money]

I didn't mean to imply that he was forbidden from having a conversation with an O-lineman, but if a coach was giving advice or teaching technique counter to what the OC/position coach and HC wanted (who are best friends and have demonstrated they always have each other's back over every other one of the 319,000,000 people in America), he wouldn't be long for his job. You stated earlier that, "[You] would never stay in a job where [your] bosses were causing [you] to perform poorly and destroying [you] professional reputation." The other side of that coin is insubordination. He'd leave that job all right, but it wouldn't be on his own terms. Foley has a job right now because the TEs performed well over the last 3+ years and the OL improved when he was reappointed as that position coach last year.

So is your position:

a) that Foley is a god and given enough time we should stop worrying?
b) you are concerned that this might never get fixed and we might need to go in a different direction?
c) Foley is great but can't teach zone blocking so this is going to be a disaster no matter what?

I have absolutely no idea. All I know is that I don't like what I'm seeing and I want it to be better.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Sorry, meant to say three. Including Temple at 4.16 YPC.

The numbers from earlier in the year were really ugly. I feel like I posted the numbers for each game through Temple at some point, but I can't find it.

Because I hate myself I looked at it. Adjusted for sacks, rushing yards per carry:

BYU - 3.3 ypc
SB - 2.79 ypc
Boise - 3.54 ypc
USF - 3.67 ypc
Temple - 3.78 ypc
Tulane - 3.83 ypc

I guess you're right. But damned if you can see that with your own eyes.

 

[MuchoDogYears]

Getting back to the origins of this thread...Boyle. A lot of people say to sit Whitmer and play Boyle, with the thought that the season is over and Whitmer's a senior..so, lets get Boyle some valuable experience and it'll pay off for next year.

That sounds logical, but here's the thing. If Boyle can't beat out Whitmer in practice but is handed the starting position regardless, what (1) message is that sending the team and (2) how is Boyle performing in practice if he can't justify the coaching staff playing him more than a handful of downs, never mind starting?

Boyle shouldn't start if he isn't showing in practice that he's the better QB, or at the very least Whitmer's equal.. I have faith that the coaching staff is handling the QB situation correctly and that Boyle will start once/if he proves he deserves to. Players must all earn their time on the field, no one gets handed anything.

 

[NBPirate]

ECU seems bored by the AAC games. Makes sense after playing South Carolina, VPI and UNC.

They need to start playing better because Marshall has a pretty strong case for the sympathy bowl bid.

I'd say its a combination. Our coaches have been really trying to get a lot of our young guys (2nd and 3rd stringers) meaningful reps too early in games and we spent the early part of the SMU game trying new things and experimenting with different coverages / pass plays / run plays, etc. that we hadn't done before.

 

[Husky25]

So is your position:

a) that Foley is a god and given enough time we should stop worrying?
b) you are concerned that this might never get fixed and we might need to go in a different direction?
c) Foley is great but can't teach zone blocking so this is going to be a disaster no matter what?

I have absolutely no idea. All I know is that I don't like what I'm seeing and I want it to be better.

Me too.

My answer is: d) None of the above.

It's less about Foley than it is the players he is coaching and the philosophies of his predecessor. The players themselves are young, immature, and un/under-developed. The previous coaching staff pushed theory over practice and seemed to expected the players to be motivated to push themselves, which is generally not the case (Exhibit 1: Courant Article from last October; Exhibit 2: Players like Xavier Hemmingway having a hard time putting on 5 lbs. let alone 50 to approach the physique necessary to play Div. 1 college football). 1% of high school football players play college ball. Further, 1% of college players play in the pros. Pros are generally self motivated, but they didn't get there on their own. Even if they did, UConn is generally not in on that 1/100th of 1% of players.

I do not consider Foley to be a god. If he were, these Freshman and Sophomore linemen would be opening Mack truck like holes and Whitmer would have 7 seconds to throw the ball every play.

 

[Jimdish255]

That sounds logical, but here's the thing. If Boyle can't beat out Whitmer in practice but is handed the starting position regardless, what (1) message is that sending the team and (2) how is Boyle performing in practice if he can't justify the coaching staff playing him more than a handful of downs, never mind starting?

Coach has come out and stated this is a developmental season. That's already the message. Developing next year's QB would be consistent with his stated objectives.

 

[BlueDogs]

I'd like to see real improvement:

1. Net Zero Turnovers (preferably no turnovers, but too much to ask)
2. A few large breakaway runs
3. A freaking play action from under center
4. Use of the tight ends
5. Some short to mid yardage throws in the middle of the field instead of 30 yards out and 5 yards up field or 60 yards down field to nobody
6. OL going out and driving people off the LOS

Most importantly - aggressive sideline calls trying to win 100% of the game, not just keeping it close enough to try and steal a win in the 4th

 

[J187Money]

Me too.

My answer is: d) None of the above.

It's less about Foley than it is the players he is coaching and the philosophies of his predecessor. The players themselves are young, immature, and un/under-developed. The previous coaching staff pushed theory over practice and seemed to expected the players to be motivated to push themselves, which is generally not the case (Exhibit 1: Courant Article from last October; Exhibit 2: Players like Xavier Hemmingway having a hard time putting on 5 lbs. let alone 50 to approach the physique necessary to play Div. 1 college football). 1% of high school football players play college ball. Further, 1% of college players play in the pros. Pros are generally self motivated, but they didn't get there on their own. Even if they did, UConn is generally not in on that 1/100th of 1% of players.

I do not consider Foley to be a god. If he were, these Freshman and Sophomore linemen would be opening Mack truck like holes and Whitmer would have 7 seconds to throw the ball every play.

Thank you. That's a useful perspective.

 

[DoctorWho85]

I have lower leg pain. I will take the points over the Boyle snaps. In addition ECU gave up a fair number of points to SMU and USF. It's their offense that's intimidating.

I thought the same thing. ECU gives up points and yard, but their offense looks like they can hang with anyone.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Coach has come out and stated this is a developmental season. That's already the message. Developing next year's QB would be consistent with his stated objectives.

Except that Chandler Whitmer is a senior with no eligibility left after this season.

 

[husky10]

Coach has come out and stated this is a developmental season. That's already the message. Developing next year's QB would be consistent with his stated objectives.

Considering the coach is bringing in 2 duel threat qbs that will be eligible next season, my guess is HCBD wants a duel threat guy to be his starter next year. So he can't develop next years qb because he is not eligible yet.

Albeit not by much CW can do more with his legs than TB, so playing CW allows him to run an offense that is a little closer to what he wants to run in the future, benefitting everyone more on the offensive side of the ball, rather than just getting your future second string qb reps.

 

[Stinger92860]

Considering the coach is bringing in 2 duel threat qbs that will be eligible next season, my guess is HCBD wants a duel threat guy to be his starter next year. So he can't develop next years qb because he is not eligible yet.

Albeit not by much CW can do more with his legs than TB, so playing CW allows him to run an offense that is a little closer to what he wants to run in the future, benefitting everyone more on the offensive side of the ball, rather than just getting your future second string qb reps.

We will need 1-2 more qb recruits for next year as I cannot see Tim staying for the spread. We may need a juco.

 

[MuchoDogYears]

Coach has come out and stated this is a developmental season. That's already the message. Developing next year's QB would be consistent with his stated objectives.

I totally agree with you...Diaco has stated repeatedly that this is a developmental season. Which would seem....seem to underscore getting Boyle lots of playing time.

So, I had to ask myself one question...If this is a developmental season, and Whitmer (a senior!) hasn't proven himself capable at QB, then why isn't Boyle getting playing time? Why would the coaching staff not start Boyle, a soph, over Whitmer, a senior during this "developmental season"?

And the only answer that I can come up with is that Boyle must be downright awful in practice. if there's another answer I'd like to hear it.

Here's hoping that something else is going on that we weren't aware of that explains this conundrum and that Boyle starts seeing significant playing time. Because he's the only future we've got.