The List

[UConnDan97]

65 scholarship players and you though the team should have been bowling? Just a question. Don't attack me. But why would the NCAA allow 85 scholarship players if 65 was enough? Not only that, 3-9 the year prior, a number of starters gone and the team still had enough talent to be bowl eligible?!

Here's my answer to that. I believe that the games against Army, USF, SMU, Tulane, and Temple were ours to win. The Temple game was lost in the third quarter, so hopefully people don't look back at that scoreline and say, "Dan, you're crazy", because Dan was there to see it. So assuming that I got 4 of those 5 games, that would be 6-6.

And I know that people accuse me often times of being glass-half-full to the point of being ridiculous, but there was no reason at all that we shouldn't have won the games I listed if based on talent alone. None. Zero. Yale found a way to beat Army, for crying out loud. And SMU...I still can't stomach the fact that we lost that game. We lost to USF after attempting to pass the ball only 9 times?!? I still can't believe that happened. And against Tulane, we gained slightly over 200 yards of offense and ZERO TD's against a team that went 3-9. So yes, I absolutely positively believe that we should have been 6-6 with our roster, and there are no two ways around it...

 

[BNich]

Here's my answer to that. I believe that the games against Army, USF, SMU, Tulane, and Temple were ours to win. The Temple game was lost in the third quarter, so hopefully people don't look back at that scoreline and say, "Dan, you're crazy", because Dan was there to see it. So assuming that I got 4 of those 5 games, that would be 6-6.

And I know that people accuse me often times of being glass-half-full to the point of being ridiculous, but there was no reason at all that we shouldn't have won the games I listed if based on talent alone. None. Zero. Yale found a way to beat Army, for crying out loud. And SMU...I still can't stomach the fact that we lost that game. We lost to USF after attempting to pass the ball only 9 times?!? I still can't believe that happened. And against Tulane, we gained slightly over 200 yards of offense and ZERO TD's against a team that went 3-9. So yes, I absolutely positively believe that we should have been 6-6 with our roster, and there are no two ways around it...

Yet the roster produced 2-10. But ok.

 

[noeynox]

Yet the roster produced 2-10. But ok.

The roster or maybe the coaching. Neither one was up to snuff last year, that's for sure.

 

[UConnDan97]

Yet the roster produced 2-10. But ok.

Yup. So guess where I put the blame.

So here's the difference between you and me:

UConnDan97 - The UConn roster had enough talent to beat some of the worst teams in college football, but the rookie head coach made a lot of mistakes. He even recognized those mistakes, and has since removed his OC and replaced him with a new one.

BNich - The UConn roster was no good (or too small, or both), but rookie head coach Bob Diaco was "awesome sauce", and this latest recruiting class will be the first time in 4 years that we have recruited talent.

I just can't accept your version of events. Call me crazy, but there was enough talent on this team to stay in the middle of the pack against a weak AAC...

 

[BNich]

Yup. So guess where I put the blame.

So here's the difference between you and me:

UConnDan97 - The UConn roster had enough talent to beat some of the worst teams in college football, but the rookie head coach made a lot of mistakes. He even recognized those mistakes, and has since removed his OC and replaced him with a new one.

BNich - The UConn roster was no good (or too small, or both), but rookie head coach Bob Diaco was "awesome sauce", and this latest recruiting class will be the first time in 4 years that we have recruited talent.

I just can't accept your version of events. Call me crazy, but there was enough talent on this team to stay in the middle of the pack against a weak AAC...

If you can dig up a post where I said Diaco was "awesome sauce" I will never disagree with you moving forward. Talent or otherwise, depth was depleted and the past couple recruiting classes, as has been pointed out, many never made it to campus and some have left the program hence the 65 scholarship number. But ok continue to believe your belief and I will continue you with mine.

 

[BlueMAB]

Yet the coaches produced 2-10 with that roster. But ok.

FIFY.

 

[BNich]

FIFY.

No clue what that means.

 

[BlueMAB]

No clue what that means.

Fixed It For You.

I "fixed" your quote (by changing it). It's a half-joke.

 

[UconnFamily]

If you can dig up a post where I said Diaco was "awesome sauce" I will never disagree with you moving forward. Talent or otherwise, depth was depleted and the past couple recruiting classes, as has been pointed out, many never made it to campus and some have left the program hence the 65 scholarship number. But ok continue to believe your belief and I will continue you with mine.

Wait so we would have been a better team with 20 more players? Did SMU have around 65 players and that's why they were so bad too?

 

[BNich]

Wait so we would have been a better team with 20 more players? Did SMU have around 65 players and that's why they were so bad too?

You're point is that, pointless. SMU beat Uconn. Move along.

 

[Pudge]

Yup. I'm famous on the Boneyard for my whining. Hey Pudge, if we put a poll on the BY to see which of us was the biggest whiner, do you really think I would win?

Secondly, whether you use Rivals or ESPN or 247, the result is the same. The top20 recruiting classes eventually lead to top40 teams. The bottom20 recruiting classes eventually lead to bottom40 teams. I think it was Junglehusky that provided the graph that demonstrated that. You can underachieve a little, or overachieve a little, but in the end your fate will be determined by the level of athlete that you have. That's true of any sport in any place in the world. I'm just not sure why you can't accept that. And yes, I agree that the 2 win debacle had nothing to do with his recruiting. I believe that we had the talent to be bowl eligible last year. But we didn't have the talent to be a top25 team. That's the reality, folks...

LOL

Look at the Math in this paragraph. Gosh ... Take some Statistics (get some Facts) & come back and see me.

I'm not saying Recruiting is not crucial. I'm saying the crapola you're spouting has no statistical significance. And I'm not teaching 101 to anyone.

We have no idea how Diaco did. Number 2 - the Stars are not the same; I just pointed out a huge variance. Offers? This ain't fact. Kids lie. The system is run by ... Guys like John O. At RutgersRivals ... who admittedly manipulates reports. The first indication of how Diaco did on Feb 4 is probably not until October. The record? Look at our retention of PP recruits if you want to cry. Blame Diaco? Hmmm.

 

[UconnFamily]

You're point is that, pointless. SMU beat Uconn. Move along.

Lol... SMU went 1-11 with a full roster. But yet we were garbage because we had 65 players??? Sometimes BNich you just make no fuc**ng sense.

 

[BNich]

Lol... SMU went 1-11 with a full roster. But yet we were garbage because we had 65 players??? Sometimes BNich you just make no fuc**ng sense.

??? Who said we were garbage? I don't like you either. But I never said that,. The roster and team was depleted.

 

[UconnFamily]

??? Who said we were garbage? I don't like you either. But I never said that,. The roster and team was depleted.

Who cares who you like I'm not here to make friends especially with one who makes no sense most of the time. No one said YOU said we were garbage but your excuse for us not winning the games we should have won was because UConn had 65 players, but yet SMU had a full roster and went 1-11.

 

[UConnDan97]

If you can dig up a post where I said Diaco was "awesome sauce" I will never disagree with you moving forward. Talent or otherwise, depth was depleted and the past couple recruiting classes, as has been pointed out, many never made it to campus and some have left the program hence the 65 scholarship number. But ok continue to believe your belief and I will continue you with mine.

The "awesome sauce" was adlib. I shouldn't have put that in quotes. My bad.

Getting back to the discussion: Out of the following teams, please tell me the ones that you think had more talent than we had on their rosters: USF, Temple, Army, SMU, Tulane. If you even say more than two of them, I'll know that you're lying. If you don't say more than two of them, then we agree and you are just fighting me for no reason...

 

[BNich]

Who cares who you like I'm not here to make friends especially with one who makes no sense most of the time. No one said YOU said we were garbage but your excuse for us not winning the games we should have won was because UConn had 65 players, but yet SMU had a full roster and went 1-11.

I'm not here to make friends either, but I really don't care for your opinion nor do I care if you accept mine. Then tell me what the problem is/was. There's a reason they only won 2 games. and 3 the season before. You called the team garbage not me. They were depleted significantly. Many true freshmen were forced into playing last season. How can Uconn expect to win playing so many freshmen with so many other changes? Idk who they play.

 

[BNich]

The "awesome sauce" was adlib. I shouldn't have put that in quotes. My bad.

Getting back to the discussion: Out of the following teams, please tell me the ones that you think had more talent than we had on their rosters: USF, Temple, Army, SMU, Tulane. If you even say more than two of them, I'll know that you're lying. If you don't say more than two of them, then we agree and you are just fighting me for no reason...

Talent is debatable. Wins are what was. Aside from SMU, all had more wins and beat Uconn. That's it and thats all folks.

 

[UConnDan97]

Talent is debatable. Wins are what was. Aside from SMU, all had more wins and beat Uconn. That's it and thats all folks.

No, that's not all folks. You refused to answer my question. The entire dispute has been about talent on the roster. So I want you to tell me which of those 5 teams had more talent on the roster than we had.

Let me put it another way: If the head coach felt that 2 wins was all that he could squeeze out of this talent, then why on earth would he replace his OC after 1 year??? Think about that for more than a second, please...

 

[UconnFamily]

I'm not here to make friends either, but I really don't care for your opinion nor do I care if you accept mine. Then tell me what the problem is/was. There's a reason they only won 2 games. and 3 the season before. You called the team garbage not me. They were depleted significantly. Many true freshmen were forced into playing last season. How can Uconn expect to win playing so many freshmen with so many other changes? Idk who they play.

If you don't care for my opinion then why ask me for my opinion? And yes I did say we were garbage because unfortunately we was.

 

[BNich]

No, that's not all folks. You refused to answer my question. The entire dispute has been about talent on the roster. So I want you to tell me which of those 5 teams had more talent on the roster than we had.

Let me put it another way: If the head coach felt that 2 wins was all that he could squeeze out of this talent, then why on earth would he replace his OC after 1 year??? Think about that for more than a second, please...

They all clearly had more talent as they all beat Uconn.

 

[UConnDan97]

They all clearly had more talent as they all beat Uconn.

I watched Appalachian State beat Michigan on tv once. They must have had a crapload more talent! It's also good to know from you that UConn had more talent than UCF, but not more than 1-11 SMU. Very insightful.

It's stuff like this that makes me truly wonder if you believe the stuff you are typing...

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Dan don't waste the bandwidth with this guy.

 

[UConnDan97]

Dan don't waste the bandwidth with this guy.

Yeah, I just learned that lesson about 10 seconds ago...

 

[BNich]

I watched Appalachian State beat Michigan on tv once. They must have had a crapload more talent! It's also good to know from you that UConn had more talent than UCF, but not more than 1-11 SMU. Very insightful.

It's stuff like this that makes me truly wonder if you believe the stuff you are typing...

I don't care if you do. Theres a reason people play the lottery. Chance. Hope. I'm done here.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

We have no idea how Diaco did. Number 2 - the Stars are not the same; I just pointed out a huge variance. Offers? This ain't fact.

Sure, we don't know how Diaco did this year. This could end up being a great class.

All we have to go on right now is stars and offers.

Luckily for us, we have historical data of recruiting classes and the correlation with how they performed on the field.

You can sit here and rant about a 4 year stretch with Edsall (our peak) that culminated in a 16-12 Big East record and how the recruiting sites missed Easley and Donald Thomas. You could point to that and say recruiting sites and offers and wrong.

Why you choose to ignore the recruiting data and on field success from every single FBS program in aggregate is nonsensical.