Another game for college football purists | The Boneyard

Another game for college football purists

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Much like Yale-Army, at the bowl the same day we lost to temple by 26 points I think, the game yesterday?

Believe it or not, I think it was a great game. It's sad that I think that, because it means I've become detached. Consecutive years of 5-7, 5-7, 3-9, now 2-7. I am just human.

On some level it does piss me off endlessly that we lost, but I have no control over anything, other than my own contributions and ticket purchases. So no use getting pissed off about it. Detached. Oh well.

SO reality. It was a great game. The pure joy of football. Playing the academies is true football. It's a battle of mental wills, individually as a player, as a team, as detached leaders individually the coaches, as a full team in the playing field on sidelines, Most of all as a team. The physical part is incidental.

THat was on display full out yesterday. Funadamentals of blocking, tackling, ball security, and execution of a plan. We had bigger stronger players, they blocked and tackled better, protected the ball better.

Lots of minutiae to look at in the game, as to where, when, how, why things could have gone different, but there was honestly IMNSHO, anything wrong with the game plans and decision making (other than what I've chosen to ignore over recent weeks on offense)

Every single strength, and weakness, that UCONN football 2014 is, was on full display. It was an Army exposition.

What is great, is that you can see the passion, and desire, and heart our guys have pouring out, dripping out of themselves on the field. Levy - falling to his knees after he knew he f--ked up. Chandler - who is truly a warrior, in every aspect the word can mean on a football field, looked like he was going to vomit after throwing that last pick.

It was heartbreak to see - and with that - I realize that I'm not SO, SO detached, because I felt terrible for everybody on this roster when the game ended with the small, undersized, and slow Army DB's that had been getting run over all day long, but tackling with perfect form, returned the ball 100 yards to end the game.

It is always the case, when you play the academices, that the team that makes the least amount of mistakes wins. THey won for no other reason, than we made too many mistakes, and they didn't make enough. They are a smarter, and more fundamentally sound football team in blocking and tackling.

Anyone that doesn't understand why I've been harping on that all season long,need only to rewatch this game. Anyone that really wants to understand what UCONN football is, right now - need only watch that game. Our coach, got his butt handed to him, by the simple fundamentals of leverage, that for whatever reason, we foregoed training endlessly on for this season, to get everyone equal playing time as in little league baseball or something.

Excellent learning experience - I wonder if we will learn from it. From here on out, it's playing for the name on the front of jersey only.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Lots of comments on here today about the D game plan. I have not looked at stats yet, but yesterday had the ongoing argument in the stands. First off, biggest fan of UCONN football now is Angel Santiago. As the QB running the option offense at Army, he had probably his easiest day when it comes to physical punishment in a long time. To my knowledge, and eye, Larry Dixon the back, was the primary threat all season, and we did very well to take that away. My only gripe with that decision, is that it was known that the guy has been fighting injuries of the dreaded lower leg, so game planning to take him away, rather than the QB? Well - what I wrote above - everything positive and negative about UCONN football was on display.

An Army Exposition. We didn't fail because of scheming or game planning, we had the opportunity to make plays within the defensive game plan - we made errors in angles, and weren't fundamentally sound enough in tackling. From the outside linebackers and DE's - not the DB's or Safeties, or interior D, and it was the same positions they exploited in the pass plays they completed. O LB's and DE's. They went right at our weaknesses, and destroyed our D. but the only fault in the game plan, was taking away the back, that was playing hurt, rather than the QB.

just looked - Air Force and Yale, are the only two teams so far this season that defended Dixon in the triple option better than we did.

The game plan was sound on D - unconventional against the triple option, but sound. But again, everything about UCONN football 2014 was on full display yesterday - EVERYTHING. Our coaching staff is not conventional.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
I don't think their DB's were undersized or slow at all. They kept with the WR's mostly all game. Josh Jenkins is 6'1 196, Carnegie is 6'1 200, Hayden Pierce is 6'4. It was difficult for the receivers to create much separation vertically up the field.
 

whaler11

Head Happy Hour Coach
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
44,369
Reaction Score
68,241
Honestly Carl you can't be *king serious.

Drive 1: 89 yards 8:30. TD.
Drive 2: 85 yards 6:00 TD
Drive 3: moving the ball fumbled for no reason
*Theoretical coaching at halftime*
Drive 4: 79 yards 7:00 TD
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
I don't know how, in the year 2014, anyone can find a way to romanticize a loss to Army.
No romanticizing being done. But it is also not the end of the world. It's where this team is right now. Point blank. The offense produced more yards this week than last week and lost to a tough and hard nosed Army team.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
I'm totally serious, they exploited our defensive edge to perfection. We took bad angles and we're poor in tackling at those positions. The interior of our D from front to the safeties was strong The rookie corners were good. The de's and olb's were exploited. We had multiple 3rd Downs where angles and leverage wrong, play fake bites. First three army drives were a clinic. The D got better. Diaco was right, no way to simulate that in practice. Army was on their game. By the time the D caught up mentally, they were gassed and gashed ph ysically in the 2nd. We stopped ourselves multiple times on offense with mistakes. The 2 deep safety D imnsho is the best we could put out there. Adams and Melifonwu constantly cleaning up mistakes all day. It could have been a lot worse. It could have been 28 instead of 14 given up to start.

nothing happened yesterday that should be any surprise.

They are a smarter and more fundamental Sound team
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,795
Reaction Score
10,094
The game plan was sound on D - unconventional against the triple option, but sound.

Um, yeah. They had 325 yards rushing, 5.5. yards per rush. That is more than their per game average. Not sure how you think the game plan was sound.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
I'm totally serious, they exploited our defensive edge to perfection. We took bad angles and we're poor in tackling at those positions. The interior of our D from front to the safeties was strong The rookie corners were good. The de's and olb's were exploited. We had multiple 3rd Downs where angles and leverage wrong, play fake bites. First three army drives were a clinic. The D got better. Diaco was right, no way to simulate that in practice. Army was on their game. By the time the D caught up mentally, they were gassed and gashed ph ysically in the 2nd. We stopped ourselves multiple times on offense with mistakes. The 2 deep safety D imnsho is the best we could put out there. Adams and Melifonwu constantly cleaning up mistakes all day. It could have been a lot worse. It could have been 28 instead of 14 given up to start.

nothing happened yesterday that should be any surprise.

They are a smarter and more fundamental Sound team
Can't argue with that. It appeared they always had one more blocker than Uconn had tackler's. One of the announcers commented on the poor angles taken by Adams as well. Melifonwu made some good plays as did Adams. I didn't see enough from the LBer's. They consistently got up the field and found lanes for 3-4 at least it seemed on every play.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Um, yeah. They had 325 yards rushing, 5.5. yards per rush. That is more than their per game average. Not sure how you think the game plan was sound.

What would you have done differently to game plan on D?
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
Can't argue with that. It appeared they always had one more blocker than Uconn had tackler's. One of the announcers commented on the poor angles taken by Adams as well. Melifonwu made some good plays as did Adams. I didn't see enough from the LBer's. They consistently got up the field and found lanes for 3-4 at least it seemed on every play.

Safeties had bad angles because of de and olb failures, Adams and Melifonwu fast enough athletic enough to make the tackles but with de and olb's failure could not keep them behind the chains. There are only a hand full of teams in division 1 football that can play offense like that successfully. Defending it is hard, mentally more than physical. It wears you down mentally if you can't stop the run and you know it's your own mistakes letting it happen. To our team credit they did not crumble but the time on the field took its toll.

We will be better the next time we play. We lost this game bec a use of our own offensive mistakes, not the weakness in our Defense that army exploited.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,795
Reaction Score
10,094
What would you have done differently to game plan on D?

It was clear that the interior knew they were playing dive and were tackling the fullback/tailback when they crossed the line of scrimmage whether they had the ball or not. The issue was with qb and pitch. Graham Stewart looked like he was doing the Icky Shuffle when the qb had the ball in his hands. Feathering out the qb/pitch never works because the defender ends up stutter stepping slowly, which allows the qb to accelerate past him. HIT THE FRIGGING QB!!!! HIT THE QB WHETHER HE KEEPS IT OR PITCHES IT!!! That solves the main problem. The second problem is the safeties were playing too far off the ball. If you see your defenders are not doing well and are tentative, call a run blitz (we used to call them thunder and lightning), where it is clear who you hit. On a thunder for example, last defender on the line takes sharp angle to qb, and OLB (or safety depending on alignment) runs hard to outside. I saw absolutely none of that. Their qb had all day to make a decision. FORCE THE DECISION. Its what creates confusion and mistakes on offense.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
I doubt coaches are dumb enough not to tell the edge defenders to plant the QB whether he keeps it or not. Never know though. They were guessing and that makes you slow to the hit. I think playing the 2 deep safety and not coming up to press was intentional to cover up our edge weakness, which is on both sides. both safeties played terrific games inmsho. Our de's and olb's will get better hopefully
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
5,795
Reaction Score
10,094
I doubt coaches are dumb enough not to tell the edge defenders to plant the QB whether he keeps it or not. Never know though. They were guessing and that makes you slow to the hit. I think playing the 2 deep safety and not coming up to press was intentional to cover up or edge weakness, both safeties played terrific games inmsho

I think that is my point though. There are coaches in the booth who are watching every play. They need to make adjustments. If they practiced what you just said all week, and then played all game the complete opposite, the coach needs to either pull the player or call those run blitzes.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
I think that is my point though. There are coaches in the booth who are watching every play. They need to make adjustments. If they practiced what you just said all week, and then played all game the complete opposite, the coach needs to either pull the player or call those run blitzes.

Once again, everything good and bad that UConn football 2014 is was on full display yesterday. The connect between coaching, game planning and actual play on the field has been head scratching all season.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
3,080
Reaction Score
8,643
....... The second problem is the safeties were playing too far off the ball. If you see your defenders are not doing well and are tentative, call a run blitz (we used to call them thunder and lightning)......

Thunder and lighting - I think UConn calls it marshmellows and whipcream.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
22,836
Reaction Score
9,464
I think that is my point though. There are coaches in the booth who are watching every play. They need to make adjustments. If they practiced what you just said all week, and then played all game the complete opposite, the coach needs to either pull the player or call those run blitzes.

THe other thing to note, is that Army threw only 3 times all game, and on each, and on both big gainers that happened on blown OLB assignments, we had a safety in position to stop the play for a TD. You can argue against the 2-deep safety set, and I was dumbfounded when we stayed with it for the beginning of the game, but as it went all along through the game, it made sense to me. If we didn't do that, the potential was there, for Santiago to throw 7 or 8 times, and get 2 or 3 TD's out of it, and instead of 14-0 at half, it's 28-0, with our offensive mistake making, and system - and the 2 QB thing? 3QB thing now?

Need to ignore it for my sanity.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
13,367
Reaction Score
33,646
Honestly when apathy has set in for Spackler can it get any worse?

I'm looking forward to our annual deep fry turkey tailgait against Cincy. I may bring the Gentleman Jack Daniels to numb the pain of watching the game.
 

zls44

Your #icebus Tour Director
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
9,078
Reaction Score
24,434
traitor71 said:
I don't know how, in the year 2014, anyone can find a way to romanticize a loss to Army.

Because trey were good in 1945 and toughness and grit and they showed emotion and...honestly, who cares.
 

zls44

Your #icebus Tour Director
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
9,078
Reaction Score
24,434
Carl Spackler said:
Safeties had bad angles because of de and olb failures, Adams and Melifonwu fast enough athletic enough to make the tackles but with de and olb's failure could not keep them behind the chains. There are only a hand full of teams in division 1 football that can play offense like that successfully. Defending it is hard, mentally more than physical. It wears you down mentally if you can't stop the run and you know it's your own mistakes letting it happen. To our team credit they did not crumble but the time on the field took its toll. We will be better the next time we play. We lost this game bec a use of our own offensive mistakes, not the weakness in our Defense that army exploited.

Somehow Yale, Rice and Kent State managed the incredible amount of mental tenacity required to defend such an unstoppable juggernaut.
 
Joined
Nov 19, 2011
Messages
5,687
Reaction Score
15,150
Somehow Yale, Rice and Kent State managed the incredible amount of mental tenacity required to defend such an unstoppable juggernaut.

Listening to Diaco this week talk up how difficult it was to stop Army on offense, I became convinced it would be impossible to stop Army on offense. I wonder if his players were convinced too. You would have thought we we're facing Oregon. Didn't really inspire confidence.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2011
Messages
161
Reaction Score
144
What would you have done differently to game plan on D?

Someone should have told the players that when playing against that offense, each player has one and only one, responsibility, one failure and the D is at risk. Someone always has QB and only QB, someone has pitch and only pitch, someone has FB and only FB, and someone has counter and only counter. It may be different people with different responsibility depending on the D called but against that offense that is the very basics to defend it. How many times did we see a UConn defender caught between QB and pitch, to only not be able to effectively defend either? To me, that is poor preparation. Our D at times (many times) looked like it was shocked at what it was seeing.

Our corners which should have been primary or secondary responsibility on the pitch were getting buried by the WR blocks too often. If they were undersized to defend this offense, there should have been a plan B to play different people (back up safeties anyone) at corner.

And you are 100% right on regarding the fact that the outside backers failed miserably as did the DEs defending the edge.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
4,606
Reaction Score
6,998
Someone should have told the players that when playing against that offense, each player has one and only one, responsibility, one failure and the D is at risk. Someone always has QB and only QB, someone has pitch and only pitch, someone has FB and only FB, and someone has counter and only counter. It may be different people with different responsibility depending on the D called but against that offense that is the very basics to defend it. How many times did we see a UConn defender caught between QB and pitch, to only not be able to effectively defend either? To me, that is poor preparation. Our D at times (many times) looked like it was shocked at what it was seeing.

Our corners which should have been primary or secondary responsibility on the pitch were getting buried by the WR blocks too often. If they were undersized to defend this offense, there should have been a plan B to play different people (back up safeties anyone) at corner.

And you are 100% right on regarding the fact that the outside backers failed miserably as did the DEs defending the edge.
There's two sides of the field. Can't only have one man have the QB and pitch man in that case. That would be impossible to cover that much ground that quickly. Army plays fast and gets up field quickly. No drop back, quick lateral movement (spin from QB) and quickly got up field. When they tried to stretch it wide they always seemed to have one more blocker, loading the backfield it seemed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
253
Guests online
2,034
Total visitors
2,287

Forum statistics

Threads
157,990
Messages
4,130,012
Members
10,016
Latest member
RipBenEmek


Top Bottom