In '07 we had the consecutive home wins against Louisville (the Larry Taylor fair catch game), USF (the Scott Lutrus/Greg Robinson game) and our first ever win against a ranked team) and then Rutgers (Saturday night game with the Rent the most full it ever was -- we had plenty of sell outs on paper but that is the only time there literally were no empty seats in the stadium). That was pretty great too.
Both things are true - we are unarguably the top hoops program of the 21st century when you include women and men; AND it is better when other people say it, not us.
The problem with a losing program with no direction is that people with limited financial resources and limited free time are not going to invest in something that makes them miserable. Ollie did that. Hurley's willingness to run through a brick wall for a victory invigorates me even when his overzelousness can hurt us. I can deal with losing but not apathy from the coach.based on the small crowds I was seeing at the end of the Ollie era, there were a lot of basketball "hobbyists" who weren't making it to games. Lets see what happens with football in the next couple of years.
I think a better coach would have done better.Edsall 1.0 was the man
Agreed. Edsall 1.0 was flawed as well. His offense always was unimaginative and outdated. He got some breaks here and there, but UConn definitely could have done better.I think a better coach would have done better.
Yep. Stubborn and unimaginative. Added lazy the 2nd time around. There was a breakdown by an opposing coach that got printed where he pointed out that what you saw pre snap was exactly what was coming on both sides of the ball. No mystery to what they were trying to do was how it was explained.Edsall 2.0 was virtually the same as 1.0. He just didn’t have the same work ethic in the end.
College football changed and he refused to adapt.
Yep. Stubborn and unimaginative. Added lazy the 2nd time around. There was a breakdown by an opposing coach that got printed where he pointed out that what you saw pre snap was exactly what was coming on both sides of the ball. No mystery to what they were trying to do was how it was explained.
Look at it this way, it gives you and other PC fans something to criticize us about on your forum (the monastery? the rectory? whatever it's called). You don't have much ammunition to criticize the basketball program these days.