Clock Management 101

[whaler11]

I get that there doesn't seem to be anyone on the sidelines with a pulse....

But the next time you are down 11 with timeouts left and have first and goal at the 15 and less than a minute left...

Kick the damned field goal on first down and try to get the onside kick with time left. 6th graders with playstation understand how to control the clock, it's not to much to ask of a BCS staff.

 

[ruskin]

+1000. . . . . all of above true but what makes it worse is gadget play after onside recovery w/11 seconds left and one timeout left. (Assuming the scoreboard was correct after all the screwing around earlier). Completely stupefying. Throw to middle of field, get 15-20 or more yds in 4-5 secs. and then go hail mary. Some of y'all didn't think not taking knee vs. USF was big deal. Now there's 2 examples of WTF clock management at end of game.
Was ready to give PP a pass on today until the end.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

HCPP was a good hire despite how badly it's playing out. Patience, he'll have it fixed before he's 70.

 

[jdb50]

We were pretty surprised that PP chose to try the gadget play on 1st down after the onside recovery. Not taking the last timeout and trying a throw into the end zone was the last bonehead play on a day filled with them.

 

[Sean]

I was probably the most pissed I've ever been at a game in person today for this very reason.

When all the fans walked out, so did PP. Pretty much stopped trying to win. It's like he decided they didn't have a shot, and he wouldn't call a timeout until his players proved they had a shot. Just beyond stupefying.

Also, with a walk-on QB, we attempted 45 passes today. That is not putting your players in position to succeed.

 

[gars44]

I was probably the most pissed I've ever been at a game in person today for this very reason.

When all the fans walked out, so did PP. Pretty much stopped trying to win. It's like he decided they didn't have a shot, and he wouldn't call a timeout until his players proved they had a shot. Just beyond stupefying.

Also, with a walk-on QB, we attempted 45 passes today. That is not putting your players in position to succeed.

Except there are not a lot of cards to play. You'd like to see a miracle, but that's not happening. This is just a sad team. Randy had a few of them also. But this team is sad.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Most of those passes occurred once UConn was despirately behind. Got to pass early to get a lead. That's how the game is played today in the rest of the country.

 

[cheech63]

Most of those passes occurred once UConn was despirately behind. Got to pass early to get a lead. That's how the game is played today in the rest of the country.

The rest of the counry has playmakers at receiver.Uconn does not.

 

[gioff23]

A couple of thoughts:

1. when you need a TD and a FG and you are inside the 20, you go for the TD not the FG. This is not a video game, it's reality;
2. I too did not understand the desperate play to end the game. The TE down the middle was open all day. Get 15-20 yards, call a TO, and then figure out next play.
3. I know the buck stops with the HC, but is PP now calling the plays? I assume it is GD, but perhaps I missed something;
4. And the team abandoned the run early. LM got 10 carries. I don't know why this team, esp after SU, tries to win by putting the game in the hands of a walk-on and challenged receivers. It's not fair to say we only threw when we were down because we were down the entire game, besides we did not abandon the run vs SU, where we were also down.

The fact of the matter is that this team did not show up, again. Now that we can put on the staff, and PP. This team does not have the intangibles prior teams had - the fortitude to fight and pull games out. They have been a disappointment, not because of their record, but because they have not played the UConn way. I was hoping for 7-5, expecting less (too many changes, too few playas). But this was a team that left so many W's on the field. I will be there on sat to cheer them on and wish them well, but this is 2006 all over again. And like then, I hope this is simply a bump in the road and that the groundwork laid in 11 can translate to better play and better results in 12.

 

[businesslawyer]

A couple of thoughts:

1. when you need a TD and a FG and you are inside the 20, you go for the TD not the FG. This is not a video game, it's reality;
2. I too did not understand the desperate play to end the game. The TE down the middle was open all day. Get 15-20 yards, call a TO, and then figure out next play.
3. I know the buck stops with the HC, but is PP now calling the plays? I assume it is GD, but perhaps I missed something;
4. And the team abandoned the run early. LM got 10 carries. I don't know why this team, esp after SU, tries to win by putting the game in the hands of a walk-on and challenged receivers. It's not fair to say we only threw when we were down because we were down the entire game, besides we did not abandon the run vs SU, where we were also down.

The fact of the matter is that this team did not show up, again. Now that we can put on the staff, and PP. This team does not have the intangibles prior teams had - the fortitude to fight and pull games out. They have been a disappointment, not because of their record, but because they have not played the UConn way. I was hoping for 7-5, expecting less (too many changes, too few playas). But this was a team that left so many W's on the field. I will be there on sat to cheer them on and wish them well, but this is 2006 all over again. And like then, I hope this is simply a bump in the road and that the groundwork laid in 11 can translate to better play and better results in 12.

I disagree that this is 2006 all over again. Except at the skill positions, this team is way ahead of 2006. This team is full of players who were recruited by a BCS school and were good enough to qualify for a Fiesta Bowl. Here is the bottom line -- we lost a good deal of talent on O, and we'll never know how much better or worse our O would be with other coaches and other schemes. But this I know -- we returned 9 starters, nine, including 4 who were playing at an all-league level, from what was a rock solid D over the second half of the season, and now our D is not good. What conclusions can one rationally draw from that other than we have not gotten enough performance out of those players?