Corey Chavous.....

[Nostical]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

 

[Exit 4]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

I like Corey Chavous - he should graduate to the next level of College FB game calling. It probably will never happen for him, but I think he is a solid analyst...and more over way better than most who call games at this level of football (teams ranked 60 - 120).

 

[Stainmaster]

So how is our Nostical W-L looking after today?

 

[Nostical]

So how is our Nostical W-L looking after today?

Our game was a Nostical loss. We were not only outplayed, we were undeniably out-coached.
On the other hand I won big on Clemson and still have USC vs Utah.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

But they did use a TE on a third and long screen. Guess they were hoping he could juke the defender, bounce out to the sideline, cut back sharp to the inside and take it
to the house. I really like #80, but that was a stupid call. And definitely not a part of the TEs skill set.

 

[Colt house75]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

I don't know..... playing off and soft not looking too reliable right now. Part of a philosophy (bend but don't break) that right now appears to be cracking.
Everything appears to be a struggle. Not good.

 

[noeynox]

Bloom needs to hang on to the ball after contact. He has dropped passes after getting hit all year.

 

[Nostical]

I'd love it if the coaching staff would sit, watch, and listen to the broadcast to hear Chavous's comments. The horde can question during pressers but they have no credibility with the coaches, nor do we Boneyard experts. But Chavous played the game at all levels and knows his stuff. Plus, he's able to articulate it without reservation.That third down when we stayed deep in coverage and literally gifted them space to convert the first down made us look stupid and inept. And that's exactly what he implied. Our defensive game plan was inept---and we never adjusted.

 

[JMick]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

RE: The Tight Ends: The biggest problem is that we have to keep them in to block. Our line needs the help, so it's often max protect with only 3 routes being run. This also explains, at least in part, why it's harder for the WR to get open.

 

[jdb50]

If we had someone to rush the passer, preferably 2 people to do this,the softer coverage might be more effective. Our inability to use our TE's is not just due to pass pro needs, we really don't try and get them involved. Especially in the endzone when we are in the red zone. If anyone has had trouble holding onto the ball it's Noel Thomas. Today the rest of the team joined in to fight for that award. Arkeel is the only offensive skill player who didn't spit the bit today.

 

[sub legacy]

was absolutely correct and right on point about our effort. We played too soft a zone, yet Cincy, playing man with inexperienced DB's, gave us fits all night. They had wide open looks. We had very few. We never used our big tight ends in the red zone. We tackled poorly. We wasted time when we needed all the minutes we could salvage.
Chavous was blunt and on point. It wasn't complimentary but it was absolutely correct. He was impressive as an analyst.

Translation: "Soft 'bend but don't break' defense and predictable offense doesn't win games."

Hence, UConn will continue to lose competitive (if not winnable) games with that philosophy. Not really finger-pointing; just piggybacking off of your point.

 

[sportsart]

If we had someone to rush the passer, preferably 2 people to do this,the softer coverage might be more effective. Our inability to use our TE's is not just due to pass pro needs, we really don't try and get them involved. Especially in the endzone when we are in the red zone. If anyone has had trouble holding onto the ball it's Noel Thomas. Today the rest of the team joined in to fight for that award. Arkeel is the only offensive skill player who didn't spit the bit today.

You got the wrong guy. Noel Thomas has great hands. Rarely drop any reasonable pass he is able to touch.

 

[JMick]

You got the wrong guy. Noel Thomas has great hands. Rarely drop any reasonable pass he is able to touch.

did you watch tonights game....?

 

[sportsart]

did you watch tonights game....?

One game in the rain with not so terrif throws does not equate to a WR with the drops. Did you not see any other games this year?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I'd love it if the coaching staff would sit, watch, and listen to the broadcast to hear Chavous's comments. The horde can question during pressers but they have no credibility with the coaches, nor do we Boneyard experts. But Chavous played the game at all levels and knows his stuff. Plus, he's able to articulate it without reservation.That third down when we stayed deep in coverage and literally gifted them space to convert the first down made us look stupid and inept. And that's exactly what he implied. Our defensive game plan was inept---and we never adjusted.

Nos,

That would be like asking Paul Johnson to watch film on the run and shoot and expecting him to change his offensive approach.

The defense we want won't get there until we get bigger at CB & DE and more experienced throughout the defense.

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

Our safeties are BAD in man coverage. If they don't stay off 10 yards, they will undoubtedly get beat deep.

Every team that runs a spread will know this and take advantage. We don't just need to cover closer, but better overall. Pick your poison...give up 6 yards on a quick-out, or get blasted over the top for 40 yards (both have happened lately).

Chavous has no context for his comments. Of course we need to do a few things differently. We're 3-5 for crying out loud. If we didn't screw up every 15 seconds, we wouldn't be 3-5. He doesn't know that we don't have either the personnel, or the coaches to improve these things right now, and a change so drastic would have us losing by 50 instead of 20. I thought he made quite a few mistakes that came from lack of film study (like the praise for Levy early in the broadcast, and blasting Vechery for snap issues, of which he's had 2 that i can remember)....but maybe i'm just salty from my usual late October UCONN-based disappointment.

Damn it, i'm bummed right now. At 3-3 i thought we were pretty good and absolutely moving in the right direction. At 3-5 it's a very different story. Especially given that the last 2 games were just soul-crushing in the way they went down.

 

[epark88]

Obi just gave up another 20-yd pass play.

-__-

...

 

[Nostical]

Chavous has no context for his comments.

Please. No commentator does. They aren't in the inner sanctum --nor are members of the horde-- but the eyes don't deceive and years of playing the game, watching lots of teams that do and evaluating talent gives him plenty enough context for this discussion. I for one disagree with your comment that our safeties can't cover. Even so, what about our corners. No press coverage--wide open gaps in the zone. No QB pressure--no safety blitzes. If you don't believe another D coordinator could change the dynamic, why ever change coaches?
If you ask me to choose between who is failing us more--our coaches or our players I say it's the coaches.

 

[Nostical]

That would be like asking Paul Johnson to watch film on the run and shoot and expecting him to change his offensive approach.

I hear you Tom but have to disagree. This isn't that dramatic a change. Our defensive players may not be stellar but it's clear our overall defensive philosophy isn't working. I'm sure you recall the definition of insanity. I'm afraid our coaches may have sadly reached that plateau. We need an intervention by a competent therapist.

 

[uconnric]

Translation: "Soft 'bend but don't break' defense and predictable offense doesn't win games."

Hence, UConn will continue to lose competitive (if not winnable) games with that philosophy. Not really finger-pointing; just piggybacking off of your point.

Except when Brown was DC, it was essentially the defense that Edsall employed.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Issue one - our CB's do not have the size for press coverage. If we attempt this, there is a very good chance that they will get beaten deep.

Issue two, our safeties do not have the speed to recover deep, bringing them in closer to the LOS (and at times blitzing one of them) would risk a deep strike to a open WR.

At this stage in the team's development, as difficult as it may be for fans to accept, the philosophy is for the opponent to be required to execute a long, multiple play drive to score. I realize that it sounds weak basing a defense on waiting for an opponent's mistake but unfortunately this is where we are right now.

I don't see how the staff can sell the team on a gambling, high risk, high reward philosophy in mid-late October when an entirely different philosophy was preached until now. Once a more aggressive defense can (confidently) be run without a very high risk, we will tighten up our zone (also, another offseason with Balis for the likes of Ormsby, Carrezola, Stapleton, etc. will help greatly) and improve our pass rush.

I do have some background on this (being a lifelong NY Giants fan) as we (the Giants) had a horrific offense, a weak secondary but a ridiculous amount of talent in our defensive front seven in the mid to late 1970's (think the team with Pisarcik's fumble). When we changed regimes (and brought in Bill Parcells as defensive coordinator) we no longer blitzed, we no longer had defensive linemen shooting the gap (which led to Jack Gregory and John Mendenhall eventually moving on in trades to rid the team of disgruntled players) and our secondary played a deep shell in coverage. The defense went from one of the better units in the NFL to a couple of seasons where while (with a couple of exceptions) not giving up an extraordinary amount of points, was giving up more yards than most teams. Once the defense added players, the secondary began utilizing tighter coverage, the defense would blitz on opportune times and the defense became one of the best in the NFL. For the record, Parcells taught Al Groh who taught Bob Diaco.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Except when Brown was DC, it was essentially the defense that Edsall employed.

??????

Are you serious?

 

[JMick]

When we changed regimes (and brought in Bill Parcells as defensive coordinator) we no longer blitzed, we no longer had defensive linemen shooting the gap (which led to Jack Gregory and John Mendenhall eventually moving on in trades to rid the team of disgruntled players) and our secondary played a deep shell in coverage. The defense went from one of the better units in the NFL to a couple of seasons where while (with a couple of exceptions) not giving up an extraordinary amount of points, was giving up more yards than most teams. Once the defense added players, the secondary began utilizing tighter coverage, the defense would blitz on opportune times and the defense became one of the best in the NFL. For the record, Parcells taught Al Groh who taught Bob Diaco.

It's pretty obvious that this has been the gameplan. Diaco isn't stupid. If he's running soft coverages without bringing pressure it's because he thinks it gives us the best chance to win with our current personnel.

 

[BlueDogs]

For a pass defense to work you need at least one area of strength you can leverage. If we had a pass rush, the DBs would be in better shape. Conversely of the DBs were good in cover, DL has time to create pressure. The LBs can create pressure and also take away the quick pass. The LBs can neither blitz well or cover well.

The only phase of our D that works well is the interior run stop. The rest is a mess.

 

[Doggie Style]

One game in the rain with not so terrif throws does not equate to a WR with the drops. Did you not see any other games this year?

The rain didn't seem to bother Cincy at all! I just think we continue to make excuses for this continued lack of performance on both sided of the ball.... It's very frustrating.