Dez responds to Palatine

[UC990411]

http://courantblogs.com/uconn-footb...y-uconn-players-go-in-nfl-draft/#comment-9527


Palatine says:
January 2, 2013 at 10:29 pm
Only Edsall recruits are seniors. P’s oldest recruits are soph. UCn has never even had a soph in the draft let along drafted.

Edsall was Mr. Medicority.

Watch the NFL draft. It will shoot lots of holes in the UConn had no talent argument.

REPLY
dconner says:
January 3, 2013 at 8:06 am
Um, no it doesn’t Palatine, sorry. Lets see how many get drafted on offense where the problems clearly were and by the way, I pointed out. I think the point I’ve tried to make – as well as others and unfortunately some want to ignore because of the judgement-clouding focus on trying to disprove what I wrote, challenge it or ding the head coach – is that you couldn’t line UConn up against Rutgers, Syracuse or Cincinnati for example and say the talent was the same. You can’t say that. They proved it. And when it came down to it, when it came down to making plays in a couple other games, who’s talent prevailed? C’mon man. The team needs to upgrade talent to compete against bigger and better competition. That’s hardly arguable. This isn’t a mystery.

REPLY


For a guy who claims to be a beat writer and not a columnist he sure has some strong opinions. This guys such a damn idiot, again I would respond but I don't want to send him off the deep end again. It's not worth it to me to make a guy want to quit his job.

http://blogs.courant.com/uconn_football/2011/01/ok-im-back.html

 

[Vuce]

dconner says:
January 3, 2013 at 8:06 am
is that you couldn’t line UConn up against Rutgers, Syracuse or Cincinnati for example and say the talent was the same. You can’t say that. They proved it. And when it came down to it, when it came down to making plays in a couple other games, who’s talent prevailed?
l

What about when Uconn lined up against a BCS bowl winning team Louisville? How did that talent look Dez? I like how he left that game out

 

[pj]

This is the rhetorical tactic known as "begging the question." Why did UConn lose? They had less talent. How do we know UConn had less talent? They lost. ... The strange thing is, it works equally well this way: Why did UConn lose? Poor offensive coaching. How do we know UConn had poor offensive coaching? They lost.

How would a scientist distinguish the two possible explanations? He would look at the offensive coordinator's history at coaching, and this collection of players' history of playing. Since the collection of players had only been around once, this wouldn't tell us much, but GDL's long history of failure seems informative.

 

[CL82]

Exactly, PJ. The whole well we lost so we must be less talented assumes that coaching is irrelevant. Line up the best kids and they win? Well they'll have an edge especially one on one, but a well coached team, where the coach understands the strength and weaknesses of the personel and devises an approach that maximizes the strength and minimizes the weakness beat talented poorly coached teams 9 out of ten times. FUCHCRE had his faults but he understood how put his teams in a position to win. This whole, well our personel are less talented line of crap is lamest excuse for failure out there.

 

[sportsart]

I'm sure it had nothing to do with an NFL coach (cough, cough) trying to teach a college OL a pro blocking scheme. Nothing what so ever.

Why is it Foley had so much success with roughly the same level of talent?

Questions Des, I'm sure, has an answer for. Or does he.

 

[B1GEast]

Here's my reply, it's not approved yet

Bigeastconf says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
January 5, 2013 at 11:37 am
Dez, Edsall didn’t leave the cup board bare. There was a lot of talent on the team, enough to win more than 5 games. We consistently produced 1000 yard RB’s, but all of a sudden over night, our OL wasn’t any good. The scheme changed, we went to a complicated zone block scheme that wasn’t suited to the skill set of our current OL. Foley is a solid OL coach, but they move him to TE coach.

The only positive for this years team was Don Brown’s defense, and he’s gone. This is now going to be year three for coach P. I didn’t see any improvement in year two, in fact you can say the team regressed.

Coach has no more excuses in my book. He needs to have a winning record and go to a bowl. Edsall set a standard and built a solid program that coach P inherited. In just two years somehow this program is a shadow of its former self.

Coach P was hired to take the program to new heights and has failed thus far. In my opinion he would benefit by taking more of a pragmatic approach, best of luck to coach P, we all want what’s best for Uconn and that’s winning.

Bigeastconf

 

[sdhusky]

This is the rhetorical tactic known as "begging the question." Why did UConn lose? They had less talent. How do we know UConn had less talent? They lost. ... The strange thing is, it works equally well this way: Why did UConn lose? Poor offensive coaching. How do we know UConn had poor offensive coaching? They lost.

How would a scientist distinguish the two possible explanations? He would look at the offensive coordinator's history at coaching, and this collection of players' history of playing. Since the collection of players had only been around once, this wouldn't tell us much, but GDL's long history of failure seems informative.

He is restricting the question of talent to the offense. Did we have much talent there?

Whitmer has more turnovers than any QB is the land. Its tough to overcome that because with the offense we were trying to run, it all starts there.

The offensive line is the next key place. Our line didn't look good until it got coached up as the year went along.

McCombs is fine, but not a game changing playmaker. RG is a game changing playmaker. NW is a playmaker but not a great WR. The other WR are better WR, but not playmakers.

So, if you are trying to run a pro style offense and your QB and line isn't very good, you aren't going to be very good.

 

[whaler11]

The only way to describe Des at this point is 'on tilt'.

 

[whaler11]

He is restricting the question of talent to the offense. Did we have much talent there?

Whitmer has more turnovers than any QB is the land. Its tough to overcome that because with the offense we were trying to run, it all starts there.

The offensive line is the next key place. Our line didn't look good until it got coached up as the year went along.

McCombs is fine, but not a game changing playmaker. RG is a game changing playmaker. NW is a playmaker but not a great WR. The other WR are better WR, but not playmakers.

So, if you are trying to run a pro style offense and your QB and line isn't very good, you aren't going to be very good.

Yet so many of those players look less talented due to the change in offensive line coaching. Whitmer spent the entire year getting beat up - that is a ridiculously tough kid. You try avoiding interceptions when you get drilled on every play.

 

[SAMCRO]

Dez is not wrong that there was not a ton of talent on Offense, but there was enough talent on O, especially with our D, to realistically beat the likes of WMU the past two years, ISU and Vandy in '11, Temple, USF, and NCSU this year. We had talent to win 7 - 9 games each of the past two seasons. I don't think people realistically expected 10+ win seasons and BCS bids, but we were out coached in a number of very winnable games where we had better talent.

 

[BlueMAB]

Give Dez the argument on Rutgers, Cincy, and Saracuse.

Ask him if the talent level was comparable to Temple, Western Michigan, USF, and NC State?

 

[upstater]

You give good offensive coaches this level of talent, and they produce a very good offense. The problem with the offense was not only play-calling, but the whole design. These OL, WRs, TEs, and QB are above the middle of the BCS level. I have questions about RB, especially depth. But the rest of the crew looks good to me. Whitmer in particular should have had a much better year. With the WR crew and Williams in the slot, Griffin and Delahunt in double TE packages, this offense should have been ripping up defenses with good coaching. Whitmer to me looks like the best QB UConn has had since Orlovsky.

The kid is not being put into position to succeed.

 

[UC990411]

I'll answer my own question. Dez feels this way because Edsall gave him limited access to the team. He clearly didn't like Edsall so he uses the talent argument. If Edsall were still here he would say the issue is with coaching. Guy is a clown. That and he can't have a debate because he's as sensitive as a puppy

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I'm currently debating whether to continue my discussion with Des (I'm Tom, who replied to his comment on Pal's second reply).

I am offended beyond description over the stance that P & GDL have taken (and Des has bought into) that unless you have more talent than your opponent, a win should be beyond reasonable expectations. I also view the idea that we have no talent as an insult to my intelligence. Can we compete with top SEC schools? No, absolutely not. Should we be able to win more games than we lose against the recent versions (2011 & 2012) of the BE? Absolutely! Should we be able to win more than we lose against the FBS schools we've scheduled over the past two seasons? Again, absolutely! Add in the automatic win to open each season, anything less than eight wins either of the prior two years is a failure considering the personnel we had.

I had my normal seats (sec 241) for the Cincinnati game and in all candor the only difference between the two teams was the level of intensity of the coaching staff and how that translated to the field of play. The Bearcats were in no way, shape or form a more talented team but the were completely a better coached team than we were that day. Anyone claiming anything different is lying to themselves.

 

[HistoryMajor]

There's (at least) two different matters being debated here
1. Does UConn have enough good talent - especially on offense. IMO we need to improve. Our O line was overwhelmed at times. With all due respects to LM, we need a further upgrade at running back. Receiver were perhaps average over the entire Big East and we need upgrades there as well. As Dez says, it's hard to argue these facts but I'm sure someone will
2. But the second point is about Coach P. I 100% agree he is a terrible game manager; doesn't use clock management hardly at all; seems to prepare our team poorly and has an OC that is befuddling. IMO there are at least three games we should have won over the last 2 seasons. Note I said "at least" three and there's no arguing if you think it's 4 or 5.

But to the basic point. we DO need to upgrade the offense. If we stand still, it will be like going backwards.

 

[uconnbill]

A good coach coaches towards the teams strengths, something that didn't happen this past year. If the line has trouble they you use more short passes and misdirections.

 

[CTHUSKY74]

Some great points above. I have been upset all season with the fact that this coaching staff can't do more with the talent we have. I don't necessarily believe we have more talent or depth than the teams we play against, but that doesn't mean we couldn't win against those teams. I've always believed that the most successful coaches out there in any sport are the ones who can adjust their approach to the talent level and the strengths and weaknesses of their roster. I think Brian Kelly always did that everywhere he's been. Then, they recruit the type of players they need to run their preferred system. This group decided the system they wanted to run, implemented it and then started complaining that they don't have the right players to run it. Not enough adjustments made in the scheme to allow our team to succeed. If these coaches will only be able to succeed when they recruit the level of talent they feel they need-- we will never win! Our opponents will consistently out-recruit us and have consistently out-coached us in games. The adjustments the other teams make in the second half of games always seem to take us by surprise but our adjustments are completely transparent to our opponents. I do believe we will get better under this staff, but unfortunately the improvement will probably be less than our opponents are experiencing with their staffs.

 

[businesslawyer]

There's (at least) two different matters being debated here
1. Does UConn have enough good talent - especially on offense. IMO we need to improve. Our O line was overwhelmed at times. With all due respects to LM, we need a further upgrade at running back. Receiver were perhaps average over the entire Big East and we need upgrades there as well. As Dez says, it's hard to argue these facts but I'm sure someone will
2. But the second point is about Coach P. I 100% agree he is a terrible game manager; doesn't use clock management hardly at all; seems to prepare our team poorly and has an OC that is befuddling. IMO there are at least three games we should have won over the last 2 seasons. Note I said "at least" three and there's no arguing if you think it's 4 or 5.

But to the basic point. we DO need to upgrade the offense. If we stand still, it will be like going backwards.

I don't think there is an argument on whether we need to upgrade our offensive personnel. Of course we do. We've had below Big East offensive personnel the last two years. But our offensive personnel, combined with our defensive personnel, was good enough that a good coach would have finished above .500 in the Big East both years. We went a combined 3-9.

And I'm really tired of SDH's "Whitmer isn't good because he had too many turnovers" crap. We as a team had too many turnovers and the first part of the season he made mistakes QBs with more experience don't make. But guess what -- if we could have run the ball a lick, and always been in third and long, anyone really think turnovers wouldn't have been less. We lost this year because we changed all our OL schemes and couldn't execute the new ones nearly as well. Period.

 

[Waquoit]

But to the basic point. we DO need to upgrade the offense. If we stand still, it will be like going backwards.

No kidding. The thing is that the talent issue is just a red herring being used to make excuses for PP and GDL's incompetence.

 

[whaler11]

I don't think there is an argument on whether we need to upgrade our offensive personnel. Of course we do. We've had below Big East offensive personnel the last two years. But our offensive personnel, combined with our defensive personnel, was good enough that a good coach would have finished above .500 in the Big East both years. We went a combined 3-9.

And I'm really tired of SDH's "Whitmer isn't good because he had too many turnovers" crap. We as a team had too many turnovers and the first part of the season he made mistakes QBs with more experience don't make. But guess what -- if we could have run the ball a lick, and always been in third and long, anyone really think turnovers wouldn't have been less. We lost this year because we changed all our OL schemes and couldn't execute the new ones nearly as well. Period.

We don't know if they would have blocked if they didn't change the scheme. They couldn't have been worse, but they might not have been too much better.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

The truth as usual is probably somewhere in between. I personally don't think we had a ton of talent on offense. But my God, we had enough to win 7 or 8 games against that easy schedule.

We put up 6 points against an atrocious USF defense. I don't think there's 1 other FBS school that USF can hold to 6 ducking points. Is Dez or any other Pasqualista gonna tell me our offensive talent is worse than bottom rung Sun Belt or WAC teams?

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Later in the debate he pointed out that on certain plays Temple's offensive line was better. I give up. He isn't attempting to have an intelligent debate, he's merely excusing P & GDL from any culpability.

 

[Chin Diesel]

I got the "Beat the Dead Horse" award for ending the thread.

Des conceded a draw to all of us and said he's now moving on to 2013.

So, here's a few 2013 articles he can research.

1. Under PP has there been a shift on weight room programs? We know he doesn't want hulking, lumbering guys, but the past season, the players looked smaller than every BE opponent. How about an in-depth article with the strength and conditioning coach discussing how they try to build up players during the off-season.

2. What did WM mean when sources said WM told PP that play calling duties are in need of an up grade.

3. RB depth. Why was it that DeLorenzo and Willams never saw playing time when McCombs was healthy? What do they need to do to earn more playing time in 2013?

4. WR's. Why is it that Matt C. hasn't recruited or developed WR's in his entire time at Uconn.

5. Why is it that MAC teams consistently find and develop 300yd passers that go on to the NFL but Uconn hasn't done it in a decade?

 

[BlueDogs]

D

What about when Uconn lined up against a BCS bowl winning team Louisville? How did that talent look Dez? I like how he left that game out

dont confuse the matter with relevant facts.

 

[ruskin]

Dez loses the argument right off the bat when he says "UConn couldn't line up against Rutgers". Please. The score should have been at least 6-6 or 10-6 UConn at halftime, "We didn't need to use a time out, we were in good shape there". That was the story of the game, although Dez didn't choose to mention it until the last paragraph of his story (part of the year-long supression of PP/GDL fails).

The problem is PP/GDL want to blame Edsall for their failures and Dez unfortunately is buying into it. Rob Lunn says there wasn't that much of a talent dropoff between 2010 and 2012. I'll trust him over the Horde.

Robert Lunn ‏@TheFatWhiteGuy
The offensive lines under Foley were better than those under Wilson before him and DeLeone after. The talent swings year-year weren't big