Diaco channelling Belicheck

[Srqhusky]

I will break my self-imposed silence (which lasted all of 2 days) for this thread. I was waiting to see how Diaco would handle the press conferences following the Army game. The game already showed me the level of coach he is at this point in time (that is to say that he needs some obvious work from his first year, and maybe that was to be expected). But the post-game press conferences were going to show me what type of leader he was.

Well, if the quotes that Des has is all that he was willing to say, then I have my answer. The fact that he wasn't even able to own a single iota of the mess on Saturday is almost criminal. It really is. And look, I don't expect a first year coach to be perfect. But damn it, I expect him to be man enough to at least say, "I could have made some better pre-game preps and in-game adjustments." My goodness. Chandler was a leader. He owned a loss that wasn't his to own. It's time for Bob Diaco to step up and show the type of leader that HE is...

(I'll go back into my hole now)

Dan I think he is not owning up to the mess Saturday is he does not want to show any type of weakness to his players. they need to know he is strong and confident and setting them up for success. We dont know if his game plan was not executed correctly or not. Lets not forget he has beaten triple option teams before. He does give props to Chandler as well by stating it wasnt his fault and that he wishes he didnt say more. I know he could have said more but I think the loss came as a shock to him and the whole team. So now he is giving the attitude that we are going to shock Cincinnati which is excactly what he should be doing.

 

[whaler11]

Dan I think he is not owning up to the mess Saturday is he does not want to show any type of weakness to his players. they need to know he is strong and confident and setting them up for success. We dont know if his game plan was not executed correctly or not. Lets not forget he has beaten triple option teams before. He does give props to Chandler as well by stating it wasnt his fault and that he wishes he didnt say more. I know he could have said more but I think the loss came as a shock to him and the whole team. So now he is giving the attitude that we are going to shock Cincinnati which is excactly what he should be doing.

Well if you can turn yourself into a pretzel for Pasqualoni, this seems easy.

It seems amazing that anyone would think showing weakness to players would be worse than what he said.

 

[Srqhusky]

Well if you can turn yourself into a pretzel for Pasqualoni, this seems easy.

It seems amazing that anyone would thing showing weakness to players would be worse than what he said.

You focus too much on the negative for me to explain it to you. His statements can also be taken as the team is improving and needs to continue to improve.

 

[whaler11]

You focus too much on the negative for me to explain it to you. His statements can also be taken as the team is improving and needs to continue to improve.

His statements are ridiculous. They are actually more ridiculous than yours.

He has no problems cashing the checks and no problem blaming everyone else for 2-7.

That's the biggest red flag in the world. That anyone gives him a pass is a joke.

 

[Srqhusky]

His statements are ridiculous. They are actually more ridiculous than yours.

He has no problems cashing the checks and no problem blaming everyone else for 2-7.

That's the biggest red flag in the world. That anyone gives him a pass is a joke.

Don't worry about his check cashing unless your the one writing them. There is no doubt he was shocked to lose to Army. Not sure if he said "wow did I screw up" is going to help his team. Also he has a defensive coordinator who is also new at his job so it is more than just Bob, and like I said he has beaten triple option teams before so I think he knows what needs to be done. I see him as angry and determined to fix the team. We will see if he can end the season on a winning streak. Sometimes you have to focus on the message and not just the mess.

 

[chapwilvaug72]

this dude better be able to recroot majorly because hes proven he cant coach

doze recroots will have to post w's next yr despite schematics systemics

ever in history recroots do just opposite of game lack thereof plans and post wins?

 

[whaler11]

Don't worry about his check cashing unless your the one writing them. There is no doubt he was shocked to lose to Army. Not sure if he said "wow did I screw up" is going to help his team. Also he has a defensive coordinator who is also new at his job so it is more than just Bob, and like I said he has beaten triple option teams before so I think he knows what needs to be done. I see him as angry and determined to fix the team. We will see if he can end the season on a winning streak. Sometimes you have to focus on the message and not just the mess.

Yeah I've only been to every home game but one since 1999 and attended dozens of road and bowl games in that time. I guess I'm not the type of person they monetize to pay the coach.

You can excuse away losses to Army if you like based on Notre Dame beating Navy and Air Force. Personally I don't give a about that.

 

[SubbaBub]

His statements are ridiculous. They are actually more ridiculous than yours.

He has no problems cashing the checks and no problem blaming everyone else for 2-7.

That's the biggest red flag in the world. That anyone gives him a pass is a joke.

A few things: I hope he isn't waiting around for ND level recruits/talent.

I do think the D is playing above it's talent/experience level, last week aside. So, he gets some credit for that.

There are way too many coaching issues for my liking, those need to be fixed asap.

 

[Runway Ron]

 

[UConnDan97]

Dan I think he is not owning up to the mess Saturday is he does not want to show any type of weakness to his players. they need to know he is strong and confident and setting them up for success.

I respect you, brotha, but this is ridiculous.

A highly respected defensive mind, and a recent Broyles Award winner, could not figure out how to stop Army from having 10 more minutes of possession than we had in a 60 minute game. I want you to let that sink in for a second. 10 more minutes of possession. Yale had 3 minutes more possession than Army, but we have 10 minutes less.

Then, and this is the egregious part of it all, he goes on to say that this is just a bad football team. But hey, don't worry, because we were "colossally bad prior to his arrival, and now we are just bad", so we are supposed to say "Kudos to you, kind sir! Thank you so much for making us a bad team!" Horse crap! Straight up horse crap! Take some damned ownership of what happened on Saturday, for crying out loud! Man up and show your kids what leadership is about. You have former NFL pros as coaches on the defensive side of the ball along with you. You have an "option-ready" backup QB on the roster (Foxx) to help you prepare all week prior to the game. You have better size, speed, and talent on your squad (remember, "The most athletic safety he has ever coached"). And with all of those advantages, you let that -show happen on Saturday. And then you let the QB take the blame for it. Man #$k up!

 

[Srqhusky]

If you guys listened to what he said, and there may be some coaching issues yes I agree his practices are based on getting fundamentals down before game planning. That is why he looks like he got caught with his pants down

 

[SubbaBub]

If you guys listened to what he said, and there may be some coaching issues yes I agree his practices are based on getting fundamentals down before game planning. That is why he looks like he got caught with his pants down

I can understand that, but the results should be telling him to spend a little more time on game planning. Gaining bad experience can be worse than none.

 

[Carl Spackler]

You focus too much on the negative for me to explain it to you. His statements can also be taken as the team is improving and needs to continue to improve.

I agree - to the fan that follows the program like we all do here, and by that I mean the type of people that are interesting in info about the program in say.....May or June in a calendar year....aren't going to take his statements well, but the casual fan? If they're even paying attention at all, he's just speaking the truth. I don't have an issue with it. I did actually listen to the audio, and I honestly go with my first thought I wrote earlier - first time head coach, and he's hit the rookie wall when it comes to the endless weekly coachspeak to the press.

He'll get through it, and like anything else, got to keep on an even keel. Belichick does it his way, his former boss Parcells - was a lightning rod in the press room. College coaches all build their own relationships with their press people. I'm sure he'll bust through that rookie wall.

 

[Tdaley]

Too many micromanagers on this site ( and all the other sites for that matter). What Bob says or doesn't say at each and every press conference isn't of great importance. Most of think he made a big mistake not calling a time out at the end of the game ( and should admit to it) but we have no idea whether or not it would have change the outcome of the game. If Whitmer throws to Meyers ( on the other side of the field) on that play ( he was open) instead of trying to squeeze it in to Thomas we tie up the game. Jim Calhoun got a pass on his press conferences because he was a very successful coach. He threw his players under the bus many times ( when he felt there was a lack of effort) and rarely blamed himself. We have to cut Bob some slack here. He is very frustrated with his team. I'm not sure he got a great effort from his defense. The jury is out on how good of a game coach he is or how good of a recruiter he is. Nevertheless, we need to give him at least two years to find out. I see many positive things in Diaco which will hopefully begin to translate into wins. Our defense is better than last years defense, our offensive which started off worse than last years offense has improve to the point that its as good as last years offense ( we run the better although we threw the ball better at the end of last year) , and our special teams are better ( we couldn't get our kickoff returns pass the 20 yard line last year). These are only baby steps and we need significant improvements in all areas of the game but we are slowly moving in the right direction. The Central Florida win was bigger than any win we had last year. The Army loss is was bad loss but was any worse than a blow out loss to Buffalo. Four years of not being in a bowl game is tough on the fans but Diaco has been year less than a year. New coaches rarely turn things around in one year. Remember, we only won 3 games last year.

 

[RedStickHusky]

When you're on a road trip with your kids and they ask every hour, "are we there yet?", you can tell them "quit asking, we'll get there when we get there." BD doesn't have that luxury -- he could probably use some help with talking points...

 

[RedStickHusky]

Jim Calhoun got a pass on his press conferences because he was a very successful coach. He threw his players under the bus many times ( when he felt there was a lack of effort) and rarely blamed himself.

Except on Ryan Gomes....

 

[Uconnalliance]

I will break my self-imposed silence (which lasted all of 2 days) for this thread. I was waiting to see how Diaco would handle the press conferences following the Army game. The game already showed me the level of coach he is at this point in time (that is to say that he needs some obvious work from his first year, and maybe that was to be expected). But the post-game press conferences were going to show me what type of leader he was.

Well, if the quotes that Des has is all that he was willing to say, then I have my answer. The fact that he wasn't even able to own a single iota of the mess on Saturday is almost criminal. It really is. And look, I don't expect a first year coach to be perfect. But damn it, I expect him to be man enough to at least say, "I could have made some better pre-game preps and in-game adjustments." My goodness. Chandler was a leader. He owned a loss that wasn't his to own. It's time for Bob Diaco to step up and show the type of leader that HE is...

(I'll go back into my hole now)

The most important game film was 35 minutes south at Yale,did he not know they were gonna run and run and run? How many pass attempts? Less than 10? But his team is a mess!!?? Really?? I shook my head as I left the stadium.

 

[Hoophound]

He didn't game plan correctly for the triple option. Simple as that. Big mistake. Arguing about it is ridiculous. The coaching staff blew the game. The fact that they almost came back is a testament to the effort the kids were putting in. The players know football, they've been playing it most of their lives. Even they know that their defense was wasting men and energy guarding deep passes that were never coming etc. Despite terrible defense, they didn't give up and they almost won anyway.

What we have here is a great coach at strengthening his players mentally and physically and a so so/poor coach in terms of game planning and game management. He will improve his Xs and Os in time. Managing a football game is chaos and it needs to be controlled chaos. I think he will get there, but he needs experience. You have to admire the fight he has put in the dog though. These kids don't give up.

 

[noeynox]

The HC has a lot of growing to do. I see some good things, I see some concerning things. Some of the things that concern me, like clock management down the stretch, can improve with experience. Things, like never accepting ownership over a loss, some guys NEVER do that, and are quick to pat themselves on the back publicly through the press when things go right. UConn fans should be familiar with that as the last two coaches did the same thing. Coaches that do that and win more than they lose, can survive. Coaches that do and lose more than they win, get tuned out by the team. So if this is going to be Coach Bob's MO, he better start winning.

 

[dtrumpet]

He didn't game plan correctly for the triple option. Simple as that. Big mistake. Arguing about it is ridiculous. The coaching staff blew the game. The fact that they almost came back is a testament to the effort the kids were putting in. The players know football, they've been playing it most of their lives. Even they know that their defense was wasting men and energy guarding deep passes that were never coming etc. Despite terrible defense, they didn't give up and they almost won anyway.

What we have here is a great coach at strengthening his players mentally and physically and a so so/poor coach in terms of game planning and game management. He will improve his Xs and Os in time. Managing a football game is chaos and it needs to be controlled chaos. I think he will get there, but he needs experience. You have to admire the fight he has put in the dog though. These kids don't give up.

from Sunday's Courant, for better or worse...
"You're not equipped on your team to show [the triple option] to them," said UConn coach Bob Diaco. "You do the best that you can. It's a major altering thing. It's just the style of blocking is an issue. The whole thing is an issue."

 

[Bonehead]

from Sunday's Courant, for better or worse...
"You're not equipped on your team to show [the triple option] to them," said UConn coach Bob Diaco. "You do the best that you can. It's a major altering thing. It's just the style of blocking is an issue. The whole thing is an issue."

I thought that was the whole purpose of a scout team - scratches head as there is no hair to pull out
How in the world were other teams prepared? I suppose then on th Army FB team they werent equipped to show them a forward pass?

 

[Carl Spackler]

from Sunday's Courant, for better or worse...
"You're not equipped on your team to show [the triple option] to them," said UConn coach Bob Diaco. "You do the best that you can. It's a major altering thing. It's just the style of blocking is an issue. The whole thing is an issue."

Look it's frigging crystal clear now. The guy needs an intervention. All he did, was approach leading this program up against Army thinking like defensive coordinator instead of a head coach. Who gives a rat's ass how complex and fast the triple option is on the field. It's not that hard to build the defense - it's MUCH harder to actually execute it. We get it.

How about focusing on the offensive side of the ball Head Coach Bobby D. That's where you beat Army - by going at their weakness, not focusing all your energy on defending their strength.

The chances of a head coach, admitting such a catastrophic failure in game planning, is Nil. Not happening, the guy publicly would be stupid to do it.

But he did have a catastrophic failure in game planning for Army, and it comes from everything he's done to approach this season, as a full team - offense and defense and it was on full display in his preparation, and then game time execution against this program. The catastrophic failure is that he didn't think like a head coach, and approached like a defensive coordinator. Ignore the frigging triple option - make sure you have players to hit the ball carrier and pitch men - that's it. Focus on your offense.

I had reached this conclusion before, on my own, and his quotes on the game only reinforce it for me.

HUGE learning experience for the guy.

My constant theme for this season - the education of a coach. UCONN is investing in it. I want payback, in form of wins and championships. Learn from this game and move on, the next time we play a team where the mismatch is the center and Nose Guard - run ----king ball down their throats over and over.

 

[BlueMAB]

The defense looked like they had ignored the triple option.

Two safeties deep the entire game against a team with 3 pass attempts.

You can spend all your time working on the offensive gameplan, but it's a waste of time if your defense can't get off the field. They averaged over 5 yards per carry, and had the ball 10 more minutes than we did. I don't want to hear this game was lost on offense. It was lost because the defensive game plan looked like it was designed to prevent the big play in the passing game, while Army did what Army does. Chew up the clock, shorten the game, keep their offense on the field averaging 5 yards a carry.

There's no defending Diaco on this game. There were no discernible adjustments made at halftime, and the staff looked completely outclassed.

 

[Carl Spackler]

The defense looked like they had ignored the triple option.

Two safeties deep the entire game against a team with 3 pass attempts.

You can spend all your time working on the offensive gameplan, but it's a waste of time if your defense can't get off the field. They averaged over 5 yards per carry, and had the ball 10 more minutes than we did. I don't want to hear this game was lost on offense. It was lost because the defensive game plan looked like it was designed to prevent the big play in the passing game, while Army did what Army does. Chew up the clock, shorten the game, keep their offense on the field averaging 5 yards a carry.

There's no defending Diaco on this game. There were no discernible adjustments made at halftime, and the staff looked completely outclassed.

I'll respectfully disagree. Our strengths on defense are our DT's, our ILB's and our Safeties. Our weakness is the DB's, OLB's, and DE's. The structure of the defense, againt the option run offense, emphasized and isolated our strengths, and protected and supported our weakness, rather than vice versa - isolating our weaknesses and covering up our strengths.

 

[BlueMAB]

I'll respectfully disagree. Our strengths on defense are our DT's, our ILB's and our Safeties. Our weakness is the DB's, OLB's, and DE's. The structure of the defense, againt the option run offense, emphasized and isolated our strengths, and protected and supported our weakness, rather than vice versa - isolating our weaknesses and covering up our strengths.

... and failed miserably.

Again, it doesn't matter how good your offense is when it's on the sideline.

 

[Carl Spackler]

... and failed miserably.

Again, it doesn't matter how good your offense is when it's on the sideline.

Failing? Not sure I agree with that, the offense on the sideline, we agree on.

I think somebody needs to introduce the KISS principle to DIaco when it comes to game planning. you don't beat army by focusing all your energy on trying to defend the option. I honestly think he came up with the best defense we could put out there, given our personnel against that option running offense system, and truthfully, if we had an offense that could sustain drives and score, like you say, it's not unreasonable that the very, very most points that the Army offense scores in that game is 21 points. All we need to do, with the defense that Diaco put together, was score more than 21 points. I'm not going to explain why I think that, people complain I write too much as it is, but I've got solid reasoning as to why that is. The game pretty much turned out exactly that way.

I have yet to have any adequate explanation as to what we're doing on offense this season. It was on full display Saturday.

I cannot come up with any reasoning that makes sense for either now or the future. Believe me, that's frustrating for me, because the way my brain works, I can pretty much find a reason for almost anything, teh reasons/reasoning right or wrong? Accurate or inaccurate - TBD - but I'll find a reason, for just about anything. I simply have nothing to say, regarding what we're doing on offense this year, which leads me to the only conclusion I can come up with - and that's they have no idea WTF they are doing on offense, and I do not want that reason to be accurate.

Diaco? The guy is too smart for his own good, sometimes and this Army game is a great example and learning experience IMNSHO, he needs to forget about being a defensive coach, and start being a head coach.

No time like this game, and what happened, to cement that lesson once and for all.

 

[huskysupporter]

I'll respectfully disagree. Our strengths on defense are our DT's, our ILB's and our Safeties. Our weakness is the DB's, OLB's, and DE's. The structure of the defense, againt the option run offense, emphasized and isolated our strengths, and protected and supported our weakness, rather than vice versa - isolating our weaknesses and covering up our strengths.

Our absolute strength on d is our d line including ends. Our ilbs are wildly inconsistent, and our OLBs are not good right now. Safeties make plays in run, struggle v pass. Corner backs are up and down, but it's tough to judge with our lack of pressure. This team desperately needs a Trevardo Williams rushing off the edge.

 

[BNich]

this dude better be able to recroot majorly because hes proven he cant coach

doze recroots will have to post w's next yr despite schematics systemics

ever in history recroots do just opposite of game lack thereof plans and post wins?

Your posts make me think of Jeff Foxworthy's "Redneck word of the day".

 

[BNich]

... and failed miserably.

Again, it doesn't matter how good your offense is when it's on the sideline.

If that's the case, then I would say the defense got beat. They got beaten by an opponent that was better than those across the line. New defensive scheme, in game #9 against a Triple Option which this team has yet to face this season. They got beat. That's it. They didn't suck. They didn't shoot themselves in the foot. Turnovers happen. Things have been better in that regard lately. Can people ever understand we just got beat? At 2-7 this team is not good. Bad teams beat good teams sometimes. They beat UCF at home in adverse weather conditions against a team used to sunny and warm. In a neutral setting against a team with the same record an "older" team they beat our young Huskies. That's it. They were there in the end with the chance to tie. And as someone hoped for, go for 2 and the win. I wouldn't hate the decision! But to think the game plan "failed miserably" instead of the team just getting beat, I don't agree. Good and bad teams get beat by better and or worse teams. This is not a good team and they got beat. That's it.

 

[BlueMAB]

If that's the case, then I would say the defense got beat. They got beaten by an opponent that was better than those across the line. New defensive scheme, in game #9 against a Triple Option which this team has yet to face this season. They got beat. That's it. They didn't suck. They didn't shoot themselves in the foot. Turnovers happen. Things have been better in that regard lately. Can people ever understand we just got beat? At 2-7 this team is not good. Bad teams beat good teams sometimes. They beat UCF at home in adverse weather conditions against a team used to sunny and warm. In a neutral setting against a team with the same record an "older" team they beat our young Huskies. That's it. They were there in the end with the chance to tie. And as someone hoped for, go for 2 and the win. I wouldn't hate the decision! But to think the game plan "failed miserably" instead of the team just getting beat, I don't agree. Good and bad teams get beat by better and or worse teams. This is not a good team and they got beat. That's it.

Yes, I'm sure the coaches are watching the tape and thinking we just "got beat". It's that simple really. We just "got beat" by the same team that lost to Kent St and Yale.

No, we aren't a good team. But who on earth thinks Army is?

Having said that, I'm 99% sure you missed the entire context of my post anyway. Hint: it was directed at the defensive schemes.