Diaco did not inherit a complete disaster. Quite the opposite. | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Diaco did not inherit a complete disaster. Quite the opposite.

Status
Not open for further replies.
...and how many wins would those 14 have produced (not named Casey Cochrane).

Everyone's right - this is the dumbest post in Boneyard history. I'm trying to figure out what your deal is, Palatine. Were you the one who came up with #uptick, and want to cement it for all eternity? I can't fathom why this is so hard for you to admit you're wrong...
 
Hoophound said:
It is almost impossible to argue the talent of the team Diaco inherited vs what P inherited. Scheme, coaching and confidence have an awful lot to do with it. Todman was our offense and P didn't have him to work with. He still won 5 games.

TJ played Casey and he quickly proved to be our best QB in years. The OL improved almost overnight and we closed the year strong.
The teams we beat had bad seasons but Memphis was pretty good the following year and Rutgers was mediocre, if I remember right. P would have lost those games because he had lost the team entirely.

Diaco came in to evaluate and tear everything down. However, he also made horrible coaching decisions and his staff is still pretty lost today when on the field. I like Diaco and I hope he can learn on the job with the players and become a good game day coach. He is clearly good at running a program, respecting the fans and recruiting.

Still, I can't help but think that people that feel TJ wouldn't have done much better last year aren't being honest with themselves. Yes he had less talent than the year before due to matriculation, but he also would have had time to prepare and set things straight. He fixed a lot in a few weeks and I think it is probably best to say nothing at all than to argue that he wouldn't have done well. He earned a lot of respect and it is only fair to let his work speak for itself and leave it at that. I have no reason to believe he wouldn't have succeeded as our coach yet I have a handful of reasons to believe he would have. We'll never know. If I were TJ reading this board, I'd think you guys poo pooping my work were delusional after I closed the season with 3 straight wins and played Casey after he had been 3rd string under P. He did everything a miracle worker would have been able to do in the short time allotted. I like to let that be his legacy here, he is a great guy. We may see him here again someday.
Expand ...

Would we likely have exceeded 2-10 last year if TJ stayed? Absolutely yes. Would TJ have been up to the task of not just coaching someone else's recruits on game day but managing a college football program? I have no idea. What I do know is that the market didn't jump all over him with offers to do so when he left. Isn't that likely to be evidence of at least what a few score of college AD's thought?
 
Hoophound said:
It is almost impossible to argue the talent of the team Diaco inherited vs what P inherited. Scheme, coaching and confidence have an awful lot to do with it. Todman was our offense and P didn't have him to work with. He still won 5 games.

TJ played Casey and he quickly proved to be our best QB in years. The OL improved almost overnight and we closed the year strong.
The teams we beat had bad seasons but Memphis was pretty good the following year and Rutgers was mediocre, if I remember right. P would have lost those games because he had lost the team entirely.

Diaco came in to evaluate and tear everything down. However, he also made horrible coaching decisions and his staff is still pretty lost today when on the field. I like Diaco and I hope he can learn on the job with the players and become a good game day coach. He is clearly good at running a program, respecting the fans and recruiting.

Still, I can't help but think that people that feel TJ wouldn't have done much better last year aren't being honest with themselves. Yes he had less talent than the year before due to matriculation, but he also would have had time to prepare and set things straight. He fixed a lot in a few weeks and I think it is probably best to say nothing at all than to argue that he wouldn't have done well. He earned a lot of respect and it is only fair to let his work speak for itself and leave it at that. I have no reason to believe he wouldn't have succeeded as our coach yet I have a handful of reasons to believe he would have. We'll never know. If I were TJ reading this board, I'd think you guys poo pooping my work were delusional after I closed the season with 3 straight wins and played Casey after he had been 3rd string under P. He did everything a miracle worker would have been able to do in the short time allotted. I like to let that be his legacy here, he is a great guy. We may see him here again someday.
Expand ...



TJ played Casey after the other QB's failed. Let's not go crazy and act like he knew what he had in Casey when P didn't.

Bottom line is his resume beyond being a position coach is 4 games as an offensive coordinator of a terrible offense, and a 3-5 record as an interim coach, with the 3 wins against bad teams. I'm not trying to be critical of him, being an offensive coordinator under P, and then taking over an 0-4 team is a really tough situation. He might be capable of being a good head coach, I have no idea. But there's a reason he wasn't really seriously considered here, and that he hasn't jumped right into a head coaching job anywhere else.
 
I agree with Palatine to a point. There is no excuse for how bad UConn was last year, and there is no excuse for the litany of brain cramps that Diaco has in games. Stop blaming the players, we are not playing Alabama and LSU, we are losing to USF.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
I agree with Palatine to a point. There is no excuse for how bad UConn was last year, and there is no excuse for the litany of brain cramps that Diaco has in games. Stop blaming the players, we are not playing Alabama and LSU, we are losing to USF.
Expand ...

I agree with the second sentence. But what reason do you have to think our players are better than USF's?
 
.-.
J187Money said:
I don't think they are necessarily. Doesn't mean we shouldn't have won that game, however.
Expand ...

Eh, it's tough to say we should've won a game in which we gave up a million yards in the 2nd half. Squandered opportunities aside, we're not going to win many games doing that.
 
pepband99 said:
...and how many wins would those 14 have produced (not named Casey Cochrane).

Everyone's right - this is the dumbest post in Boneyard history. I'm trying to figure out what your deal is, Palatine. Were you the one who came up with #uptick, and want to cement it for all eternity? I can't fathom why this is so hard for you to admit you're wrong...
Expand ...
Because the evidence says I'm right. That was not a 2-10 team.. And the people throwing the players under the bus are wrong.

I'm still giving Diaco the benefit of the doubt. I'm just saying he brought 2-10 on himself. And he did, and anyone who followed his own statements knows he did.
 
There's a profound difference between "throwing the players under the bus" and "not tarring and feathering the coaching staff".
 
Palatine said:
Because the evidence says I'm right. That was not a 2-10 team.. And the people throwing the players under the bus are wrong.

I'm still giving Diaco the benefit of the doubt. I'm just saying he brought 2-10 on himself. And he did, and anyone who followed his own statements knows he did.
Expand ...

He took over a 3-9 team that lost a ton of starters and reserves who played a lot, including the QB who kept that 3-9 team from being 0-12. Don't see how it wasn't a 2-10 team.
 
15 years from now when Diaco is a legend and UCONN is winning the B1G East regularly, you will all look back on this and chuckle.
 
.-.
UCONN13KC said:
15 years from now when Diaco is a legend and UCONN is winning the B1G East regularly, you will all look back on this and chuckle.
Expand ...
I pray you're right in five years not 15.
 
UCONN13KC said:
15 years from now when Diaco is a legend and UCONN is winning the B1G East regularly, you will all look back on this and chuckle.
Expand ...
Your lips to (Football) God's ears.
 
It's astounding how quickly Casey got his throws off vs. Memphis. Really amazing, he played out of his mind.

 
Palatine said:
Because the evidence says I'm right. That was not a 2-10 team.. And the people throwing the players under the bus are wrong.

I'm still giving Diaco the benefit of the doubt. I'm just saying he brought 2-10 on himself. And he did, and anyone who followed his own statements knows he did.
Expand ...

Right. But it was a 3 or 4 win team. So not sure what your point is. We weren't going to a bowl no matter what. And we had this discussion ALL of last season. So what's new?

If your point is only that Diaco could have won more than 2 games had he coached differently, virtually everyone agrees on that. So you are just stirring things up why? To amuse yourself?
 
Further, if he inherited a 3/4 win team, that isn't a disaster?

Or if it isn't a disaster, it certainly isn't the "opposite" of a disaster.
 
Apparently there is some sort of nebulous moral high-ground to be claimed by believing that "they sucked because Diaco made them suck" while those of less superior character "blame the kids' or 'throw the players under the bus'. The whole line of thought is a lame effort at self gratification. For starters, football fans judge football teams -- it's what they do. If you think it's disrespectful to the players to call UConn '14 a bad team, maybe you should be watching no-score tee-ball. A bad team is a bad team and, as was the case the case last year at UConn, those most deserving of 'blame' (JH, PP, GDL) are often long gone when you get to that point. I mean sure, gold stars to everybody in '13 for raising their season average from an F to F+ with that three-game stretch run. Perception is subjective, but I'm not calling that an up-tick and I'm not apologizing.
 
Last edited:
.-.
I don't usually defend pal but in this case he is correct. 2-10 and awful was on Diaco. He made a decision to basically blow off the season in order to build long term. That might have been a good decision or it might be bad. We'll see. It's almost impossible to say whether a different coach or different approach would have resulted in a better or worse record. I think there were 4 winnable games at least. Maybe 5. Not guaranteed of course but possible. With a bit of momentum maybe we win another couple. So yes, 2-10 is absolutely on Diaco. Whether that was a sound decision of not is still up in the air I think. But here's the thing, if Diaco is not the guy it doesn't matter except that we are in a worse place than need be but not by much.
 
There's really not many facts in dispute in this thread, if any. It's just a question of how you want to see things. Diaco deciding to do a demolition before his rebuild is not something I'm willing to consider a fault, egregious or otherwise. It's what is commonly done when someone gets hired for a rebuilding job. Maybe he denied us the glory of a 4 or 5 win season, I have my doubts personally, but I'll admit it's feasible. Four or 5 win seasons is not what I'm hoping for. He'll either get the corner turned in the next two years or he won't. I'm still betting he will. Either way, there won't be many still talking about what could have been in '14 .
 
junglehusky said:
Ohhhhhhh I have a feeling somebody will be talking about '14 and '15.
Expand ...
Fair enough, I'm really talking about myself I guess. Win 10 games in '16 and I won't even talk about 2010 anymore...
 
Palatine said:
No, once again a complete misunderstanding (or perhaps intention misunderstanding) of my post.

Diaco inherited a team that showed a lot of character. That dug itself out of a hole. That showed promise and effectiveness on offense. And was headed in the right direction after the Pasqualoni debacle.

And the people who describe the situation that Diaco inherited as a complete disaster are just flat wrong.
Expand ...

Chandler Whitmer's chiropractor loved the 2014 team, especially the O line.
Rumor has it he bought a brand new Tesla that year!

image.jpg
 
.-.
Palatine said:
Duh. That's true of every team. So what? He inherited a team on the uptick. It is simply a fact. In fact, read my initial post

"I'm not saying this was a team that could compete for a championship in year one. But it was a solid squad with a star receiver and a decent defense."

My point, which you miss, is that the team he inherited was capable of much more. It could have won more games. Diaco decided to tear it down to the foundation and rebuild. The 2-10 is on him not that team.

Not really that hard to understand. Very easy position to support.
Expand ...

http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/1415-mtt.html

http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/1314-mtt.html

The 2-10 record is on him AND that team. He basically admitted he wasn't trying to win games last year, and it has taken me till about this point in the season for him to win back my support.

But it's a moronic argument to say he inherited the same team. The only "simple fact" is that the roster changed for numerous reasons, and the biggest impact was on the OL and at QB, and those two things dictated everything we were (un)able to do on offense.
 
Just the title of this thread alone puts the OP in a class by himself.

What's the opposite of a "total disaster"? Diaco inherited the opposite of a total disaster? Really? He inherited a team that went 3-9, that's the opposite of a total disaster? I know the OP likes to talk about facts. The fact is he inherited a team that was 3-9. That's the opposite of a disaster? And the QB that won the three games, lasted 1 game last year. Is there anyone left that really takes Pal seriously?
 
WingU-Conn said:
http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/1415-mtt.html

http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/archive/1314-mtt.html

The 2-10 record is on him AND that team. He basically admitted he wasn't trying to win games last year, and it has taken me till about this point in the season for him to win back my support.

But it's a moronic argument to say he inherited the same team. The only "simple fact" is that the roster changed for numerous reasons, and the biggest impact was on the OL and at QB, and those two things dictated everything we were (un)able to do on offense.
Expand ...
No one said he inherited the same team. I sure didn't.
 
Palatine said:
No one said he inherited the same team. I sure didn't.
Expand ...
BS. By discounting the roster turnover that every else has tried to ram into your head, you're at best implying same team.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,349
Messages
4,566,441
Members
10,468
Latest member
ADD3LA


Top Bottom