Foxx is a quarterback

[Carl Spackler]

Two cold showers and 4 jugs of amber. For me.

Do you do personnel development? Do you know how long it takes even the greatest manager in history to take on his first job at the helm, have almost all of his support team have less or not much more experience than he does, to assess and really learn what all of his people can do, let alone have to readjust when key injuries occur, and have outsiders armchair QB every move he makes? You take a quote out of context and figure that it shows something crazy about the guy who was quoted. It shows me he is taking a look at his horses and deciding on lots of things. He has maybe a half dozen kids at skill positions who are ready to do or are doing very good things, and some of those are his younger players. He has a major problem with the O line, and he has fans who want some things to happen now that probably are not going to show up this year. He has other fans who want him to build for the future but still don't want the team to take lumps now.

As for Whitmer, he isn't the worst passer in the world, that would be me, and his "happy feet" aren't as big a problem as the lack of time he gets. His first INT against Temple was underthrown, but name me a HOF QB who hasn't thrown a bunch of poor passes that cost his team even with great pass protection. The INT that sealed our fate against Boise (unlikely victory to begin with) was a good throw and ripped away from maybe our biggest stud. None of us has the faintest idea if Foxx is the answer to anything at QB, but if bysome chance he has the goods, one should wonder more about how the last regime evaluated him and not how Diaco, dealing with the entire personnel, has to figure things out. Second guessing is what fans do. The coach can't worry about that or he should sell cars instead. Time will tell what Diaco can do, and there isn't much to take away from this year other than that it confirms what we knew off of last year. The program needs a whole lot of better talent.

Personnel development and management. That's where we are at, in a nutshell. Absolutely.

it's a corny, and theatrical reference, but also based in reality - in that Diaco strikes me remarkably as a highly intelligent and motivated ensign or 2nd lieutenant coming out of an academy or something. He wants to lead,and thinks he knows how, but the chief petty officer on deck, or the master gunnery seargent knows a hell of a lot more about command, especially under pressure.

He's got people to lean on Diaco, in a guy like Patterson for example, and other coaches he's been around for the past 20 years, but I think he's really got self evaluate, and make sure his management plan makes sense to develop the personnel is sound.

He said himself, before the season began, that nobody has ever seen the systems we are using this season. Maybe there is a reason for that.

 

[sdhusky]

Even after hundreds of words you still never answer the important question.

How does playing Foxx at quarterback make the team better past 2014?

How does playing Davis make the team better past 2014? Or playing any other senior?

 

[Husky25]

You are talking about something completely different.

Running out the clock in garbage time is one thing. That is not what they are talking about going forward.

So you don't want to see any more wins this year? You don't want to be entertained? You want a continuation of the last 3 years? The coaching staff may have their sights firmly focused on the future, but they have to play games in the now too. They are not going to forfeit the rest of the season because they think they might be better in 2015.

As far as I can tell, the players have not checked out on Diaco and if UConn continues to lose, then Diaco cannot afford to be boring. That is how the former "coaching" staff operated.

Boyle can't run the plays Foxx was running anyway so what's the difference? How does Boyle develop anything by coming in and hand the ball off four times? At the very least, this plants a seed in the mind of opposing coaches that Diaco is creative and may a have a few tricks up his sleeve. It also lets the players have a little fun. It's not like Wain lined up at left tackle...

 

[whaler11]

So you don't want to see any more wins this year? You don't want to be entertained? You want a continuation of the last 3 years? The coaching staff may have their sights firmly focused on the future, but they have to play games in the now too. They are not going to forfeit the rest of the season because they think they might be better in 2015.

As far as I can tell, the players have not checked out on Diaco and if UConn continues to lose, then Diaco cannot afford to be boring. That is how the former "coaching" staff operated.

Boyle can't run the plays Foxx was running anyway so what's the difference? How does Boyle develop anything by coming in and hand the ball off four times? At the very least, this plants a seed in the mind of opposing coaches that Diaco is creative and may a have a few tricks up his sleeve. It also lets the players have a little fun. It's not like Wain lined up at left tackle...

Of course I do.

I wasn't the one playing 55 guys from scrimmage.

I wasn't the one who was simplying things two weeks ago and now re-complicating them.

I wasn't the one who burned Boyle's redshirt and then never used him.

However if you don't get that playing Foxx in that capacity forces them to invest practice time in that scheme and therefore takes away from other things they can do in practice... and this is a team that can't do basic things - practice time is a pretty valuable resource for them.

 

[whaler11]

How does playing Davis make the team better past 2014? Or playing any other senior?

Well he sits Davis all the time so isn't that more evidence that makes one scratch their head on this?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

How does playing Davis make the team better past 2014? Or playing any other senior?

What an utterly idiotic thing to say.

 

[Dooley]

So after constantly talking about the future and doing things like playing 55 guys from scrimmage under the guise of playing for the future..

Now it's what can we do that doesn't help the future but beats Tulane or Army or SMU.

Which is fine but why wait 5 games to take that approach?

So I'm not seeing much disagreement anymore on my point. What does this do for the future and does it line up with past decisions.

The answers seem to be nothing and no.

You don't think winning a few games and gaining a little confidence won't help in 2015? Granted, our 3-game win streak at the end of last season did not carry over into 2014. But to be fair, we only had Cochran against BYU. We likely wouldn't have beaten BYU with Tom Brady under center.

I'm all for playing Boyle, even if it might get him hurt. I'm just not as opposed to seeing Foxx run a Wildcat read-option either if it means that we move the ball and give opposing D Coordinators something to try to game plan against.

We know two very concrete things about our offense:

1. Whitmer is not a D-1 level QB;
2. Our OL is horrendous

If Boyle can not quickly read defense coverages and is going to hold onto the ball too long and get pummeled OR turn the ball over consistently, then the only other alternative is to move the pocket around and go unconventional. To this date, we are unaware of any other player who has practiced as a Wildcat read-option QB other than Foxx. You're certainly not going to run Wildcat read-option with Newsome or Johnson. They are too valuable to mess with. Can Lemelle run it? Bradley? We don't know. Right now, as of today, all we have to go on is that Foxx has practiced it and looked fairly comfortable in garbage time doing it.

I'm not so sure 2014 is a good year to develop QBs, given our incredibly shallow depth at the position and incredibly porous OL. This might be a better year to develop our RBs.

 

[Dooley]

What an utterly idiotic thing to say.

The argument that playing Foxx at QB does not help beyond 2014 because he's a SR. If playing SRs is bad for 2014, then so is Davis, under that guise.

That said, the coaches really do seem content on taking Davis off the field on crucial downs so maybe they've already adopted that philosophy. Doesn't make me want to pound my head against the concrete any less.

 

[whaler11]

You don't think winning a few games and gaining a little confidence won't help in 2015? Granted, our 3-game win streak at the end of last season did not carry over into 2014. But to be fair, we only had Cochran against BYU. We likely wouldn't have beaten BYU with Tom Brady under center.

I'm all for playing Boyle, even if it might get him hurt. I'm just not as opposed to seeing Foxx run a Wildcat read-option either if it means that we move the ball and give opposing D Coordinators something to try to game plan against.

We know two very concrete things about our offense:

1. Whitmer is not a D-1 level QB;
2. Our OL is horrendous

If Boyle can not quickly read defense coverages and is going to hold onto the ball too long and get pummeled OR turn the ball over consistently, then the only other alternative is to move the pocket around and go unconventional. To this date, we are unaware of any other player who has practiced as a Wildcat read-option QB other than Foxx. You're certainly not going to run Wildcat read-option with Newsome or Johnson. They are too valuable to mess with. Can Lemelle run it? Bradley? We don't know. Right now, as of today, all we have to go on is that Foxx has practiced it and looked fairly comfortable in garbage time doing it.

I'm not so sure 2014 is a good year to develop QBs, given our incredibly shallow depth at the position and incredibly porous OL. This might be a better year to develop our RBs.

Clearly I'm not getting my point across:

You can defend decisions a, b, c, d and so on.

I can't see anyway to connect a, b, c d into a cogent long term plan.

That's the issue for me.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

The argument that playing Foxx at QB does not help beyond 2014 because he's a SR. If playing SRs is bad for 2014, then so is Davis, under that guise.

That said, the coaches really do seem content on taking Davis off the field on crucial downs so maybe they've already adopted that philosophy. Doesn't make me want to pound my head against the concrete any less.

Dooley, I really don't mean to blow up on you do just know that but...

THE ARGUMENT ISN'T THAT FOXX IS A SENIOR IT'S THAT HE'S A SENIOR WIDE RECEIVER PLAYING QUARTERBACK!

 

[Dooley]

Clearly I'm not getting my point across:

You can defend decisions a, b, c, d and so on.

I can't see anyway to connect a, b, c d into a cogent long term plan.

That's the issue for me.

I tend to agree with your point: every other position on the field has been given a "develop during game action" strategy except for QB. I don't understand burning Boyle's RS if he's not going to play either. My point is if they feel like they need to go to a wildcat package, then maybe Foxx is the only guy who can run it. There might not be underclassmen ready to QB those packages.

 

[Dooley]

Dooley, I really don't mean to blow up on you do just know that but...

THE ARGUMENT ISN'T THAT FOXX IS A SENIOR IT'S THAT HE'S A SENIOR WIDE RECEIVER PLAYING QUARTERBACK!

No worries - I don't take anything personally here unless someone talks about CL Smooths in a derogatory manner.

The answer to that: because there are, apparently, only 3 active and eligible guys left on the roster who have practiced as a QB in some capacity:

1. Whitmer - writing is on the wall...not a D-1 QB, can't move the offense, skills do not mesh well with our horrendous OL, not the future;
2. Boyle - young, clearly not comfortable with the offense yet. Not as mobile so does not mesh well with our horrendous OL but I still want to see him play more to get him more reps now that his RS was inexplicably burned;
3. Foxx - wildcat read-option offense only; skills mesh better with our horrendous OL (moves the pocket, not stationary, only has one hot read of the opposing DE to worry about instead of having to worry about all 11 defenders...8 of which will be in our backfield 1 second after the ball is snapped). Not the future unless you think that Davis/Shirreffs can run this style of offense in 2015. Develops our RBs in that case.

I have no idea if Lamelle, Bradley, Abrams, etc can run wildcat. Maybe they can. I have no idea who else has practiced being the primary ball handler on offense.

If I had my way, I'd thank Whitmer for his services, assign him the finest clipboard, visor and headset available, and plant him right to Cochran for the remainder of the season. Start Boyle and play him the majority of downs and use Foxx as a complimentary wildcat read-option guy. If Boyle gets hurt (likely, given our OL), then scrap conventional offense and exclusively go with wildcat read-option the rest of the season. Drink enough CL Smooths to think you're watching Oregon's offense, blackout and pray that Jim Delaney doesn't get ESPNews or ESPN3 and is watching this mess.

 

[Fairfield_1st]

If Diaco's desired offense is a mobile quarterback and using Foxx now will start us in that direction and he's willing to do it, I'm all for it. If a by-product is that it moves the offense, puts a somewhat competitive product on the field and helps take the pressure off the o-line, again, I'm all for it. Why did it take this long. I can only assume he was trying to make do with the QB's he had. I don't really care and I don't care about Boyle's RS. I would like this team to start cutting down on mistakes, first and formost. If they can do that, great. If we can move the ball in the process, even better.