If you are looking for the reason they lost | Page 2 | The Boneyard

If you are looking for the reason they lost

Status
Not open for further replies.
Still hoping we can plug a few holes in our OL with 5th Yr transfers.
 
tduconn said:
The biggest problem is he and the staff recruits very little FBS talent to UConn.

When he has talent he can coach at this level.ala Cincinatti, ala Notre Dame, as well as his other coaches. He didn't hire coaches who were failures in other programs.

And we are happy about this experienced group of line men, all who have played 13 games together, some more, lead us into 2016?
Expand ...

Marshall didn't have more talent than us. But you keep thinking Butch, that's what you're good at.
 
jdb50 said:
To win today as we are constructed we needed to stop their running game and weren't able to do so. Our lineman weren't able to get off the blockers and make tackles. All game we struggled to bring runners down. The final offense possession with all our motion nonsense, and tight end heavy lineup was an effort in futility. Mark May nailed it, clock management and 2 minute offense are on the coaches to improve on in the offseason.
Expand ...
So it had nothing to do with the fact our offense was playing 9 against 11.

BTW, Mark May is an idiot.

The 2-minute offense wasn't the problem. It was the 58-minute offense.
 
mauconnfan said:
They were dominated because of predictability. Mix it up and open the game up and they would be fine.
Expand ...


I don t know about that. Your concept is right, but what you described doesn't work with an OL that is just this physically outmatched. They get blown off the line constantly, and play straight up with no leverage.
 
.-.
Jax Husky said:
I don t know about that. Your concept is right, but what you described doesn't work with an OL that is just this physically outmatched. They get blown off the line constantly, and play straight up with no leverage.
Expand ...

They weren't the problem. How they are used is the problem. They play 5 against 7 or 8 on every play.
 
Skiblets said:
You guys are all wrong. The reason they lost is because I DVRd the game. They always lose when I do that. My bad
Expand ...

Pro Tip: Just delete it, burn the TV, buy a new one and move on. Watching that again is a torture I wish on no man.
 
Palatine said:
They weren't the problem. How they are used is the problem. They play 5 against 7 or 8 on every play.
Expand ...

Chicken or egg though.

My opinion is that we can't pass because these players suck at it right now. We don have the skill set to open it up. Yours is that the coaches can fix that with playcalling. We'll just have to disagree.
 
.-.
Here is a crazy thought: maybe some of the players aren't as good as they have been talked up to be and that's why Marshall's offensive line, defensive line and offensive skill players played better than UConn's?
 
Palatine said:
They weren't the problem. How they are used is the problem. They play 5 against 7 or 8 on every play.
Expand ...
It's hysterically funny that you are sticking up for a group that has been the weak link for this team all season...especially after they put up another stinker! You must think George DeLeone is the hands down best OL coach ever to set foot on a college campus.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
The last drive we had 6 guys blocking 5 and there was immediate pressure. What the hell are some of you guys watching?

We also don't have WR's that can get separation. I keep hearing we have talent on offense. Where? Other than Newsome?
Expand ...
They blitzed. Watch the plays again.
 
I am having a hard time judging the talent of Marshall's offensive line, none ran a pattern out in the flat or across the middle. They stayed in and blocked.
 
FDNY99 said:
It's hysterically funny that you are sticking up for a group that has been the weak link for this team all season...especially after they put up another stinker! You must think George DeLeone is the hands down best OL coach ever to set foot on a college campus.
Expand ...
They are made the weaker by the coaching. If you have a weak OL, you compensate. Rich Rodreqiuz invented the spread when he had an OL that was was weak. It become one of the most successful offense schemes of its time.

Diaco is not RichRod, but at the very least, he needs to stop playing to his weaknesses.
 
.-.
Palatine said:
They blitzed. Watch the plays again.
Expand ...

Not every play. They sat back and rushed three when we threw the two yard out pattern and stayed in bounds. Next play on third down, when BS escaped heavy pressure, it wasn't a blitz - it was just a guy coming up the middle totally unblocked. Just a blown assignment.
 
Our o line is terrible, this is compounded by our offense which is a power run style pro set. Pretty tough to move the ball in a power running game style when your o line is terrible. Not running the offense to fit your personnel, instead implementing the offense before you have all the pieces. 6 wins, it was a good year, I believe this team is on the verge to being great. Lots of sophomores contributing now and some good talent coming in.
 
Palatine said:
They are made the weaker by the coaching. If you have a weak OL, you compensate. Rich Rodreqiuz invented the spread when he had an OL that was was weak. It become one of the most successful offense schemes of its time.

Diaco is not RichRod, but at the very least, he needs to stop playing to his weaknesses.
Expand ...


Where do you come up with this stuff? Please show me where Rich Rod invented the spread at Glenville State because of a poor OL. Because what I've read says he toyed with it, but it really came to fruition because of Shaun King's abilities at Tulane. Not because their OL sucked.

I am also waiting for you to name all the OL worse than ours that run awesome passing attacks. You mentioned that earlier, but didn't back it up.
 
Last edited:
Palatine said:
I don't agree.

No offensive line can get a running game going against eight sometimes nine in the box.

The problem is the offensive scheme,
Expand ...

Did you watch the o line the whole game? If you did you would see that they were getting beat one on one.
 
.-.
mauconnfan said:
They were dominated because of predictability. Mix it up and open the game up and they would be fine.
Expand ...
San Fran with Montana(I know) and Rice(I know) had a play where Rice went into motion and Montana would lead him with a pass before he reached the line of scrimmage. S0, defenses had to deal with Rice already on the edge and moving fast. A lot of the play was happening before the ball was snapped. When you have a questionable offensive line, you have to design your offense around your talent. Diaco has an offense scheme and then tries to plug in inadequate players. He needs to figure out his talent level and then go from there.
Example, UConn ran three sweeps with Mariner being the motion guy. Mariner has never shown me the ability to plant his foot and make a quick cut up field. Mariner basically just ran himself out of bounds. I would have liked to see Thomas run that play instead because he has shown the ability to make the quick cut. A play that went for a yard or two with Mariner could have gone for six or more yards with with Thomas.
 
Last edited:
pnow15 said:
San Fran with Montana(I know) and Rice(I know) had a play where Rice went into motion and Montana would lead him with a pass before he reached the line of scrimmage. S0, defenses had to deal with Rice already on the edge and moving fast. A lot of the play was happening before the ball was snapped. When you have a questionable offensive line, you have to design your offense around your talent. Diaco has an offense scheme and then tries to plug in inadequate players. He needs to figure out his talent level and then go from there.
Expand ...


I disagree. You form an identity and recruit players that fit that. We will get there. You don't see successful coaches changing their offensive philosophy often. The comparisons to a Bill Walsh developed offense arent really fair either.
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
Just wait until Nostical gets back in here.
Expand ...
I'm just back from the game. Here are my observations. While the game was hard fought and Bryant Shirreffs was a warrior, I'm afraid this loss was squarely on our unimaginative offensive game plan. Although it's after Christmas, we played like it was still NO-vember. No screen, no quick slant, no flip reverse, no halfback pass, no flea flicker. Don't tell me the O-Line isn't good enough. If it's not (and it's not) you have to improvise. My wife's not a great cook. We eat out a lot.
As good as our D played, and they did (despite playing a soft zone which had visions of the Cincy game in my head, and missing some tackles that would have helped) they needed a better game from their offensive brothers.

But even with all of that we still had a chance, and thus it qualifies as a Nostical win. So we had a 9~4 season with lots of hope for next season. Bottom line, we have great kids, talented players, but an offensive scheme that simply can't adapt. I can't believe after watching all that tape on Marshall we came out with that pedestrian game plan.

The good news is that every player loved the Bowl experience (especially the swag) and wants to come back to one next year--in a big way. They are completely motivated for next year. Let's hope the coaches are as well.
 
Jax Husky said:
I disagree. You form an identity and recruit players that fit that. We will get there. You don't see successful coaches changing their offensive philosophy often. The comparisons to a Bill Walsh developed offense arent really fair either.
Expand ...
If your Notre Dame or Alabama and have the pick of the players, you can do that. Often you don't have your pick but you get a couple of guys you can work effectively. So, you have to max out on that talent.
 
Shirreffs has good mobility, is tough as any QB we've had and appears to be a decent leader. That said, he'll never be compared to Aaron Rodgers.
a Marshall DL
Yes, I imagine there are some QB's who could be more effective with our offensive line in front of them but nobody on our roster fits that bill.

I want to add that it was quite disappointing when Rutherford was blown up (by one of Marshall's DTs) early in the game but I am very confident that there are posters on this board who already believe that he and Peart can somehow step in next season as starting OT's and perform at a high level. It would be great if that could happen but realistically it will take some time for each of them and that it will take time is not an indictment on our coaching staff.
 
whaler11 said:
Of course you don't because you believe the players are all the same - and somehow you can do creative things on offense when there is a jailbreak everytime you snap the ball.

The last drive they rushed five and there was instant pressure on BS as soon as he caught the snap.
Expand ...

No really instant pressure on the QB that last drive? Wow that's amazing. Imagine a defense selling out on an offense that has compiled 160 yards all game and needs to go 75 yards in 1:45 with NO timeouts? What a defensive genius on the other side, this has to be the OLine's fault huh? :eek::rolleyes:

You're right whaler "you can't make this place up sometimes". OWOW
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,339
Messages
4,565,603
Members
10,467
Latest member
Eil Rule


Top Bottom