It’s time to replace Randy. | Page 5 | The Boneyard

It’s time to replace Randy.

By
Steelerone said:
Randy Edsall is not the problem. The problem is the problems. To begin with, Ct. is a small state with only minor interest in high school football so there no real "farm system" for the largest school in the state. Additionally, we have no real rivals other than the other New England states and how many fans do you think you are going to get at Uconn vs Rhode Island, Maine, Vermont or New Hampshire? Then think about tthe economic cost of "Big Time Football". Finally, look at your GPS and travel back to reality and try to be satisfied with the true love of Connecticut fans - basketball.
""
Expand ...
using that logic, fold all sports. Basketball doesn’t recruit solely in CT. A small state has little to do with anything. It’s a national university that should draw talent and has been systematically mismanaged for over a decade. The true love of CT fans is winning. End of story.
 
Northbound said:
How does RE explain Boise who came up to FBS at about the same time as UConn. Must be the allure of Idaho to recruits and the powerful conference in which BSU competes.

You can’t make it up.

The university across the board screwed the football pooch
Expand ...

Boise chose to play an exciting brand of football - particularly on offense. UConn? Choose boring 1960's football: run the ball left, run the ball right, run up the middle and . . . punt. Then pray that the defense can hold the score down. Boise model fits with the contemporary college game. UConn? Not even close.
 
Last edited:
Granted my bar is low, but if you compare last night's game to the Boise game from last year, they're noticeably more competitive in every phase of the game. The total yardage last night ended up 607-426 in UCF's favor. Sure a lot of those were garbage yards, but even in the first half they closed with drives of 33, 53, and 62 yards. The defense also forced them to turn it over on downs twice, punt once, and fumble on another occasion during that same span. UCF plays fast and UConn was loose with the ball, so there were more drives and theforemore more points, but this was nothing compared to Boise outgaining us 818 to 193 last year.

What Randy is attempting to do now isn't so different than what he did the first time around:

'99 - 4-7
'00 - 3-8
'01 - 2-9
'02 - 6-6
'03 - 9-3

The progression isn't always linear when you're dealing with graduations and transfers and redshirts and all that. Year three was actually the low point the first time around, so it shouldn't shock us if that's the case now as well.

Does this mean I'm optimistic about the future of the program? Obviously not. But you can't can Edsall three years into a five year project.
 
Be forewarned this is lengthy and done from a friggin phone.

1) Boise went 1A in 1996 not sure who can’t look that up, but goodness I’ll do the work for you - “The Broncos turned to Portland State head coach Pokey Allen to lead the Boise State football team after Hall resigned. In Allen's second season, the Broncos returned to the championship game in 1994.[21] After 26 years in the Big Sky, BSU joined the Big West Conference in 1996 and moved up to Division I-A (now FBS).”

2) Boise was very good in 1AA this is 100% true

3) UConn is not Stanford, Cal or Northwestern for god salke. Its a flagship state U. Great rankings top 100 in USN, but come on it appears that UConn admin thinks that it cam attract top tier football student athletes like a Stanford, Cal, ND - that is not going to happen. Relax the standards for football if you want to have a chance to compete. Wasn’t it Ambrose a few years back who wanted to do a grad year and couldn't get into the grad program of his choosing so he transferred to FCS - foolish if true.

4) Boise is a horrible academic institution - correct

5) Boise plays an exciting brand of football

6) Boise has a recruiting philosophy that has been successful for them - JC for sure, but its smart for them

Point is that anyone can excuse anything to fit an argument. florida schools = recruiting advantage, Boise = easy in for athletes, we all can go down the list of most FBS peograms and make excises why they are better than UConn - but that has to stop at some point doesn’t it?

UConn just doesn’t want to play the major college football game or is unwilling to do so. Both are ok because that’s a choice the University has made, but to expect success at a program with - zero tradition, small fam base, poor conference, no recent success - without finding creative ways to get the athletes you need into school is a VERY tough putt. UConn is competing on the field with the Boise’s, UCF’s, etc at some point the school has to give the program a fighting chance.

Perhaps start with a coach that has had success (re has a career losing record) and believes in modern football that might give the program some currency.

Something has got to give at some point - college football is a business and UConn isn’t treating it that way.
 
.-.
BlueDogs said:
By

using that logic, fold all sports. Basketball doesn’t recruit solely in CT. A small state has little to do with anything. It’s a national university that should draw talent and has been systematically mismanaged for over a decade. The true love of CT fans is winning. End of story.
Expand ...

Well said. If women's basketball was poor to middling for the last 20 years you could fit the number of paying fans into a Toyota Corrola. Fact is people love being a part of success. Win for a sustained period of time and there will be a culture of football as well.
 
To be fair, there are at least 30 FBS head coaches who earn less money annually than Coach Edsall. That's not an argument for or against the bonuses, just for accurarcy.
 
Last edited:
GridironGR8 said:
To be fair, there are at least 30 FBS head coaches who earn more money annually than Coach Edsall. That's not an argument for or against the bonuses, just for accurarcy.
Expand ...
Did you mean less? Because there have got to be a lot more than 30 who make more.
 
Ldandy said:
The time to replace Randy was before he was rehired. The program desperately needed a competent offensive coach who could bring an experienced staff along with him. They should have looked to The FCS for a rising coach winning games and putting points on the board. A coach accustomed to doing so with limited resources that would not be turned off by the challenge presented.
Expand ...
Amen to this. In general, I don't think hiring former defensive coaches as head coaches works in this modern wide open game. PP, BD & now RE again. I think Randy gets 1 more and we need to see progress. But, if it's the same old boring/blowout losses, then it needs to change. We have an opportunity to reinvent ourselves going indy and this style of play won't do it. At minimum, a new OC with an eye towards coach in waiting should be hired this off season. We need an exciting brand of football that puts points on the board.
 
.-.
So this is the last straw? UConn losing by 35 as 40+ point underdogs with a freshman QB playing shaky and a RSSO getting his first true experience in a hostile road environment to a team who is head and shoulders better and more talented than anyone else in the conference and coming off their first regular season loss in 3 seasons?

Nope. UConn is still "who we thought they are." This game didn't show anything and it doesn't move the needle.
 
it was 42-0 twenty minutes into the game. the only difference is that ucf showed mercy. they could have laid a hundy on them if they chose.
 
whaler11 said:
it was 42-0 twenty minutes into the game. the only difference is that ucf showed mercy. they could have laid a hundy on them if they chose.
Expand ...
Did you not have this inclination before the coin flip?
 
Husky25 said:
Did you not have this inclination before the coin flip?
Expand ...

i actually didnt think it was going to be THAT bad.

im just loling at the idea it was improvement or that drives against the scout team matter
 
.-.
Boise's possessions last year

10 plays, 69 yards, FG

2 plays, 71 yards, TD

4 plays, 43 yards, TD

6 plays, 64 yards, TD

3 plays, 92 yards, TD

11 plays, 91 yards, TD

9 plays, 52 yards, FG

1 play, 72 yards, TD

7 plays, 21 yards, Punt

5 plays, 80 yards, TD

9 plays, 76 yards, TD

13 plays, 48 yards (their backups basically toyed with us and chewed up nine minutes of the clock to end the game)

This was undoubtedly better, with a far less experienced QB. They've gone from a middle of the pack FCS team to a higher level FCS team that looks like it might eventually have the juice to transition.
 
Would all the people whining about the brand of football rather be UMass? Serious question. They're innovative and modern and exciting. 24.6 points per game!

They're coming off an exhilarating 37-29 win over Akron and could use your support for the upcoming homestand against UConn and Liberty.
 
whaler11 said:
i actually didnt think it was going to be THAT bad.

im just loling at the idea it was improvement or that drives against the scout team matter
Expand ...
I did see improvement on defense. UConn actually held UCF twice in the first quarter and it was 14-0 with 4 minutes to go. UConn' offense then could not run 2 back-to-back clean plays. The two pick 6 interceptions were thrown directly to UCF defenders, as if they were wearing white. UConn should take credit for those scores.
 
champs99and04 said:
Would all the people whining about the brand of football rather be UMass? Serious question. They're innovative and modern and exciting. 24.6 points per game!
Expand ...
I'm not whining, though I do think we have a chance to reinvent ourselves with an exciting wide open offense. Losing and being boring is a recipe for failure. Being in the Northeast with this run run run punt offense just won't do it.
So to answer your question, I want to be innovative, modern & exciting, but I don't want to be UMass.
 
.-.
Ldandy said:
The time to replace Randy was before he was rehired. The program desperately needed a competent offensive coach who could bring an experienced staff along with him
Expand ...
RE brought one with him. Remember Lashee?
 
I’d love to replace him too. But without the budget to hire some better coaches for the staff, I’m afraid you’ll see pretty much the same results.

The school is trying to kill football. This is how you manage a surrender.
 
ZooCougar said:
I’d love to replace him too. But without the budget to hire some better coaches for the staff, I’m afraid you’ll see pretty much the same results.

The school is trying to kill football. This is how you manage a surrender.
Expand ...

I said this for a long time. I'm done saying that its all about the money. At this point if I took over as head coach we wouldn't be doing any worse. I've never coached football only basketball and baseball. But honestly it doesn't matter. How could I lose worse than by 40 points consistently. And does it really matter if I lost by 50 conisistently. Eventually the other team takes their foot off the pedal. This team consistently quits on the coaching staff, and its because they don't believe in them. I wouldn't condone it but it has got to be the most frustrating thing to play for this inept staff. The play calling is atrocious. From a scheme approach the (offense is predictable, leaning to heavily on run, no creativity in pass to the defense who has stopped blitzing) , to personnel choices (Qb??), to game play and clock management, to punting and turtling up like they did before half (for what? to not lose by 42? oh wait..). The coaching staff has lost the ability to motivate these guys. Lost the ability to redirect them and focus them and give them specific skill feedback to help them success when facing adversity. I don't blame them too much for the recruiting, the school is a long ways away from prominence and being able to reel in good talent. But they aren't developing any of the guys they get or creating any kind of cohesion.

The players are somewhat at fault too for not stepping up. There is little passion out there. Few of our D players go in to their tackles looking pop someone. Looking to drive them backwards or knock the ball out. More often than not they are willing to protect themselves first by shying away from the big hit and frequently let the guy fall forward for extra yards or break the tackle. I've seen O-lineman stop pushing the pile where a skill guy could be shoved forward a couple of yards before he falls. I've seen guys stop on routes. Those issues are all on the players.

What this all boils down to is RE shouldn't be allowed to finish the season. Make it known to the guys on the roster understand that we are making changes and things will get better. Give an underrated young, dynamic FCS coach a shot and see if he can find lightning in a bottle for a couple of years before he leaves for a better job. My personal choice would be Joe Harasymiak (former UMaine, Minnesota DB's now), but I'm biased as I went to Springfield with him. But find someone. Somebody new with a new philosophy, and someone who for christ sakes has some balls.
 
The players are visibly slower, smaller and outmatched. Bad recruiting + bad coaching and this is what you get.

Yes, you can attract a better staff with better pay.

Nobody wants to play for a failed General like Edsall too. Nobody wants to march into certain death.

It’s Pickett’s charge every gd Saturday.
 
ZooCougar said:
The players are visibly slower, smaller and outmatched. Bad recruiting + bad coaching and this is what you get.

Yes, you can attract a better staff with better pay.

Nobody wants to play for a failed General like Edsall too. Nobody wants to march into certain death.

It’s Pickett’s charge every gd Saturday.
Expand ...

Pickett's charge without the desire or discipline?

Charge of the Light Brigade without horses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,262
Messages
4,560,407
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom