The most irrational thing I've seen on the football forum recently was the call to add a kid one week before kickoff solely because we have an open scholarship. Your very rational response was as follows:
Personally I expected someone who actually played college football (and during quite a long time on the old board would never cease to point this out) to place more value in the practice time that was missed by said prospect (unless somehow you are willing to claim that the few weeks the kids did get under their belts this summer were meaningless).
My stance on this specific situation is this, there isn't enough talent in state to build a quality FCS program. Unlike many more geographically fortunate schools we need to build the lion's share of our roster from elsewhere. At the same time all of the work that was invested during the first decade of this century has been pissed away at breakneck speed primarily due to some misguided need to placate local coaches.
I don't dislike Warde. I would in fact wager that there are few here who hold him in as high esteem as I do. I am beyond the point of no return with P (and GDL for that matter) however. I cannot believe that they have turned me against them as thoroughly as they have as quickly as they have. I see them slowly, quietly killing this program. It is kind of like Prometheus, with a bird of prey pecking away at his entrails, unfortunately for us, the vital organs wont regenerate. Left to P's devices our program will disappear within a few years and almost nobody outside of a zip code that begins with 06 will be able to recall that we did have a football program. This is why I feel as i do about the current head coach (and his side kick) and why I am infuriated at any defense of the man. The first thing out of the mouth of P's defender's is that he is recruiting so much better than anything we've seen. The second is on the lack of talent he has to work with. Where I get confused on these arguments is here:
We made it to bowl games (and even beat a pretty good South Carolina team) facing better BE competition during RE's last four years here yet each of those teams had numerous contributors who were not long into the program. If P's recruiting is superior (or even equal) to that of his predecessor, shouldn't at least some of the kids he has brought in have been able to contribute a bit more than they have? After all, they they are better recruits, supposedly competing for time against lesser players (RE's teams were talented enough to win bowl games, P's teams are so talent deficient they cannot even make it to bowl games). How do they possibly resolve this?
For the record, I have my six seats, purchased an additional seven through the three game deals that include Michigan and I plan on making it to every game. I will root like hell for the kids in blue with a sliver of a husky's face on their helmets and hope for wins in every game. Considering what I've heard about the defense, we should, at a minimum have a shot in each game. Considering what I've heard about the offensive line play (and I am still at a loss as to how this got so bad so quickly as even a bonobo should have been able to figure out how to at least on occasion get a large body on one of our opponents) it is quite possible that our offense will be far too similar to what it had been recently.
So you would rather go into the season with 84 scholarship players on the roster instead of 85. I would not. I can imagine that you would, since Randy Edsall routinely would look for walk ons to award scholarships, rather than use prep schools as an assist to building a roster.
I think that perhaps if you have a real significant difficulty local high school football coaches, and whatever you think their influence is on this football program, you may want to discuss it with the chairman of the UCONN BOT. Maybe you know him personally even. I'm sure he'd be happy to answer questions and concerns if you were to approach him. You sure as hell aren't going to do anything but create piss and wind by discussing such things with me, in a forum like this.
While I think Hathaway was a fool, and was probably rushed into the hire of Pasqualoni, it was Chuck Neinas' headhunting that found Pasqualoni, not the CT high school football coaches who nominated him, unless you want to come out right here and say that Neinas' firm identified Pasqualoni by consulting a few CT high school football coaches. Do you want to say that? Do you know Chuck? DId his firm find Pasqualoni by consulting the high school coaches in CT?
Randy Edsall's offense benefitted greatly from having a handful of multiple year starters on the offensive line. His defense worked because he was able to recruit players with effective speed. He won enough to be successful, and won bowl games yes. I've never tried to take anything away from Edsall, I've made myself clear in the past, that I think Edsall had a ceiling with his program, and we had hit it. I had hoped that he would be able to change and adapt to continue to improve. I didn't want him to leave, all I wanted was change so that we could improve. I wrote it. It's out there.
As for Pasqualoni, the guy has faults as a head coach, that were on clear display over the past 2 years. He's also accomplished a lot in his career, and it's a disservice to try to minimize it. Just like with Edsall, I'd prefer for him to stay and improve, rather than leave. Because, changing head coaches for a college football program, is not something that should happen often, and quickly, and going through 2 head coaches in less than 2 years would be devastating to this program - my opinion. I"m sure you probably think different.
As for Warde Manuel, I can only assume that you have deep basketball ties or something to the athletic department, becuase I really don't know any football people that don't respect the guy 100%, certainly nobody that's had to change their mind about him one way or the other about anything football related.
As for the rest, you'll get your answers this year. This is no longer Randy Edsall's program, in any way shape or form. This is Pasqualoni's program now in 2013, and he'll either succeed or go down with it.
BTW: I'm not shy in saying it, in that I wonder what you really are capable of thought wise, because, nowhere, no how, anywhere has anyone suggested that a full 1A squad could be built with only CT players. Examination of our own roster, as compared to Edsall's roster, shows that there is any difference at all really in the number of players from CT vs those from out of state. The difference, is that we're getting some of the more visibile and sought after players in the past 2 seasons. I really can't see how anyone with the ability to critically evaluate something would be able to argue otherwise.
And Skip Holtz did a pretty good job of building an FCS program with many in-state players, as did Tom Jackson. The only thing that lacked in the past - if you talke to a guy like Lou Holtz - who you can find in restaurants in CT - have you ever talked to Lou? THe only lacking back then, was the commitment from the university to have a top athletic department. Jim and Geno changed that through basketball, and Edsall, and now Pasqualoni are the beneficiaries.
Do you know Steve Spagnuolo? When was the last time you talked to him? You know he coached at UCONN and played at Springfield right? Talk to him about what he thinks about recruiting and pulling talent of CT, New England and the northeast.
I don't know you from a hole in the wall, and I don't really care to. Cheer for the players, and don't bitch at me about the coaches or recruiting.
I think Pasqualoni is light years ahead of Edsall when it comes to building and running a 1A football program, and you don't. Got it.
