moving on. Stony Brook.

[Carl Spackler]

Wow Carl. This does everything short of saying you want Edsall back.

LOL. I would love to get back to the kind of football where strength, conditioning, preparation and execution of fundamentals and discipline were the normal, and expected. I would love to get back to the place, where we are arguing over what it will take us to get over the hump and into the national picture regularly, than just conference titles. We're on track with the strength, conditioning part, but the preparation and execution of fundamentals is lacking IMNSHO, and this 'PLAN' about maximizing reps for everyone, instead of settling on a lineup and getting that lineup the reps they need to perfect those fundamentals, is giving me gout.

I do not want Edsall back, though, no way.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Carl, I usually tune in to what you say about team, progress and what is needed.

I have met a few people that are a bit put off by HCBD. What makes some people run through a wall is making others feel like they are chewing tin foil. Just looking at where you are leading, you seem to be hesitant to buy into the coach because you got so burned by the last one.

Everyone steers their own ship, I am just suggesting that you may not need to go too far just yet. Let's see where the year takes us.

I just disagreed with labeling Diaco as the 'complete' hire/coach whatever at this point. It's nonsense. I bet if you asked Diaco right now, or for that matter, more importantly - the guy that hired him Warde Manuel, if he was the 'complete' coach, he'd say no - he needs to get a few laps around the track under his belt before he can be considered a 'complete' coach. It's nothing more than semantics really.

It was a tough spot, BYU, most likely will be one of the toughest, if not the most difficult matchup we've got all season. And we got them right out of the gate, and we started off about as badly as possible. There is no where to go but up.

It really is all about beating Stony Brook right now. It gives me a pain in the stomach to go with the gouty arthritis this rotations of players is giving me rather than having a starting lineup, to know that we're at this level, that I'm worried about beating Stony Brook, but you got to build from somewhere, and I wrote a long time ago, that 2-0 to start the season would be awesome, 1-1 would be ok, too, but if it's 1-0 vs. BYU and 0-1 vs. Stony Brook, the roller coaster ride isn't over yet, and the team isn't on even keel, but if it's 0-2 vs. BYU and Stony Brook at home.......that tells us some serious info too.

 

[Uconnalliance]

Let me add to this by saying that I have this gut feeling that we are going to run the ball for about 1,000 yards on Saturday. In all seriousness, I think that we'll have two backs go for over 100 yards each (and my money is on Marriner and Newsome). I think we'll see a heavy dose of "solve your problems with aggression." And if we aren't chasing the game the way that we were against BYU, I think that it will really take the pressure off of the QBs, which will make them look even better. Just my gut feeling...

We will destroy Stonybrook Sat, feel bad for the fella keepin stats cuz my man will have carpel tunnel by days end!

 

[RedStickHusky]

In the immortal words of the boss - "someday we'll look back on this and it will all seem funny."

 

[RedStickHusky]

I just disagreed with labeling Diaco as the 'complete' hire/coach whatever at this point. It's nonsense. I bet if you asked Diaco right now, or for that matter, more importantly - the guy that hired him Warde Manuel, if he was the 'complete' coach, he'd say no - he needs to get a few laps around the track under his belt before he can be considered a 'complete' coach. It's nothing more than semantics really.

Concur, we shot for complete last time and got completed instead.

 

[Colt house75]

Let me add to this by saying that I have this gut feeling that we are going to run the ball for about 1,000 yards on Saturday. In all seriousness, I think that we'll have two backs go for over 100 yards each (and my money is on Marriner and Newsome). I think we'll see a heavy dose of "solve your problems with aggression." And if we aren't chasing the game the way that we were against BYU, I think that it will really take the pressure off of the QBs, which will make them look even better. Just my gut feeling...

Absolutely Dan, can't agree with you more. I think this is Arkeel's breakout game. My take from last Friday is that we didn't win on the scoreboard but "won" in a number of other ways. I told all my buds as we were walking out after the game I thought we won in a number of areas. They can't be measured on the scoreboard. including (1)seeing new faces get reps, (2) all the backs showed me something and the biggest intangible..."they never quit" . With the latter, Diaco showed me he has been "winning" since December.
That attitude will carry through.

Dan, I know from your posts you will predict we win every game here on out on the scoreboard.
I predict we win every game here on out but we will go 6 & 6 on the scoreboard....here's why:
I know this. HCBD is a man of his word. His GOAL is to "win" championships. He is surrounded by a great winning staff and players. To achieve his GOAL, he has objectives. Those Objectives are termed Process. We achieved our Processed objectives last Friday night....as he and the team have been FOR EVERY DAY SINCE HE ARRIVED IN STORRS. I don't look at the scoreboard, not right now.... this is an incredible group of young kids out there and they showed it----not once did they back down or ease their own internal mojos off the throttle. That is a testament to the internal objectives and PROCESS. In my mind, the scoreboard showed one thing but I thought we won...... it is pretty simple.

 

[UConnDan97]

Dan, I know from your posts you will predict we win every game here on out on the scoreboard.
I predict we win every game here on out but we will go 6 & 6 on the scoreboard...

Blasphemy!!!

(Some of the other comments were good though...but...blasphemy...)