My Two Cents

[gopher2]

We got our soundly kicked on national TV which always sucks. I was very disappointed in some of Diaco's decisions but I took heart regarding the following:

1. Houston could not run on us except for the QB scrambles which did hurt. Impressive that the #6 team could not establish an effective ground game against us.

2. NT continually got behind the D and made a big play for a long TD. We needed to do that - it should help the confidence of the O going forward.

3. The coaches showed a willingness to open it up some on O and the results were generally positive.

4. The players continue to play hard.

5. There isn't a DB in the country who could have stopped some of those pinpoint accurate passes by the Houston QB. And their receivers made some great grabs. Doubt we will see a passing game like that the rest of the year.

I don't feel as bad about this loss as I did about the other two. Yes, we could have played better, the coaches should have called a more aggressive game, and the score could quite possibly have been closer but we were not going to beat this team on the road. Continue to open up the O, put more pressure on opposing QBs, PLAY TO WIN, and we might just might turn the corner. Figured the board could use a semi-optimistic post at this time.

 

[noeynox]

After 5 games we've showed a willingness to "open it up" on offense in 2 games where we fell behind by at least 3 tds. Navy was the other time. They happen to be the 2 games where NT has caught TDS.

The Syracuse game was begging for us to attack them more through the air. Our whole philosophy seems to be to keep games close and try to pull em out at the end. Even the Maine game was like that. Toledo thumped Maine btw. Problem with close games your a bad bounce from your whOle approach going kaput.

 

[UConnSportsGuy]

Our whole philosophy seems to be to keep games close and try to pull em out at the end. Even the Maine game was like that. Toledo thumped Maine btw. Problem with close games your a bad bounce from your whOle approach going kaput.

We better get used to it. Diaco's entire strategy is built on 1980's Midwest football.

His strategy is to have big, huge lineman and to run the ball from the start of the game with a very conservative strategy (look at the size of our current OL and of all of our recruits--they lack athleticism, but are huge physically). Even if we are running the ball up the gut of the defense and getting no yards for the entire first half--it is all part of his plan (as is often the case for us unfortunately). He is fine if we fall behind early and will not open up the offense. His plan is to keep wearing down the defense so that in the 4th quarter they have nothing left physically and we are able to run it down their throat and pull out a late victory. That is why all of the late game goal-line calls have been runs up the middle (despite it seeming like we are completely predictable and banging our heads against a wall repeatedly that will not move). His strategy is complete smash-mouth football...big, physical players with a conservative offense and a bend-don't-break defense to keep us in the game until our "physicality" wins it for us in the end.

Unfortunately, that strategy will never work. First, there is too much speed and athleticism in the game today to have that strategy work. And second, the level of players you need to get to execute that plan is likely beyond what we can expect to get here at UConn on a consistent basis. He is focused on getting the big, physical players to execute his strategy--but the players who are both that big AND have the athleticism to stay up with the speed of todays game are extremely rare and are going to the elite programs.

That is Diaco's strategy and he will never deviate from it. He will continue to recruit the same players and try to execute the same strategy and game plan no matter the results. That is just who he is and he believes in it 100%.

We have at least 1 more year until Benedict would even consider getting rid of Diaco. First, is the massive buyout and the state of the UConn budget these days--we cannot justify paying him $3-$5MM and pay our next coach $1-$2MM while Herbst is having to make major cuts to the University and our athletic revenue is minuscule. Second, we fired PP after only 3 years. To fire two consecutive coaches who do not even have a chance to get a full eligibility cycle with "their players" is near suicide when trying to attract a new coach. Who is going to want to come to UConn given the current state of our program/conference/etc knowing that we get rid of coaches after only 3 years if they don't get immediate results. That is not attractive to young coaches who have options.

So the we better get used to it....we are stuck with this coach and strategy for at least another 15 months. I just hope that our program isn't at a point of no-return at that point.