Newsome in good company...

[whaler11]

Really? Really???

If its either the line wasn't remotely close or Newsome was so much better than Todaman, you came up with it being Todman.

Gotcha.

Maybe you don't really have a problem with Diaco's press conferences. Maybe you have a tough time understanding it.

I'm pretty sure you are misunderstanding me.

I mentioned their yards per carry and said it's not fair to Newsome to compare - obviously because of the offensive lines. Pretty sure we agree on that.

You said Newsome would have had a lot more. It wasn't clear if you meant a lot more than Todman had or a lot more than Newsome had with this line. After you clarified you were comparing the lines and not the backs, I'm pretty sure we agree on that as well.

So I'm not totally sure why you snapped.

 

[RedStickHusky]

Brown, Todman, Caulley, Dixon, McCombs, Brockington, etc... are all good aspirational comparisons for AK and I hope he finds a spot in that list. For now, he's a few lines above Joe Williams.

 

[RedStickHusky]

So I'm not totally sure why you snapped.

By this point, that's a conditioned response around here.

 

[sdhusky]

I'm pretty sure you are misunderstanding me.

I mentioned their yards per carry and said it's not fair to Newsome to compare - obviously because of the offensive lines. Pretty sure we agree on that.

You said Newsome would have had a lot more. It wasn't clear if you meant a lot more than Todman had or a lot more than Newsome had with this line. After you clarified you were comparing the lines and not the backs, I'm pretty sure we agree on that as well.

So I'm not totally sure why you snapped.

I didn't snap. I figured out why your tantrums are even less valid. Comprehension.

 

[whaler11]

I didn't snap. I figured out why your tantrums are even less valid. Comprehension.

Sure thing buddy. Go back and read your post and notice my reply had a question mark. That would be because your post could be read two ways and I was asking you to clarify.

But if you think you lack of clarity is a reflection on me that's your call. As for my 'tantrums', that's a good feature of San Diego. Plenty of sand to bury your head in.

 

[sdhusky]

Sure thing buddy. Go back and read your post and notice my reply had a question mark. That would be because your post could be read two ways and I was asking you to clarify.

So you were confused when I said much better, you thought I meant Newsome and not the line. Wow. Just wow.

Just to clarify, do you think the line this year and the year Brown went for over 2k are equivalent?

 

[Devland]

Todman ran for under 300 yards as a frosh. Behind the best run blocking line in UConn history.

I think Newsome will be a better player.

I'm not seeing it. Newsome is nowhere near as quick. He also is a lot more of a hesitant runner. Johnson is the future star back on this team.

 

[sdhusky]

I'm not seeing it. Newsome is nowhere near as quick. He also is a lot more of a hesitant runner. Johnson is the future star back on this team.

You may be right but I think the line this year made him appear more hesitant.

 

[whaler11]

Completely not fair. Newsome would have run for way more per carry behind Todman's frosh line. Not even close. Not remotely close.

SD. I'm not sure how you don't see that this can be read two different ways.

1. Newsome would have run for more yards per carry behind Todman's line compared to what Newsome ran for behind the 2014 line.

or

2. Newsome would have run for more yards per carry than Todman did behind the 2008 line.

I believe you've clarified that you meant #1 and I haven't disagreed with you at all since you clarified.

#1 is obvious. #2 would be debatable since Todman ran for 6.3 yards per carry and it would be difficult to beat that by a margin that wouldn't be remotely close.

'Wow'? I didn't assume. I asked you which one you meant.

 

[sdhusky]

SD. I'm not sure how you don't see that this can be read two different ways.

1. Newsome would have run for more yards per carry behind Todman's line compared to what Newsome ran for behind the 2014 line.

or

2. Newsome would have run for more yards per carry than Todman did behind the 2008 line.

I believe you've clarified that you meant #1 and I haven't disagreed with you at all since you clarified.

#1 is obvious. #2 would be debatable since Todman ran for 6.3 yards per carry and it would be difficult to beat that by a margin that wouldn't be remotely close.

Now you are thinking, its coming easier, isn't it?

Try doing the same thing next time Diaco has a quote in the paper.

 

[whaler11]

Now you are thinking, its coming easier, isn't it?

Try doing the same thing next time Diaco has a quote in the paper.

Well except I was thinking the whole time, while you were accusing me of a lack of comprehension you were the one who wasn't reading...

 

[Bonehead]

Now you are thinking, its coming easier, isn't it?

Try doing the same thing next time Diaco has a quote in the paper.

Wow - I was wondering how the FAQ you were voted 2013 Boneyard Poster of the Year -
Then it hit me - it goes to the poster who can alienate the most amount of other posters - congrats! You are probably in the lead this year also!

 

[kris1]

I'm not seeing it. Newsome is nowhere near as quick. He also is a lot more of a hesitant runner. Johnson is the future star back on this team.

I think you're confusing "hesitant" and "patient". Newsome is a very patient runner. He good at allowing the hole develop, then getting north/south. The problem is, those holes haven't opened very much behind this O-line. He's had some of the teams longer runs from scrimmage. I think we need both, Newsome and Johnson, for this offense to be affective going forward. In addition to a QB and an O-line. There is no team in the country who uses just one back exclusively. There are enough opportunities in a game for both to be effective. I'd love to see formations with both on the field at times. Frankly, I'm really not sure why we haven't done it very much. Maybe it's part of the process?? It's pretty funny reading guys (who probably couldn't run a sub-5.0 forty on their best day) posting that a kid, who was clocked at 4.49, doesn't look as quick as they thought. Drinking tends to do that. He's certainly the fastest RB on the roster. We just haven't seen enough holding when he gets the ball.

 

[Devland]

I think you're confusing "hesitant" and "patient". Newsome is a very patient runner. He good at allowing the hole develop, then getting north/south. The problem is, those holes haven't opened very much behind this O-line. He's had some of the teams longer runs from scrimmage. I think we need both, Newsome and Johnson, for this offense to be affective going forward. In addition to a QB and an O-line. There is no team in the country who uses just one back exclusively. There are enough opportunities in a game for both to be effective. I'd love to see formations with both on the field at times. Frankly, I'm really not sure why we haven't done it very much. Maybe it's part of the process?? It's pretty funny reading guys (who probably couldn't run a sub-5.0 forty on their best day) posting that a kid, who was clocked at 4.49, doesn't look as quick as they thought. Drinking tends to do that. He's certainly the fastest RB on the roster. We just haven't seen enough holding when he gets the ball.

While he is being "patient"the hole is closing up. I had high hopes for him based on his high school resume. It appears to me he is more McCombs than Todman.

 

[Waquoit]

I think you're confusing "hesitant" and "patient". Newsome is a very patient runner.

Maybe so, but on kick returns? You see him exhibit his "patience" inside the 10 then tackled on the 20. I remember how our great returners in the past would start running full speed and worry about the path later.

 

[huskysupporter]

Maybe so, but on kick returns? You see him exhibit his "patience" inside the 10 then tackled on the 20. I remember how our great returners in the past would start running full speed and worry about the path later.

I like Newsome alot as a runner, but he needs to realize he isn't facing nvl kick coverage units now. You can't be patient initially on returns. Accelerate, accelerate, accelerate. Get past the first wave, then you can be patient.

His vision in the open field is special. I really believe that.

 

[kris1]

I like Newsome alot as a runner, but he needs to realize he isn't facing nvl kick coverage units now. You can't be patient initially on returns. Accelerate, accelerate, accelerate. Get past the first wave, then you can be patient.

His vision in the open field is special. I really believe that.

True, but our blocking on KR and PR is putrid.

 

[kris1]

.....and to be honest, he wasn't a threat as a KR in high school. He had very few returned for TDs in his elustrious career.

 

[kris1]

While he is being "patient"the hole is closing up. I had high hopes for him based on his high school resume. It appears to me he is more McCombs than Todman.

Behind this O-line, I totally agree.

 

[BNich]

I rest my case. TO's killed them today.

 

[Stinger92860]

None of this matters if he can't hold onto the ball. Based on this year, it's a problem he has to fix.

 

[BNich]

None of this matters if he can't hold onto the ball. Based on this year, it's a problem he has to fix.

Exactly. Don't say that to some, it's a problem all programs deal with.

 

[Waquoit]

Newsome certainly impacted the game, he was just determined to fumble the opening KO. I think Marriner is better than he is.

 

[Bonehead]

Johnson is running just fine behind this line.

 

[kris1]

Johnson is running just fine behind this line.

Mainly because he's getting the majority of the carries (deservedly so). We have QBs who can't throw a ball to the ocean from the shore (or a potential NFL WR in G. Davis). Our best offense plays have been out of the wildcat and On half back screens. But, Johnson stepped up and took hold of being the lead back. It only took him until the last game of the year, against a once winless SMU team, to rush for 100+ yards. So, I guess you're right he has. That's something to be proud of.

 

[huskysupporter]

Mainly because he's getting the majority of the carries (deservedly so). We have QBs who can't throw a ball to the ocean from the shore (or a potential NFL WR in G. Davis). Our best offense plays have been out of the wildcat and On half back screens. But, Johnson stepped up and took hold of being the lead back. It only took him until the last game of the year, against a once winless SMU team, to rush for 100+ yards. So, I guess you're right he has. That's something to be proud of.

Johnson has run well all season. Newsome hurt himself with fumbles and an inability to pass block. Looking foward to the competition next season. Both should see significant carries.

 

[huskysupporter]

Newsome certainly impacted the game, he was just determined to fumble the opening KO. I think Marriner is better than he is.

Not sure why Marriner was tossed to the side by Coach Diaco. I think he can be a solid all around back.

 

[kris1]

Johnson has run well all season. Newsome hurt himself with fumbles and an inability to pass block. Looking foward to the competition next season. Both should see significant carries.

Without question he has hurt himself and he has to correct it or he should never see the field. It is fixable. Many greats have had problems with it (Tiki Barber comes to mind). We have bigger problems with pass protection then Newsome.

As for Marriner, he can't make people miss in the open field and he doesn't have the burst, the two freshman have. Especially, when there are no holes to run through.

 

[BNich]

Without question he has hurt himself and he has to correct it or he should never see the field. It is fixable. Many greats have had problems with it (Tiki Barber comes to mind). We have bigger problems with pass protection then Newsome.

As for Marriner, he can't make people miss in the open field and he doesn't have the burst, the two freshman have. Especially, when there are no holes to run through.

I'd rather a secure ball carrier in the open field than a fumbling commodity in the any field.

 

[Stainmaster]

I'd rather a secure ball carrier in the open field than a fumbling commodity in the any field.

But what if the fumbling commodity was the CT Gatorade POY?