Once Again, It's What Have You Done for Me Lately?

[UConn07]

http://the-boneyard.com/blog/what-have-you-done-for-me-lately/

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Quite possibly the worst thing I have ever read.

Yeah, blame the fans crazy high expectations that we should beat a 2 win Army team. What a bunch of garbage.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Matt, you're gonna get blasted for this column. Take cover.

Diaco cannot come out and challenge O'Leary and boast about his process taking form after beating UCF and then make the comments he did on yesterday's conference call. Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard were not running the ball on Sat. Other dreadful teams figured out how to stop Army's vaunted (top 5 offense if you ask Spackler) running game.

We need to stop making excuses for losing to a DREADFUL Army team. Just stop.

 

[UConnDan97]

"While UConn fans are acting like fans, with a typical overreaction following a loss, the Huskies are in a good place for the future."

^^^ ridiculous! The team was horribly prepared for Army, and it showed. The coaching staff failed to get calls and players into the huddle on time on numerous occassions. And we made Army look like Alabama. And not one "own it" moment from the head coach or coaching staff. Horse crap! He needs to man up...

 

[uconnric]

Here we go again. This dead horse has been beaten over and over.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Here we go again. This dead horse has been beaten over and over.

What's the alternative? Stop discussing topics pertaining to UConn football?

 

[BHusky]

Army got shut down by 1-8 Kent State and 2-7 Wake Forest among other far from stellar football teams they played. It is hard to play the option when you face it once a year, but 6 other teams on Army's schedule figured it out and won the game and our defense was supposed to be our strength.

Army won because UConn defense could not get off the field on 3rd and 4th down when it was almost certain that Army would be running the ball. And the excuse that they did not have enough time to make plays because Army dominated TOP?!?! Uconn had only 6 less plays and less than 4 minutes difference in TOP between UCF and Army. That small difference turns a team "that is getting better and coming along in the process" after a good UCF win to a "bad football team".

 

[CTMike]

What has UConn done lately? Never mind just lately, we are talking 4 straight losing seasons. That's not overreaction, that's fact. That it will take a while to fix doesn't change the fact that we are Andy Dufrense swimming through doo doo.

But yay process!

 

[Dooley]

http://the-boneyard.com/blog/what-have-you-done-for-me-lately/

Matt - you know I like you and think that you do a great job covering the team. But I don't agree with what you wrote in here. For starters, I don't think that the entire fanbase started expecting a bowl game after the UCF win. Sure, there was reason for a little extra optimism following two straight weeks of playing good opponents very tough and rightfully so...we haven't had a win like the UCF win in years. He11, we haven't had a loss like the ECU loss in years. But I think the majority of the fanbase knew we weren't going bowling after our loss Tulane (some much sooner).

The expectation from the fanbase is exactly what the coaching staff reiterates almost daily: we expect this team/program to get better each day. That means we expect the team to be ready to go against Army. There were some 15-17K UCONN fans that filled the first base side of Yankee Stadium, despite a less-than-marquee matchup between two bad 2-6 teams. Our expectation was to beat Army. That's it. The same Army team that has struggled with the likes of Yale, Ball State, Kent State, Wake Forest and other NCAAF dregs. To see the team as unprepared from the get-go, to drop into a 14-0 hole against a very bad team, did not show any improvement from the ECU and UCF weeks whatsoever. Yes, UCONN had a chance to win the game despite the early struggles. If Chandler throws his final throw into the cadets section instead of quadruple coverage, we might have won. Heck, if our coaches call time out before the play even started after seeing obvious pre-play confusion, we might have won. But we didn't. We lost by the same two scores that we spotted them in the 1st quarter. That's why you have angst and anger within the fanbase this week. We lost to Army...by far, Diaco's worst loss of his UCONN tenure.

 

[SubbaBub]

How about an article about the "process" that goes a little deeper than mentioning there is a process.

Here's an easy one, talk to the lineman on what they've done to improve, the work they've put in, the techniques they've added/improved upon.

A harder one, why can't we seem hold contain on the outside by either the line or the LB ' S

Harder one still, why do we throw away the third series by putting in the backup QB. (I believe we made one first down this season.)

Lastly, is it smart to play so many players when some clearly don't know the playbook or their assignments.

Any would be more welcome to the FB consumer than bishin about our bishin.

 

[whaler11]

Not that I took you seriously before but you now have zero credibility.

Des has more credibility on the topic of PP than you on Diaco.

 

[Bonehead]

“I’m focused on today, that’s it,” he said. “Just like everything I’ve ever said. We are going to get better today, we are going to get better everyday.”


a good follow up might have been -
Coach, you have said this is a real bad football team, collosal I believe was your word, wouldnt it have been wise to focus on trying to get 6 wins this year instead of focusing on today? This would have given you extra practices which in turn would give you and your crack staff of teachers more time to get better over the long haul? Do you think it might have been some short sightedness on your part to only focus on today?

Or -
How exactly do you plan for your upcoming opponent when you are only focused on today? Are you game planning at all besides on Saturday am for your opponent? Are you even game planning or just focused on your team?

Or -
Whats the story with Tim Boyle - and when he replys - we want to play Tim, we do - ask WTF does that mean????

Matt - like others have said its great you have some access but we expect more out of you - we dont need another Jeff Jacobs.

 

[DoctorWho85]

Here we go again. This dead horse has been beaten over and over.

If it was played at an on-campus 60,000+ seat stadium with better helmets, with the block C helmets, UConn would have crushed Army.

Now it's been beaten with a dead horse.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

How about what is the status of Geremy Davis???????????

 

[SubbaBub]

If it was played at an on-campus 60,000+ seat stadium with better helmets, with the block C helmets, UConn would have crushed Army.

True dat.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

How about what is the status of Geremy Davis???????????

Obviously nondescript, non specific lower leg injury. Come on now

 

[ZooCougar]

If we shouldn't expect to beat Army then why bother?

 

[Skiblets]

Matt, love your work but not your best effort. Pretty superficial analysis. And for a beaten down fanbase who has witnessed debacle after debacle over the past four years, it was not too much to expect to beat the team that lost to Yale and Kent St. Sorry. We may be bad but none of us thought we were Army bad. So in my opinion we have every right to question the idea of progress and process after that showing on Saturday.

And this is not about what have you done for me lately? Hell, all this program has done for us over the past four years is empty our wallets with little to show for it. The reaction is more layered that that. For me personally it is:

1. HCBD talks about process and progress and yet we are not seeing it against the weakest of opponents (Stony Brook, Tulane, USF and now Army)
2. There is no transparency around the injury reports - Boyle, Newsome, Davis all with the mysterious lower leg injury
3. There is seemingly no plan at QB with the one and done series each game for Boyle. It is essentially a wasted series each game
4. The cryptic and downright crazy things he says - "wanted to get the FG kicker some work from the hash", "we didn't understand the psyche" (in talking about the lead up to the INT on Saturday) etc.
5. My biggest pet peeve and where we have seen no improvement this year at all is in how long it is taking us to get plays in. Bit us in the on the final two possessions on Saturday and has been slow all year - combo of getting playing time for everyone and indecision on play calling

So it still feels like a hot mess to many of us which is why losing to a team that we all expected to beat along with the items above still makes me (us) feel like we are still in the wilderness.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Matt, you're gonna get blasted for this column. Take cover.

Diaco cannot come out and challenge O'Leary and boast about his process taking form after beating UCF and then make the comments he did on yesterday's conference call. Glenn Davis and Doc Blanchard were not running the ball on Sat. Other dreadful teams figured out how to stop Army's vaunted (top 5 offense if you ask Spackler) running game.

We need to stop making excuses for losing to a DREADFUL Army team. Just stop.

Hey - watch it Serrano. I was wrong, it's #6 rushing offense as of this website today. I said it was probably #5 after our game, not sure why you're fixated on that.
http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/offense/split01/category01/sort01.html

My biggest frigging problem, well a few of them. Nobody was constantly putting Santiago on his ass on Saturday, and even that's ok, if somebody is actually putting the potential pitch guys on their asses, but that wasn't happening either. I came up with a rationalization for it, because we played a 2-deep safety set most of the day, and my guess, because I have no knowledge of what was actually coached or devised, is that happened because they wanted to protect against failures in defending up front, because without the 2-deep set, if somebody screws up in front, those long gains, aren't just long gains, but TD's. Adams and Melifonwu turned out to be our leading tacklers. Am I right as to the reasoning as to what we did? WTF knows - just writing my thoughts. It's not up for debate, that our defending of the option wasn't that great.

BIGGER problem, is that we didn't lose this game because of the way we defended the option, we lost because we couldn't score enough points, and were killing our own drives with mistakes, we turned the ball over 1 more time than they did, and in general the sucktitudeness of our offense in general, when it comes to sustaining drives and scoring points continued for yet another game. At this point, I lay that squarely on coaching. And furthermore, I think Coach Bobby, forgot that he's a head coach now, instead of defensive coordinator when preparing for this Army game, because the way to beat army is simple when you think like a head coach.

You tell your D-coordinator to build a defense that will put the ball carriers and pitch options on their asses on every play - make sure your defenders know who their supposed to hit on every play call - that's it - then you focus all your effort on beating the Army defense with your own offense. That's why Army is 3-6, and not 6-3 - their D sucks. Not their offense.

It appears to me that Diaco spent tons of time game planning to stop Army's strengths, in actually building a scout team weeks in advance to simulate the offense and all that, and came up with an offense that rotated 3 QB's through the game, and has still zero consistency or composure when the pressure is on to perform, false starting on a 4th and 1, and unable to get a play call in and run properly in a 2 minute drill late in the game.

Let's focus on the things that matter eh?

Disclaimer: None of this critique means that I do not like Diaco or want him gone. I like the guy, I want him here, I want him to improve our program back to the level where we are a consistent winner, instead of loser.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Army got shut down by 1-8 Kent State and 2-7 Wake Forest among other far from stellar football teams they played. It is hard to play the option when you face it once a year, but 6 other teams on Army's schedule figured it out and won the game and our defense was supposed to be our strength.

Army won because UConn defense could not get off the field on 3rd and 4th down when it was almost certain that Army would be running the ball. And the excuse that they did not have enough time to make plays because Army dominated TOP?!?! Uconn had only 6 less plays and less than 4 minutes difference in TOP between UCF and Army. That small difference turns a team "that is getting better and coming along in the process" after a good UCF win to a "bad football team".

Nobody has shut down the Army offense so far this season other than Air Force, and in a couple weeks - Navy. Every team that has beaten them, including Yale - has managed to outscore them, because their defense is bad. How hard is it for people to grasp this?

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

This is the same team which lost to Tulane and barely eeked out a win against Stony Brook. At home. I know UCF was a big win, but let's not act like the Army game was some isolated incident of awfulness here. UCF was the exception; not Army.

 

[FastEddie]

So for us fans, what would qualify as "reasonable expectations?" Should we not expect the team to be properly prepared? How about victories over lesser opponents? Is that too much? Maybe we should just be happy with whatever product is put on the field, good, bad, or indifferent? I support Diaco, and was by no means expecting 12-0 this year, but thought we were capable of 5 wins. Changing the culture, turning kids into "men" and preparing them for life, all great stuff, but this is D-1 Football not the Boy Scouts. As a fan, I expect the team to win, or at least be competitive. Diaco himself has said that there are no moral victories, so lets win some games. The fanbase is not the problem.

 

[whaler11]

Army got shut out by Stanford. Scored 6 against Air Force. 17 against Kent, 21 against Wake and Rice.

They scored a lot against Yale, Buffalo and Ball St.

Buffalo already fired their coach, Ball State hadn't beaten an FBS team since 2012 and this isn't the Yale that Carl
and Butch have wet dreams about.

CAN WE STOP WITH THIS NONSENSE YET?!

 

[whaler11]

How about this one. The monumental challenge that Army provides..

Can anyone tell me the list of teams Army has outscored in the second half this season.

I'll save you the trouble: One. UConn.

In every other game Army was outscored in the second half. Maybe - just maybe it's not impossible to make adjustments and beat Army.

Instead UConn kicks off in the second half and promptly gets the ball jammed up their rear ends.

So please if you want to go with blind faith just say that. But there is no defense for losing to Army. It just makes people look silly trying.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Army got shut out by Stanford. Scored 6 against Air Force. 17 against Kent, 21 against Wake and Rice.

They scored a lot against Yale, Buffalo and Ball St.

Buffalo already fired their coach, Ball State hadn't beaten an FBS team since 2012 and this isn't the Yale that Carl
and Butch have wet dreams about.

CAN WE STOP WITH THIS NONSENSE YET?!

Did you watch the Stanford Army game? I did. I also watched the Air Force Army game. I noted they stopped them. I didn't watch Kent Wake or Rice, and I was at Rentschler for Army v. Yale.

Unless you want to credit all the defenses we, the UCONN offense face, with being able to stop us, when it comes to turnovers, ball security, and offensive procedural penalties...whatever.

Against Stanford, Army's offense themselves was a major contributor to stopping themselves. Army's mistakes and Stanford's ability to stay on the field with their own offense, and play disciplined football, with talented players on both sides is what kept Army to 200 yards rushing on the game and zero points, while they exploited the Army D.

Stanford has had a brutal schedule and is hovering on the edge of the top 25. Stanford exploited Army's defense, and benefitted from playing good defense and catching Army on a day when they made a lot of mistakes on O. We caught them on a day that they didn't make mistakes playing in Yankee Stadium, and our offense was for me disgusting to watch. I can't take it most times - the lack of consistency is maddening, and it's entirely on the coaching staff for approaching the game the way they do.

Stanford - Preparing for Army in the middle of their September schedule, can be argued to be a reason as to why they aren't a top 25 team right now. I respect all posters on here, but forgive me if I don't change my opinions based on what you're writing. As for our defense, academy football is always an exposition.

The reality is that our defense, is probably not that much different than a Wake, or Rice, or Kent - that sees army regularly - right now. Where a program like Kent makes up for athletic ability and recruiting with experience against the offense, Rice and Wake, are programs that are supposedly on a some sort of level....which I want to be on a much higher level - but it is where we are now.

With not much more than one single veteran DT, and a veteran SS to anchor on for the majority of the season, is not very strong, but we have young players that have great athletic ability that can develop, and we have been relying mostly on athletic ability at this point on defense, and it was exposed against Army. Badly. I don't believe for a second that players weren't coached to defend the option properly, but seeing it for the first time in real speed, and being so young and inexperienced across the board in general - we were biting like fish on the hook and getting gashed.

Our offense - and the inability to stay on the field, sustain a drive, and score points - which comes from both game planning, coaching, and play calling - the lack of any consistency, identity, or even a starting lineup - is what cost us the win, and the primary reason why we are 2-7 now.