Pasqualoni Beginning to Disappoint

[Excalibur]

I have no idea if P will work out or not. I was skeptical when he was hired, and I remain so. However, if you're going to criticize the guy, you really need to come up with better examples than a backup quarterback transferring and a kid who hasn't even signed yet talking to other schools. That was really weak.

 

[ZooCougar]

I am skeptical of P because of who hired him. But he definitely isn't in Greg Robinson territory.

 

[noeynox]

I'm glad the board took the OP to task. Look, it bothered me to see Nebrich leave because of the way it happened. Kid should have been redshirted or played more last year. Then, we bring in a JC kid, who is annointed the starter before camp even starts. It doesn't seem fair to Nebrich, I know that, but this is major college football and that isn't always fair.

 

[Adios]

Amazing how emo people get over entertainment.

 

[HartfordHank]

Can somebody post a picture Eeyore? Under a rain cloud?

Asked and answered!

 

[ruskin]

I too am skeptical of P and he is on a short leash with me given his missteps last year. But if he's the defensive coach his record and supporters say he is, things will be fine. Let's not forget most of the defense we are loving was brought in by Edsall. I'm glad Whitmer was named starter before camp, sorry Nebrich leaving, hurts depth, but that's life in the big city. Circle of life: remember, Whitmer transferred out of Illinois.

 

[Waquoit]

Amazing how emo people get over entertainment.

Cause we know how you're above it all.

 

[Waquoit]

I don't think criticizing Coach P is off limits, but the OP doesn't make his case IMO. My take is this: HCPP may well have pulled out another win or two last year by dumbing down his game plan. By playing Randyball. But the game plan was a success, the players on the field just couldn't execute it. There were open guys all over the place past year. There were plays where all we needed was a short quick pass in stride and the play goes for 15-20 yards. Instead we got floaters and balls thrown to the back hip that are stopped for no gain.

Instead of settling for safe, PP challenged the team to play at a higher level. A standard was set. While the team wasn't up to it his first season, I'm thinking (and hoping) it is now. We will be better this year for the decisions that were made last year. If this is not the case at the end of this year, we'll talk.

My POV can be illustated by the most (in)famous play from last year. That late pick against Vandy. The consensus of the play was formed due to the result, a horrible interception. It said we should have played it safe and sat on the ball. Now that would not have guarenteed a win. The odds would have been much higher of a win if the pick wasn't thrown, I get that. But the game plan produced a play where the QB was under no pressure had a receiver down field right in front of him who was wide open. No one with in 1o (20?) yards of him in any direction. Execute that and then it would have been game over. That's the kind of play UConn needs to make to get to the next level. That's why I supported the call. It was the call from a coach that believes in his program as opposed to one who doesn't. Whitmer gives us the best chance of making that play than anyone since DanO.

 

[Adios]

Cause we know how you're above it all.

Do you see me raging on here?

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't think criticizing Coach P is off limits, but the OP doesn't make his case IMO. My take is this: HCPP may well have pulled out another win or two last year by dumbing down his game plan. By playing Randyball. But the game plan was a success, the players on the field just couldn't execute it. There were open guys all over the place past year. There were plays where all we needed was a short quick pass in stride and the play goes for 15-20 yards. Instead we got floaters and balls thrown to the back hip that are stopped for no gain.

Instead of settling for safe, PP challenged the team to play at a higher level. A standard was set. While the team wasn't up to it his first season, I'm thinking (and hoping) it is. We will be better this year for the decisions that were made last year.

My POV can be illustated by the most (in)famous play from last year. That late pick against Vandy. The consensus of the play was formed due to the result, a horrible interception. It said we should have played it safe and sat on the ball. Now that would not have guarenteed a win. The odds would have been much higher of a win if the pick wasn't thrown, I get that. But the game plan produced a play where the QB was under no pressure had a receiver down field right in front of him who was wide open. No one with in 1o (20?) yards of him in any direction. Execute that and then it would have been game over. That's the kind of play UConn needs to make to get to the next level. That's why I supported the call. It was the call from a coach that believes in his program as opposed to one who doesn't. Whitmer gives us the best chance of making that play than anyone since DanO.

That is a well thought out post, and I fully agree that P wants his players to learn more complex schemes which, if they learn them, can produce good results. So did Charlie Weiss by the way, but that doesn't mean P can't pull it off. We need to give him time and see.

I also fully agree that running on 3rd and long at Vandy did not increase the odds of winning the game to 100%. But where I disagree, in a matter that to me has nothing to do with Edsall or P (although it probably does to you) is your statement about throwing there showing that P "believes in his program." As a coach, you do not ever, ever, demonstrate your belief in your program by doing something in the 4th Quarter that decreases your chances of winning the game. You play to win the game. Not to show you believe in the program (whatever that even means). I truly believe (and only you know) that you remain so worked up about our departed coach that you are trying to justify something that many thought was a mistake at the time, that P admitted was his mistake, and that didn't work. To defend a mistake with "it shows he believes in the program" demonstrates nothing more than that you have a theory (which is clearly that Edsall didn't believe in the program while he was here) that you feel the need to defend in every situation.

And before you say it in response, Edsall made plenty of mistakes while here. Every coach makes mistakes everywhere. They just do not prove what you are claiming.

Have a nice day.

 

[Excalibur]

My issue with the play at Vandy wasn't so much that we passed, it's that we threw across the field, right to the sticks. A predictable route where the ball is in the air forever. Throw deep, throw to the flat, run the ball. Any of those are fine. I don't know whether the choice to throw to the sideline was that of Mac or the coaching staff.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

That is a well thought out post, and I fully agree that P wants his players to learn more complex schemes which, if they learn them, can produce good results. So did Charlie Weiss by the way, but that doesn't mean P can't pull it off. We need to give him time and see.

I also fully agree that running on 3rd and long at Vandy did not increase the odds of winning the game to 100%. But where I disagree, in a matter that to me has nothing to do with Edsall or P (although it probably does to you) is your statement about throwing there showing that P "believes in his program." As a coach, you do not ever, ever, demonstrate your belief in your program by doing something in the 4th Quarter that decreases your chances of winning the game. You play to win the game. Not to show you believe in the program (whatever that even means). I truly believe (and only you know) that you remain so worked up about our departed coach that you are trying to justify something that many thought was a mistake at the time, that P admitted was his mistake, and that didn't work. To defend a mistake with "it shows he believes in the program" demonstrates nothing more than that you have a theory (which is clearly that Edsall didn't believe in the program while he was here) that you feel the need to defend in every situation.

And before you say it in response, Edsall made plenty of mistakes while here. Every coach makes mistakes everywhere. They just do not prove what you are claiming.

Have a nice day.

I find your posts on football related topics to be very good. I agree with you more times than not.

But your posts in which you respond to every single subtle (and not so subtle) shot at Edsall is getting really tiresome. Of course you can continue to post and respond to whatever you like, but if you simply ignored these types of posts, there'd be a lot less Edsall fights which you say you despise. Just my opinion.

 

[businesslawyer]

I find your posts on football related topics to be very good. I agree with you more times than not.

But your posts in which you respond to every single subtle (and not so subtle) shot at Edsall is getting really tiresome. Of course you can continue to post and respond to whatever you like, but if you simply ignored these types of posts, there'd be a lot less Edsall fights which you say you despise. Just my opinion.

I respect your opinion. I try very hard not to start these discussions (note that I posted in this thread simply defending P from a silly attack), and struggle with when to not respond and when to respond. My personal opinion, however, remains that to sit back and never respond allows it to look as if this board thinks nothing worth bragging about has been accomplished yet since going I-A. Which I don't believe, and don't want anyone to think UConn fans believe.

And, to be clear, that was not a particularly subtle shot at the departed coach. It was clear, and clearly silly.

 

[mattp]

P thought the players could make the play. he didn't put out a play just to prove a point, he did it b/c he thought we could complete the wide open pass and win the game. last season i felt like i saw more open receivers than i ever have in the past so i think the play calling has improved. often we still didn't complete the pass, and hopefully we will this year. i remember four plays in particular where McCummings was throwing to a receiver that literally didn't have anyone anywhere near them. i think we hit two of them and missed two of them, but the play was there and the calls were good.

 

[Adios]

McEntee was exposed. That's all. Next.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Not meant as a flame but I've seen this comment before and I really don't know what it means. PP has had 1 year of recruiting and now we "look" like a 1-A team? We've had some pretty good teams with good OL, RB, ST, etc. in the past. Why does this team finally "look" like a 1-A team? Like I said, I'm not trying to flame but most experts pick us 6 or 7th out of an eight team conference.

What are you seeing that is so revolutionary?

I could list my height and weight but would anyone really believe me? Whatever. Here's the thing. I've been on the same level with players at UConn before. Field level. Now, our guys in the trenches have been up to speed for several years. Those guys are monsters that we've been putting out at the #1s, but most of the time, we've been bringing in freshmen that need a year or two, if not more, of getting up to size......that's not the case anymore, the freshmen we're bringing are at size already.....so that's the change there.

Now, when you start looking at the linebackers, the defensive backs, the split ends on offense. Tailbacks....

Oh never mind. Last year, at the Louisville game, I had friends of mine back in CT at the game from Colorado, Florida and California. Guys who's last UConn football games, was field level at memorial stadium, a long time ago. We were down under the scoreboard at the opening kickoff, kicking back a few, and the way the day went, spent most of the afternoon there. Stayed right to the end, and went down to the empty seats late. Every single one of them couldn't believe the size of the guys we had on the field for kick units, from that angle up there and then down lower......vs. the guys that louisville had running down - especially on the kicks. "We look like a pee wee team." Quote.

That won't be the case this year. We're going to put some big, fast, and powerful athletes out there on kicks this year. Keep in mind, that the players that are playing kick coverages, are usually down on the depth chart a bit. Take it for what you will.

When I stand field level, with the guys, I see a team that's much different in 2012, than what we had in 2010. That's all I mean. I see a team, that could stand shoulder to shoulder from 1-105 with any program in the country, and not be outsized,overmatched.

Now - you cant win with size and speed alone, but it sure helps.

 

[Rondogg]

OK, just trying to understand your methodology.

Thanks.

 

[whaler11]

I guess we were too small on specials in 2010 when we had a ton of huge returns and special teams was a huge part of the success.

I might not agree with the strategy entirely, but the staff implemented their system year one. It's an investment that may pay off this year and in the future - time will tell.

Nebrich may just be more comfortable someplace else. The people he committed to are elsewhere. It is a loss because we are now one injury from McEntee needing to play the season AND stay healthy because McCummings is losing valuable time and Cochran will be in way over his head as a true freshman not able to fully particpate in summer camp. Kids transfer especially quarterbacks, one would notice every quarterback we've played for some years except Endres and Box's one start transferred in. JMac, Tyler, Frazier and the current starter. Have we even had a high school recruited quarterback that played four years of eligibilty at the position since Bones?

 

[FAIRTIDES]

That is a well thought out post, and I fully agree that P wants his players to learn more complex schemes which, if they learn them, can produce good results. So did Charlie Weiss by the way, but that doesn't mean P can't pull it off. We need to give him time and see.

I also fully agree that running on 3rd and long at Vandy did not increase the odds of winning the game to 100%. But where I disagree, in a matter that to me has nothing to do with Edsall or P (although it probably does to you) is your statement about throwing there showing that P "believes in his program." As a coach, you do not ever, ever, demonstrate your belief in your program by doing something in the 4th Quarter that decreases your chances of winning the game. You play to win the game. Not to show you believe in the program (whatever that even means). I truly believe (and only you know) that you remain so worked up about our departed coach that you are trying to justify something that many thought was a mistake at the time, that P admitted was his mistake, and that didn't work. To defend a mistake with "it shows he believes in the program" demonstrates nothing more than that you have a theory (which is clearly that Edsall didn't believe in the program while he was here) that you feel the need to defend in every situation.

And before you say it in response, Edsall made plenty of mistakes while here. Every coach makes mistakes everywhere. They just do not prove what you are claiming.

Have a nice day.

BL - One point of disagreement. You are absolutely right about "the pass" not being related to confidence in the program. On the other hand, I think it had everything to do with showing confidence in the QB, for the benefit of the QB. I also think the QB was given a common Parcells' instruction, "If it's not there, throw it away. A punt is not a bad thing." Last year, I sometimes wondered what the rest of the QB's yr would have been like if that one pass had been completed. Confidence, in sports, is incredibly fragile.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I guess we were too small on specials in 2010 when we had a ton of huge returns and special teams was a huge part of the success.

I might not agree with the strategy entirely, but the staff implemented their system year one. It's an investment that may pay off this year and in the future - time will tell.

Nebrich may just be more comfortable someplace else. The people he committed to are elsewhere. It is a loss because we are now one injury from McEntee needing to play the season AND stay healthy because McCummings is losing valuable time and Cochran will be in way over his head as a true freshman not able to fully particpate in summer camp. Kids transfer especially quarterbacks, one would notice every quarterback we've played for some years except Endres and Box's one start transferred in. JMac, Tyler, Frazier and the current starter. Have we even had a high school recruited quarterback that played four years of eligibilty at the position since Bones?

I believe Bones and Orlovsky are the only 2 from the FBS era.

 

[businesslawyer]

I guess we were too small on specials in 2010 when we had a ton of huge returns and special teams was a huge part of the success.

I might not agree with the strategy entirely, but the staff implemented their system year one. It's an investment that may pay off this year and in the future - time will tell.

Nebrich may just be more comfortable someplace else. The people he committed to are elsewhere. It is a loss because we are now one injury from McEntee needing to play the season AND stay healthy because McCummings is losing valuable time and Cochran will be in way over his head as a true freshman not able to fully particpate in summer camp. Kids transfer especially quarterbacks, one would notice every quarterback we've played for some years except Endres and Box's one start transferred in. JMac, Tyler, Frazier and the current starter. Have we even had a high school recruited quarterback that played four years of eligibilty at the position since Bones?

The answer to your question is no, we have not.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Whaler - typical.

Am I in the minority, thinking that in the past, especially when you moved away from the point of attack at scrimmage - we tended to be a small team? Vertically and horizontally through the roster? Maybe I am.

Well, either way - if you thought we were small before, we aren't anymore, and if you didn't think we were small before - nothing's changed.

 

[businesslawyer]

BL - One point of disagreement. You are absolutely right about "the pass" not being related to confidence in the program. On the other hand, I think it had everything to do with showing confidence in the QB, for the benefit of the QB. I also think the QB was given a common Parcells' instruction, "If it's not there, throw it away. A punt is not a bad thing." Last year, I sometimes wondered what the rest of the QB's yr would have been like if that one pass had been completed. Confidence, in sports, is incredibly fragile.

Look, those are all fair points. I understand the arguments for giving JM rope and I'm not telling you no other coach makes the same call at the same time. All I am telling you is what I was screaming into my TV as we went into the huddle, which is if we just make sure we make their Offense beat us from that position we were going to win the game and the odds were way too high that JM was going to force something and have it picked. I still believe that. But the bigger point is it's just a play call. Coaches get some right and some wrong. The fact that a play call by a coach that doesn't work is used as an indictment of a former coach who didn't make that or the other call is ....

 

[businesslawyer]

Whaler - typical.

Am I in the minority, thinking that in the past, especially when you moved away from the point of attack at scrimmage - we tended to be a small team? Vertically and horizontally through the roster? Maybe I am.

Well, either way - if you thought we were small before, we aren't anymore, and if you didn't think we were small before - nothing's changed.

Carl -- I think you're making too much out of this size disparity. I think it may be true to some small extent that we are recruiting bigger players now than we did then, as opposed to recruiting more smaller and quicker players and making sure we put weight on them, but any movement in that regard would seem marginal and to some degree offset by the fact that every year players every where are getting bigger because young men are getting bigger.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Whaler - typical.

Am I in the minority, thinking that in the past, especially when you moved away from the point of attack at scrimmage - we tended to be a small team? Vertically and horizontally through the roster? Maybe I am.

Well, either way - if you thought we were small before, we aren't anymore, and if you didn't think we were small before - nothing's changed.

Honestly, I think the incoming frosh this year (Coach P's first class) are more of the "prototype" size, but I don't know how you can say that's a credit to P. All of the guys, with the exception of the true frosh that started to practice last week, were brought in by the former regime.

I think size helps, but I'm much much much more interested in whether these kids can play football. And only time will tell.