Play-Style Change

[CTBasketball]

Now I don't post on the football section a lot, hence my name, so don't destroy my opinions (however tangential they may be)

But when I look at college football, it is dominated by teams that run the spread, shotgun, or a variation. Sure, there are teams that run the I and pound the ball and are successful. But the most memorable teams are the ones with the fun-to-watch offenses. Oregon, KSU, Florida, Alabama, Etc). I get that recruiting is a big factor, but take Oregon for example. They only recruit maybe an ESPN150 guy a year or two. The rest they recruit just to fit their play style. UConn will never get the top tier recruits, so it is possible to recruit according to a play style.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but what would you rather watch? An Oregon offense or a UConn Pound the Ball Offense? I would take the spread everytime and I'm sure the TV ratings feel the same. I haven't been to a football game since Edsall left mainly because I do not want to pay money to see 50 rushes a game at 2 yards per clip. At least Edsall changed it up and was fun to watch. UConn had a great season in 2007 (I think) with Lorenzen as a multiple threat QB with a great special teams game.

I know the offensive philosophy hasn't changed and it can lead to success, but why hasn't the spread/shotgun offense been talked about? Football drives conference re-alignment, so wouldn't a more memorable team/fun-to-watch team that goes 6-6 or 5-7 be better off than GDL's rushing attack? I would think so...

 

[Chin Diesel]

Let me get some popcorn. This should blow up shortly.

Uconn football will run the spread approximately the same time JC brings back the full court press.

 

[huskymedic]

so wouldn't a more memorable team/fun-to-watch team that goes 6-6 or 5-7 be better off than GDL's rushing attack? I would think so...

Ummm - No.

IMO - Consistently competing for the conference title and going to bowl games would be more fun (and 6-6/5-7 won't get there in the future). I can give a hoot about the offense's play-call scheme/philosophy as long as they win significantly more than they lose.

 

[freescooter]

I think you reflect the general sentiment. Though I actually htink that our problem hasn't been whether we run or pass more. It is that we haven't really done anything effectively. As a matter of fact, last year we were pretty balanced. Ran the ball 52% of the time and threw it 48%. If you c0mpare that with say 2009, when we beat both Notre Dame and south Carolina, we ran the football 58,5%. 2010 numbers were similar. Our problem has been that we haven't been very effective either running the ball, or throwing. In 2010 we averaged 151 yard/game passing but 175 rushing. last year we averaged a few more passing yards, 230, but a paltry 87 rushing yards. You can be successful running the ball or passing the ball but you have to do something well. Our problem is that we didn't do either well.

 

[CTMike]

You may not know this, but we have a new OC this year, and its not GDL.

 

[CTBasketball]

You may not know this, but we have a new OC this year, and its not GDL.

I know but we will still see the same offense. It didn't work last year, why keep it?

 

[CTMike]

I know but we will still see the same offense. It didn't work last year, why keep it?

Personally, I don't think it's the playbook that was the problem, but the play calling.

The two words I've heard most on Weist are "energy" and "tempo". You don't have to have a spread to have an exciting offense. You just need to score points, and he has some experience there.

Hearing how much the players are excited to play for him has me excited. I'm expecting good things.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Now I don't post on the football section a lot, hence my name, so don't destroy my opinions (however tangential they may be)

But when I look at college football, it is dominated by teams that run the spread, shotgun, or a variation. Sure, there are teams that run the I and pound the ball and are successful. But the most memorable teams are the ones with the fun-to-watch offenses. Oregon, KSU, Florida, Alabama, Etc). I get that recruiting is a big factor, but take Oregon for example. They only recruit maybe an ESPN150 guy a year or two. The rest they recruit just to fit their play style. UConn will never get the top tier recruits, so it is possible to recruit according to a play style.

Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but what would you rather watch? An Oregon offense or a UConn Pound the Ball Offense? I would take the spread everytime and I'm sure the TV ratings feel the same. I haven't been to a football game since Edsall left mainly because I do not want to pay money to see 50 rushes a game at 2 yards per clip. At least Edsall changed it up and was fun to watch. UConn had a great season in 2007 (I think) with Lorenzen as a multiple threat QB with a great special teams game.

I know the offensive philosophy hasn't changed and it can lead to success, but why hasn't the spread/shotgun offense been talked about? Football drives conference re-alignment, so wouldn't a more memorable team/fun-to-watch team that goes 6-6 or 5-7 be better off than GDL's rushing attack? I would think so...

The gist of your sentiment is not wrong, but your post is littered with inaccuracies. I'd stick to hoops.

 

[pj]

Play calling, and player enthusiasm, and coach enthusiasm, and getting people ready to execute as a unit. The key in football is getting all eleven in sync acting as a unit. If the enthusiasm isn't there, then someone has a mental lapse, and the play is all too likely to fail.

Now, if you have too many distinct plays and not enough consistent execution of each in practice, that also makes failure likely. I think that may have been a problem with GDL.

 

[jackl]

Personally, I don't think it's the playbook that was the problem, but the play calling.

The two words I've heard most on Weist are "energy" and "tempo". You don't have to have a spread to have an exciting offense. You just need to score points, and he has some experience there.

Hearing how much the players are excited to play for him has me excited. I'm expecting good things.

The play calling was the problem. When most of the fans in the stands could predict within 98% what the next play would be. How hard is it for the opposing teams football DC who has viewed tapes of our games? Not very. A little better line play and not even razzle dazzle, but just enough change of pace to fool the fans even. Go Huskies, can't wait for the opener. I realize you don't put all your cards on the table at first. Just keep us fans guessing.

 

[Husky25]

Running teams can be very explosive (Think Tom Osbourne's Nebraska Cornhuskers, Army, Navy, and Baylor with RGIII).

Just like in basketball, the coordinator who can create and, ultimately take advantage of, the greater amount of mismatches will prevail. I personally don't mind the 3 yards and a cloud of mud offenses of Bo Schembeckler, Woody Hayes, and Lloyd Carr. The two key differences are 1) execution and 2) the coach's recognition to put his players in the best possible position to succeed. Coach DeLeone didn't seem to have a firm grasp of this concept and now he no longer has that responsibility.

 

[Chin Diesel]

Personally, I don't think it's the playbook that was the problem, but the play calling.

The two words I've heard most on Weist are "energy" and "tempo". You don't have to have a spread to have an exciting offense. You just need to score points, and he has some experience there.

Hearing how much the players are excited to play for him has me excited. I'm expecting good things.

I won't give SUcks fans credit, but when PP hired GDL I distinctly remember them telling us how GDL will have 50 different formations to run three plays. I won't say they were right, but they weren't wrong.

 

[CTBasketball]

I think it was a combination of play-calling and the playbook itself. Running teams such as Nebraska are so much different than ours. They aren't really comparable.

When it was like 3rd and 8 and GDL called for a HB Iso up the middle then there is a little wrong.

 

[CTMike]

Keep calm and trust TJ.

 

[CTMike]

Man, if TJW sucks this year, I'm gonna look like an idiot. More than I already do. Haha.

 

[Husky25]

I think it was a combination of play-calling and the playbook itself. Running teams such as Nebraska are so much different than ours. They aren't really comparable.

When it was like 3rd and 8 and GDL called for a HB Iso up the middle then there is a little wrong.

No doubt, but that is not what I interpreted your question to be. Oregon's offense is no doubt more exciting than that of the 2012 Huskies, but that doesn't mean that an offense must have spread characteristics in order to be exciting. There is a certain beauty to grinding out the clock, provided you can get chunks of yards. Running the ball is not the antithesis of excitement, lack of execution is a different story.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[coachcap]

To answer the original premise, I's rather have a Joe Morris, John Riggins, etc. style offense that qualifies for bowl games, than a spread that sits home after the first weekend in December. It's not style of play that matters, it's production. UConn hasn't been productive in the win department, hence the change in OC. As long as TJW gets us to the post season, I'll be satisfied. Otherwise, it's time to clean house in the coaching regime. Three years without a bowl appearance is unacceptable.

 

[SubbaBub]

I don't care what they do on offense/defense as long as they do it well. Anyone who watched teams like ND, SCar and Pitt get steamrolled by the running game should appreciate that non-spread offenses can be exciting to watch.

Alternating turnovers with 3 and outs won't be, regardless of the formation in which they the line up.

Pick something, do it very well and don't be a complete disaster in all the other areas.

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dooley]

The spread looks good on TV because, for the most part, the teams that run it have their players in place and recruit at a higher level for these types of players than UCONN. It will take at least 3 years, maybe more, to successfully transform the offense from a Pro-Style to a Spread and, after the 3 years of recruiting and practices, there is no guarantee that you will win any more games than we are right now. We all remember how flat RichRod fell on his face at Michigan. Oregon runs it because they have been recruiting and practicing for it for years. Same with Cincinnati.

I understand your premise: UCONN should be more exciting like Oregon. Try to keep in mind that 2013 is the most important season in UCONN football history. We HAVE to win 7-8+ games this season. Implementing an entire new offense in the spring (which they didn't do) and this summer is nowhere near enough time to get all of our players on the same page. What I *do* think we will see in 2013 is more of an aggressive Pro Style offense with TJ Weist calling plays (he better be calling plays or else we will finish 5-7, maybe worse, again if GDL is still secretly the OC). So, I think we'll see a little bit more no-huddle when we catch an opponent in a base defense or when TJW feels momentum.

My own personal opinion: I prefer the Pro Style offense for right now. I think it works better for the level of talent we recruit, the climatic environment of New England in the fall, our stadium, and the brand of football that most kids play in high school in the northeast. I'd only be adaptable to the spread if we fail to win 7-8 games this year and have a coaching change AND we are in a Power 5 conference. It will be tough to stomach lean transition years while playing in the AAC. We need to dominate the AAC, not be a program in transition with poor records. Another 1-3 years of bowl-less football at UCONN gives schools like UCF, USF, Houston, and Temple a chance to market themselves to a better conference.

 

[Uconnalliance]

Just win = happy fan base= more fans for the future

 

[jbdphi]

But the most memorable teams are the ones with the fun-to-watch offenses. Oregon, KSU, Florida, Alabama, Etc).

Three of the four teams you named here I would characterize as having relatively humdrum offenses with Oregon being the obvious exception. Alabama, Florida and Kansas State were ranked 1, 5 and 28 in scoring defense respectively and that's what drove their very impressive performances last season. We had similarly great defense but the big difference is where their offenses were average / above average, ours was putrid. All we needed was average and that could have come from a combination of execution (less turnovers, remotely competent running game) and play calling (no wildcat, more variety on 1st down, etc).

 

[CL82]

To me the key to this year is keeping the opposing defense off balance. I don't think we'll have an offense that will be to impose it's will on you to the extent that people won't be able to stop us. But I do think that we've got the ability to come at people a lot of ways and play calling is where TJW is going to earn his paycheck. I am very hopeful that we'll be able to keep teams off balance, particularly early in the season when game film will be minimal. Just a hunch, but I'm excited by the possibility of it.

 

[freescooter]

No doubt, but that is not what I interpreted your question to be. Oregon's offense is no doubt more exciting than that of the 2012 Huskies, but that doesn't mean that an offense must have spread characteristics in order to be exciting. There is a certain beauty to grinding out the clock, provided you can get chunks of yards. Running the ball is not the antithesis of excitement, lack of execution is a different story.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Right. Anybody who watched the Notre Dame game, particularly the last touchdown drive and the final drive saw an offense that simply imposed its will on the Notre Dame defense. When we had a td called back on a phantom hold, it almost didn't matter. It was a beautiful thing to watch. The Pitt game in 2010 was similar when the running game was clicking on all cylinders, and everyone in the building knew Todman was getting the ball on 3rd and 8 but it didn't matter. Again, it was really beautiful to watch.

 

[joey3$trike$]

Execution is the key! It was piss-poor last year on offense, the defense executed 99% of the time, hence the disparity of O vs D.