RB and recruiting....

[uconndogs]

That McCombs took every handoff on Thursday clearly tells me that neither Max or Hypolite are thought of very highly. It's possibly that Mariner is just not ready because of youth. Hard to know where Williams would have figured in, but he had all of last season to earn meaningful carries in an offense that couldn't get the ground game going. And, yes, a lot of struggles in the running game can be pinned on the OL and blocking schemes, but all the more reason a more powerful back should be able to earn carries.

Pretty sure I am right on this. At one point in the not too distant past we had all of the following on our roster at the same time: Donald Brown, Jordan Todman, Andrew Dixon, Robbie Frey and Reggie McClain. I throw McClain in because he was originally recruited and slotted on the roster as a RB, but, despite being one hell of an athlete (and he is one hell of an athlete) he couldn't earn time as a RB and was switched to CB. I don't think McCombs, let alone anyone else on the roster, is the back that any of these past Huskies were. It's mind boggling to me that we are three seasons in to be so deficient at a critical position.

I will say it again. We don't run we don't win.

 

[UConnJim]

RB depth was a strength of the Edsall era. It is baffling that PP has relied on a 160 to 170 lb running back who is not fast or strong for 3 seasons! RB is one of the positions that freshman or redshirt freshman can start. This is a coaching problem plain and simple.

 

[Dooley]

Our running game is really a perfect storm. George DeLoser has come in and single handedly destroyed the one facet that UCONN has always been good at: physical offensive line and running the football. We have a line that can't open up any holes for a 160 lb running back who is neither fast or strong enough to break enough tackles to gain positive yards. If McCombs was running behind our 2009 line, he would probably have had more success. But he's running behind GDL's awful line and the results are what they are.

 

[jdb50]

During camp we are told that the staff is pleased with the work of different guys then the game comes and they never get a shot. This year it wasn't just the reporters telling us this it was the head coach. I agree there has been a drop off in talent from the Brown, Dixon, Todman years but the insistance on running just one guy is surprising considering we had a new OC supposedly calling the plays.

 

[rich1122]

If you watch the game McCombs looked good in the first half. Even the first series on the 3 and out.. He had a couple of nice runs and I saw him run over a safety. The kid plays hard every down. Had 4.5/run not shabby. I was much more enthused, especially in the first half.

 

[ktuck911]

If you watch the game McCombs looked good in the first half. Even the first series on the 3 and out.. He had a couple of nice runs and I saw him run over a safety. The kid plays hard every down. Had 4.5/run not shabby. I was much more enthused, especially in the first half.

I get what u mean bro, but he's the ONLY back getting carries.. You don't find that disturbing? at a good 25 to 30lbs under 200lbs???? We gotta get anothe back back there that can do some things.. we didn't show that in game one which brings about the concern.. rightfully so... And the concern was even more justified on the 3rd and short plays...

 

[jdb50]

If you watch the game McCombs looked good in the first half. Even the first series on the 3 and out.. He had a couple of nice runs and I saw him run over a safety. The kid plays hard every down. Had 4.5/run not shabby. I was much more enthused, especially in the first half.

Yes he does play hard every down but the results are whaat they are. I don't think we wear down the defense when he is the one they have to tackle. We had alot of 2 back sets but he always gets the carry. Some variety might help. You can't say with him running that we are pounding the defense over the course of a game. Since our QB doesn't run we are really not hard to figure out.

 

[Pudge]

Number 1. How would you know about DeLorenzo, Williams or Hyppolite? Or Marriner. These toads talk about spreading it around. Never happens. We have not really seen opportunity given in any game is 25 games.

Number 2. Lyle McCombs is a fine COMPLIMENTARY RB. That's it. He shouldn't be relied on as a workhorse. 10 carries at most. 4.5 ypc. Swing passes.

Number 3. You're right. Brown Dixon Frey Todman McClain. All together. And we had Caulley Brockington Bellamy etc in another stack. There's no reason why UConn can't recruit this deep regularly. It's the coaching. And again ... Terry Richardson was good.

Number 4. I actually think we're getting great OLine candidates. Better than 10 years ago. It's coaching. And bad scheme.

 

[UConnJim]

When you have a small RB that can't break tackles and is not fast, it changes the whole defensive philosophy. On defense, you know one guy can bring him down and you can easily pursue if the first guy misses.

As for the OLine, I agree that UConn has poor schemes and the OLine looks lost. The poor schemes are making the OLine look worse than they are.

The lack of RB depth and OLine schemes = bad coaching.

 

[UConnDan97]

I get what u mean bro, but he's the ONLY back getting carries.. You don't find that disturbing?

At risk of butting into someone else's question, I would find it disturbing if ANY of the other runners displayed any ability as a solid #2 back. Everything I've seen from Max or Hyppolite would suggest to me that they aren't there. McCombs is noticeably better than the both of them, and Marriner is still a freshman and may need some time to develop (although I haven't seen him personally so I'm not sure). But for anyone that is suggesting that DeLorenzo should get more carries, I think they are looking for an answer in the wrong spot. A goal-line bang 'em up run? Okay. Catching in the flat? Okay. But not on the ground...

 

[Duncan Idaho]

We had bigger lines, it was built for a power game, Greene is now 30lbs lighter since his freshman year. The staff wants them all around 300-310 for this type of play, that use to be the size of our centers.

 

[metsfan2323]

McCombs was not the problem on Thursday, he seemed to be the most inspired player we had and he has clearly added some weight and strength.

That said I want to see Marriner get some action.

 

[ktuck911]

At risk of butting into someone else's question, I would find it disturbing if ANY of the other runners displayed any ability as a solid #2 back. Everything I've seen from Max or Hyppolite would suggest to me that they aren't there. McCombs is noticeably better than the both of them, and Marriner is still a freshman and may need some time to develop (although I haven't seen him personally so I'm not sure). But for anyone that is suggesting that DeLorenzo should get more carries, I think they are looking for an answer in the wrong spot. A goal-line bang 'em up run? Okay. Catching in the flat? Okay. But not on the ground...

Can't argue with u there Mr. Moore... which kind of eludes to the end of my previous comment. You would at least think that Delorenzo or Hyppolite could've provided some a carry or two on 3rd and short... Maybe that's for Claxx, who didn't suit up in game 1? Let's hope we at the very least get our short yardage game in order.

 

[ktuck911]

McCombs was not the problem on Thursday, he seemed to be the most inspired player we had and he has clearly added some weight and strength.

That said I want to see Marriner get some action.

If Delorenzo and Hyppolite clearly can't do it at #2 you gotta put Marriner in... I remember hearing that during training camp he showed the ability to continuously gain positive yardage.. We need that....

 

[ktuck911]

It's the coaching. And again ... Terry Richardson was good.

Number 4. I actually think we're getting great OLine candidates. Better than 10 years ago. It's coaching. And bad scheme.

This.

I know guys beat on me a little here about a RB coach.. You guys underestimate how important Richardson was to our run game... That's why I was hoping we'd bring a guy in to replace him with similar attributes...not a guy that has coached one position (i.e. LBs or STs) and then comes here to become a RB for the first time in his coaching career at the FBS level.. To me it dumbs down one of our team's strong points... So far.. I think I'm right....

 

[rich1122]

McCombs had a very good first half and and very bad second half. I'll take 4.5 yard/carry. He was not the problem.

 

[Alum86]

That the incompetents who coach cannot even put Max in for 1-2 carries is disturbing.

 

[uconnell]

After practice and after the game all PP does is blow smoke up our butt.

 

[Husky68]

At risk of butting into someone else's question, I would find it disturbing if ANY of the other runners displayed any ability as a solid #2 back. Everything I've seen from Max or Hyppolite would suggest to me that they aren't there. McCombs is noticeably better than the both of them, and Marriner is still a freshman and may need some time to develop (although I haven't seen him personally so I'm not sure). But for anyone that is suggesting that DeLorenzo should get more carries, I think they are looking for an answer in the wrong spot. A goal-line bang 'em up run? Okay. Catching in the flat? Okay. But not on the ground...

"ANY of the others" ... "any ability as a solid #2 back"

So 90 plus yards in a game against Div 1 competition in your red shirt freshman year after getting almost no burn before that (nor after) is not good enough to warrant a solid #2 status the following year? How many times has the "solid" # 1 back gotten to 90 plus yards per game, so 74 yards vs. a FCS gets you "solid #1" status?
LM would not start for virtually any BCS team, probably not even be 2nd string. Name one team you saw on tv as BCS level team where he was even "just as good" as their starting back.
LM got his 70 something yards against a FCS level team, and one not even picked in the top10 at that level. Why didn't he get more yards, UConn didn't get enough 1st downs so even though he got all the carries were less than 20, and who ran the ball on 3rd downs and didn't make them - LM. Hmmmmm, no cause and effect here?

Key stats for running is not getting 5 yards on 1st and 10 at your own 30 yardline, is getting 3rd and short (and some 2nd's and short) and goal line and short. Here are LM's stats vs. Towson (again, this is Towson):
3rd and 4 = 3 yards and punt.
2nd and 2 = loss 3 and series ends with punt.
3rd and 1 = no gain and punt.
1st and goal at 1 = loss of 1 which leads to 2nd and goal from 2 = gain 1 and subsequent penalty and field goal.

UConn is not going to win games with LM taking 100% of RB carries and all the 3rd and short carries, just not going to happen. If can't find another back to complement, who is better, or better at some phase (like short yardage); go with empty backfield or just H back for blocking or put in the freshman athlete QB and go 100% wildcat/spread.

 

[UConnDan97]

"ANY of the others" ... "any ability as a solid #2 back"

So 90 plus yards in a game against Div 1 competition in your red shirt freshman year after getting almost no burn before that (nor after) is not good enough to warrant a solid #2 status the following year? How many times has the "solid" # 1 back gotten to 90 plus yards per game, so 74 yards vs. a FCS gets you "solid #1" status?
LM would not start for virtually any BCS team, probably not even be 2nd string. Name one team you saw on tv as BCS level team where he was even "just as good" as their starting back.
LM got his 70 something yards against a FCS level team, and one not even picked in the top10 at that level. Why didn't he get more yards, UConn didn't get enough 1st downs so even though he got all the carries were less than 20, and who ran the ball on 3rd downs and didn't make them - LM. Hmmmmm, no cause and effect here?

Key stats for running is not getting 5 yards on 1st and 10 at your own 30 yardline, is getting 3rd and short (and some 2nd's and short) and goal line and short. Here are LM's stats vs. Towson (again, this is Towson):
3rd and 4 = 3 yards and punt.
2nd and 2 = loss 3 and series ends with punt.
3rd and 1 = no gain and punt.
1st and goal at 1 = loss of 1 which leads to 2nd and goal from 2 = gain 1 and subsequent penalty and field goal.

UConn is not going to win games with LM taking 100% of RB carries and all the 3rd and short carries, just not going to happen. If can't find another back to complement, who is better, or better at some phase (like short yardage); go with empty backfield or just H back for blocking or put in the freshman athlete QB and go 100% wildcat/spread.

I'm seriously tired of reading about how McCombs sucks. Over 1,200 yards as a freshman, earning All Big East co-freshman of the year with Teddy Bridgewater.

Do we need another back to go along with McCombs? Yes. Is it clear to me that the back is at UConn right now? No. Simple as that.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I'm seriously tired of reading about how McCombs sucks. Over 1,200 yards as a freshman, earning All Big East co-freshman of the year with Teddy Bridgewater.

Do we need another back to go along with McCombs? Yes. Is it clear to me that the back is at UConn right now? No. Simple as that.

It's impossible, based on the sample size, to say that as definitively as you have. I actually thought Delorenzo played well when he got extended burn, which wasn't much.

 

[pj]

If we had an effective offensive line, we probably have 3-4 backs who could be productive. With the line we have, only McCombs is even semi-effective. He had a good yard per carry average but can't reliably get us 1 yard when we need it.

We have to fix the offensive line. That's it. With the offensive line working there are not only holes on running plays, but the passing game is more effective and Davis and Phillips will spread defenders over the field. The backs will look pretty good if the o-line becomes merely competent.

 

[uconnell]

Dan and we know that how? All we've seen is LM. Put in a freshman until we get one that can do it.

 

[UConnDan97]

It's impossible, based on the sample size, to say that as definitively as you have. I actually thought Delorenzo played well when he got extended burn, which wasn't much.

Are you saying it's impossible for me to say that it is unclear that the second back is here at UConn right now? By definition, being unclear is always possible...

For what it's worth, DeLorenzo has looked good in spots to me, and has also looked bad in spots. But to me, I haven't seen anything to suggest that he is even an equivalent back to McCombs, much less a better one like some have suggested in this thread. Believe me, I'm always rooting for a local kid to make big waves, because it's good for the growth of the game in the state. But if I'm being honest....he's not as fast nor is he as shifty as McCombs. He's bigger though, and should probably earn the goal-line opportunities...

 

[UConnDan97]

If we had an effective offensive line, we probably have 3-4 backs who could be productive. With the line we have, only McCombs is even semi-effective. He had a good yard per carry average but can't reliably get us 1 yard when we need it.

We have to fix the offensive line. That's it. With the offensive line working there are not only holes on running plays, but the passing game is more effective and Davis and Phillips will spread defenders over the field. The backs will look pretty good if the o-line becomes merely competent.

This is about as good as I could have said it. No, actually it's better than I could have said it.

If we are going to have to rely on a back that is shifty and has a quick burst, then that is always going to favor McCombs over DeLorenzo and Hyppolite. For the 1-yard bang, I'm fine with lining up DeLorenzo and having him power his way for 2...