Reading the SU board

[jbdphi]

I just want to get this thread up to 100.

By the way, this makes for fun reading on a slow work day...

 

[UConnDan97]

I agree with some of your premise, but I can't give you "full credit." What I mean by that is, yes you are correct in stating that a top recruit that has his eyes on Michigan is more likely to go there than to go to UConn for football, but that's because Michigan has nationally recognized football tradition. That fact doesn't discredit the fact that our nationally recognized basketball program gives us an edge over similar football programs that don't have that nationally recognized basketball. A good analogy would be a 3-star recruit comparing UConn versus Minnesota, or UConn versus BC. UConn versus Michigan or UConn versus Ohio State is always going to be a tough sell for us.

And although I have a soft spot in my heart for CCSU, that's a terrible analogy. They might be recognized as a good school for an education major, but really only in our state's borders. There is no way on earth that you could convince me that CCSU is nationally known for its education majors. If they were, my aunt and brother would both be ecstatic about their degrees right now (I'm sure they are both proud alums either way).

"Come to UConn. We are good at MULTIPLE sports!"

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

From one former Apologista to another.....let it go man. You're never going to convince sdhusky or any of the others to change their opinions. And, to be frank, you're taking the Edsall criticism almost personally and your defense of him is a bit over the top.

 

[UConnDan97]

And let me add to Jimmy's comment that I could be classified as an "Apologista" as well (just look at my post on page 4 or 5, where I caught crap for calling his UConn record "exceptional"). All I was commenting on was the fact that having name recognition helps recruiting, even if the recognition comes from another sport. And even in 98-99, we were a national brand. We had almost a decade of NCAA tourney appearances and big wins / big players (Marshall, Allen, etc.), as well as big wins in the Big East. We weren't Valparaiso...

...but we Apologistas do need to stick together, so...

 

[johnhuskies95]

We were tied for 25th in the BCS standings in 2007 BEFORE the bowl game.

Not to go all Bill Parcells on everyone, but you are what your record says you are. He was 74-70 at UConn, and 22-26 in conference. Edsall did some good things and even some great things, but he's won less than half of his games in his career.

 

[Duncan Idaho]

We were tied for 25th in the BCS standings in 2007 BEFORE the bowl game.

Not to go all Bill Parcells on everyone, but you are what your record says you are. He was 74-70 at UConn, and 22-26 in conference. Edsall did some good things and even some great things, but he's won less than half of his games in his career.

Rough start, stronger finish against a higher level of competition.

 

[Pudge]

Boise ... UConn. Boise ... UConn.

Both impressive (they are more so ... ok???). My compelling thought, though, is that: WE in the BE have seen this play out perfectly. A Cincy or a USF; a UConn NOW Houston, SMU, UCF, Boise, SDSt given a chance can have a wonderful half decade & skunk a Syracuse or a Pitt or a Duke or a Kansas or a Mississippi State. Programs with just a little platform makes college football far more interesting. That's where we go with this new NBC/FOX and whatever stuff. I expect Brett McMurphy will be proven, as most sportswriters are (HEAR ME Mike DiMauro) to know didly in the world of economics. This package is valuable ... not ACC numbers; but, the schools are IN because the number will be over $10m for the All-in Schools (less for Football only) and that is many times the MWC dollars. Or C-USA.

Given a slim chance at the 4 team Playoff, you can see Boise or Houston WIN the National Championship. Get hot for 2 games. Hey ... that's why they play the games.

You all know who you are now. Some UConn fans want to just wallow in crap.

 

[businesslawyer]

This. 1000%, perfectly said, this.

If that quote just gets saved somewhere on the board, so that anyone who cares about rationality has access to it, I think I could resist coming in to defend against the silly attacks again and again when goodness forbid someone questions anything about our present regime.

 

[Palatine]

Edsall was a good not great coach. It is impossible to say if another coach would have done better, worse or about the same.

Regardless, I will never lower my expectations for the football program. If BYU can earn a national championship, anything is possible. The goal should be to go undefeated, to win the conference and win the national championship. There is no other reason to play.

 

[Waquoit]

What apoligistas refuse to acknowledge is the effect a crappy ending has on the rest of the story. It's human nature, it's true for books, movies and for real life. It's not Benedict Arnold, hero of the battle of Saratoga - the turning point of the American Revolution. It's Benedict Arnold, traitor.

 

[UConnDan97]

What apoligistas refuse to acknowledge is the effect a crappy ending has on the rest of the story. It's human nature, it's true for books, movies and for real life. It's not Benedict Arnold, hero of the battle of Saratoga - the turning point of the American Revolution. It's Benedict Arnold, traitor.

The fact that you can write about Benedict Arnold as the hero of Saratoga means that you can appreciate what he did for this country without ignoring it due to his treason, right? Why can't you do the same for Edsall's accomplishments in light of his treason? Odd...

 

[Waquoit]

The fact that you can write about Benedict Arnold as the hero of Saratoga means that you can appreciate what he did for this country without ignoring it due to his treason, right? Why can't you do the same for Edsall's accomplishments in light of his treason? Odd...

Not odd. Normal. What's odd is the figurative ball licking of a guy who just pissed in your face.

 

[UConnDan97]

Not odd. Normal. What's odd is the figurative ball licking of a guy who just pissed in your face.

That guy pissed in our faces, and now he is paying a humorous price for it. It is my absolute wish and desire to continue the humorous price by beating the urine out of them this coming football year. It doesn't mean that he wasn't a very good coach for us. Period.

 

[sdhusky]

This. 1000%, perfectly said, this.

If that quote just gets saved somewhere on the board, so that anyone who cares about rationality has access to it, I think I could resist coming in to defend against the silly attacks again and again when goodness forbid someone questions anything about our present regime.

The fact that you can write about Benedict Arnold as the hero of Saratoga means that you can appreciate what he did for this country without ignoring it due to his treason, right? Why can't you do the same for Edsall's accomplishments in light of his treason? Odd...

Why does saying IMHO that Edsall didn't suck but I don't honestly feel he accomplished much more than that is so unreasonable?

This isn't the 70's. The rules when Edsall came to the program were more in the favor of the little guy than ever before. By 2005, we had great facilities, were in a BCS conference and on national TV. I think our situation was about the same as UofL, Cincy and RU. We never had a season like their best years.

He wasn't Krag or GROB or Terry Shea. For that I am thankful but I'm not willing to go much beyond that.

I think Kelly or Petrino or RR all would have done much better so I don't think he should be held in that high of esteem. There is a reason why nobody else wanted him and he kept getting turned down for new jobs.

 

[UConnDan97]

Why does saying IMHO that Edsall didn't suck but I don't honestly feel he accomplished much more than that is so unreasonable?

This isn't the 70's. The rules when Edsall came to the program were more in the favor of the little guy than ever before. By 2005, we had great facilities, were in a BCS conference and on national TV. I think our situation was about the same as UofL, Cincy and RU. We never had a season like their best years.

He wasn't Krag or GROB or Terry Shea. For that I am thankful but I'm not willing to go much beyond that.

I think Kelly or Petrino or RR all would have done much better so I don't think he should be held in that high of esteem. There is a reason why nobody else wanted him and he kept getting turned down for new jobs.

I respect your opinion. And I am not going to argue that Edsall was as good as Kelly, Petrino, or RR. Each one of those individuals was so good that they were pulled away by some of the most coveted positions a coach could be pulled by (ND, the Atlanta Falcons, and Michigan respectively).

However, are you telling me that there are only two levels of coaches; those that went on to the most highly coveted jobs in the country, and those that "didn't suck"?? Is that seriously the only two options? You're right, Edsall wasn't Kragthorpe or Grob, or Shea, (and thank God, he wasn't Robinson!) but I would also say that he was better than Wannstadt, a former professional coach, by the way. He certainly did more with less than what Wanny had. He was also better in my opinion than Schiano (a current professional coach) and also did more than him with less. He was better, in my opinion, than Leavitt, who....wait for it....ALSO had more than he had!

So, I guess my only struggle is with the idea that Edsall's only claim to fame was that he "didn't suck"...

 

[johnhuskies95]

If you look at his record, he's an average coach. And then if you look at the rebuilding job he had, he becomes an above average/pretty good coach.

The fact that he couldn't recruit even a halfway decent quarterback after Danny O is the most disappointing thing during his time here, and the reason UConn never had a 10 win season IMO. In addition, he consistently got killed with in-state recruiting.

 

[pj]

I would also say that he was better than Wannstadt, a former professional coach, by the way. He certainly did more with less than what Wanny had. He was also better in my opinion than Schiano (a current professional coach) and also did more than him with less. He was better, in my opinion, than Leavitt, who....wait for it....ALSO had more than he had!

Maybe Edsall should be in the pros, since he does more with what he has than Schiano; and pro coaches don't have to recruit. But isn't recruiting a pretty significant part of being a college coach? If Edsall recruited worse than Schiano and then outcoached him to get to rough parity in performance, isn't he at best Schiano's peer as a college coach?

I'm guessing that not many people in the pros believe that Edsall is better than Schiano, or Edsall might be working there instead of at Maryland.