Should we scale back the hurry up offense?

[metsfan2323]

I think we need to for the simple reason that we do not have the depth on defense to play so many plays. The game just ends up being way too long and injuries will pile up.

I think we should stay no -huddle and hurry up to the line, but then let time run off the clock. We should occasionally snap quickly to keep the defense confused but I think the "hurry up and wait" approach is best going foward or just go back to the huddle, but we can't be playing 5 quarter games.

 

[BlueDogs]

I'd let it play itself out more.

We scored more points in one half than the last 4 games of the season last year using the Diaco rope-a-dope play for 0-0. This was despite a simply incompetent OLine. The only thing UConn can do is tire the D and get them out of alignment because there is zero push by the OL. Frankly, the whole line ought to be replaced. They are horrrndous. The fact we put up 20 in the second half makes it all the more remarkable.


I'll grant you that the D is very poor even with smaller, supposedly quicker players. I'm not convinced this 3-3 gimmick works or sustains with big boy football. In fact, I think there is a strong possibility we get gashed big time on the ground by a quality O-Line and heavy-duty back with size and speed up the middle. This happened a couple of times with less athletic, decent HC running backs. The middle of the field was also heavily exploited by HC in the pass (well pretty much everywhere, but there where big holes in coverage in the middle at 10-15 yards). I expected much more disruption but saw little special in this new scheme other than soft cover, soft run defense, and soft mentality with poor individual tackling, and a lot gang tackling trying to bring down folks bigger and stronger. They are remarkably weak in the physicality department and the supposed speed and athleticism is not compensating.

Lots of work to do, but way too early to switch schemes.

 

[Walker11]

No way, if only for aesthetic reasons. I sure as hell don't want to sit through a game where we run hurry up to the line and then just count down the clock.

The defense is going to struggle regardless of scheme. We have a lot of young DB's and green LB's and little depth on the D-line. The team just needs to take its lumps an figure out which holdovers have what it takes. There is a reason more and more of the big boys are switching to a base nickel defense and these are schools who have the ability to recruit D-linemen.

 

[RedSoloCup]

I think we need to ride it for a short bit, and see what kind of work we can do with it.

These aren't players pulled for this system, but there were flashes last night where I was happy to see growth.

It's a 2 year plan!

 

[UConnDan97]

I think it's the right thing to keep doing. As bad as the line was, we generated the yards and the points. They are still learning the system and it will continue to improve. It also will keep the better defenses from catching their breaths or possibly even getting their desired personnel changes onto the field in time.

As for the defense, we were missing or best DL for most of the game as well as our best THREE linebackers (after Joseph injury). While there were a lot of "oh dear" moments last night, I'm betting that they'll get better with more time in the system and better personnel on the field...

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

It's pretty bad when you're not getting first downs and your possession is like 45 seconds but hurry up wait was the Diaco offense. We're not doing that .

 

[SubbaBub]

Scheme wise, the O looked pretty darn good. Unlike the vanilla predictable past.

If the guys can't execute it then get different guys. Plenty of opportunities to move the ball and score.

 

[Excalibur]

Most effective no-huddle hurry up offenses don't go full speed from the first snap of a possession. You generally start at a jog (20-25 seconds to snap the ball after the end of a play), and then when you get a first down break into a sprint.

 

[Hamms30]

I like the hurry up, but I think they need to do something with the snap count. Not necessarily eat clock once they are at the line of scrimmage, but Holy Cross was sending heat all night and the LB's or DB's that were blitzing were right on top of the LoS at the snap. A hard count here or there or just a pause to see what the defense is doing I think would have made a big difference. That screen to Newsome at the end was a thing of beauty and really had me wondering where that was the entire game with all the pressure Holy Cross was sending on 3rd downs. I think this was a big reality check for UConn nation, but a win is a win no matter how ugly or pretty.

 

[huskeynut]

Why would you scale back? Its only one game. There are gliches to work out.

 

[housekeys]

As I recall, BS was at his best when running 2 minute drills or in hurry up situations, so I am not surprised of his performance last night. The problem with hurry up, is you need to make quick and smart decisions (i.e throw the ball away, and not force things etc.) something BS is much better at now that he has the experience as a senior. So I think we can continue with him at the reigns. Pindell can also be effective as he gets more comfortable at this level. Finally, we need to be aggressive on both sides of the ball. Take it to USF, much like HC took it to us.

 

[thatguyed]

I think we need to ride it for a short bit, and see what kind of work we can do with it.

These aren't players pulled for this system, but there were flashes last night where I was happy to see growth.

It's a 2 year plan!

If it's a two year plan, are these games just exhibition games? ;>)

 

[ConnHuskBask]

We brought in an SEC Offensive Coordinator, who has been successful at a pretty high level, and after 1 game you want to go back to the same old UConn offense?

 

[specialisthusky]

While sloppy, last night's offense was at least an attempt at a modern scheme. The team and coaches will eventually find a tempo that they like and works for the team. It will also help if the QB makes better decisions on the read option. I felt like we got stymied all night when the option went to the running back.

It's a work in progress and I hope it is not scaled back.

 

[JMick]

It's really hard to go fast when you can't run the football. It's going to be a long season but we shouldn't be changing such a huge part of the scheme.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

This will be an interesting test to see if RE 2.0 is really 2.0...or 1.0 plussed up,

We all know that RE 1.0 would approach this USF game very cautiously. He would be Diaco-esque (albeit, much more effectively) and slow play the game to keep Flowers off the field and keep the score close. Then hope that the D and special teams can make a play and they can win a close game. Offensive play calling would be very conservative...running on first an second down and low risk passes.

Will RE 2.0 let Lashlee run high tempo offense? Will he trust his coaches and offensive line? If the team does a 3 and out in 60 seconds on the first drive, does he direct Lashlee to slow it down?

It should be interesting I know RE wants to think long term and take his lumps now...but he also needs to get the team confident and he needs to play the odds.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

It's really hard to go fast when you can't run the football. It's going to be a long season but we shouldn't be changing such a huge part of the scheme.

I have to admit...I was shocked at how bad Newsome looked running the ball in the first half. Against a FCS team. I don't know if it was scheme or the line play...or both. But it was a bit disconcerting to see an FCS team manhandle an FBS line and RB like that. I get the talent isn't there yet...but are we saying that the talent wasn't even FCS level? HC isn't even high FCS.

 

[GetTheFacts]

I have to admit...I was shocked at how bad Newsome looked running the ball in the first half. Against a FCS team. I don't know if it was scheme or the line play...or both. But it was a bit disconcerting to see an FCS team manhandle an FBS line and RB like that. I get the talent isn't there yet...but are we saying that the talent wasn't even FCS level? HC isn't even high FCS.

This was a big takeaway for me as well. I feel like his quickness has always been overrated.

 

[Jimdish255]

Just stop. After 1 game people want Lashlee to consider abandoning the offense he was hired to implement? I didn't think the ADHD on this board could get any worse.

 

[JMick]

I have to admit...I was shocked at how bad Newsome looked running the ball in the first half. Against a FCS team. I don't know if it was scheme or the line play...or both. But it was a bit disconcerting to see an FCS team manhandle an FBS line and RB like that. I get the talent isn't there yet...but are we saying that the talent wasn't even FCS level? HC isn't even high FCS.

The line just sucks. Both him and Hopkins were met in the backfield on almost every handoff.

 

[Palatine]

This thread makes no sense.

Do you really want to junk the offense they spend all off season installing after one game that produced double the points we averaged last year?

 

[Husky68]

Guess I'm one of the few that saw a lot of good things in the game and winning with a good comeback effort. I give HC quarterback a lot of credit with how he managed the play calling and execution. This kid is really good and before I say "this years" HC team is a poor FCS level team I'd like to see how they do this year, as the kid was hurt last year.
Losing FF early was a big hit on the defense, digging deep for LB play after the injury was good. HC did not score in the 2nd half. We had an interception that was dropped. Lot of almost pass breakups. Recovered on several break away plays by HC to minimize damage. Forced that fumble by HC and our guys were all over the recovery.
Offense had more good than bad. Turnovers and letting punt run to 1 yard line in 3rd quarter are type of plays that get you an L, yet team won. In 3rd quarter Pindell had nice drive to HC 6 yard line where couldn't make 1st down (he was step away from 1st down on previous play) and started next drive on 1 yard line. HC was locked into our formations and Pindell did not have "HC quarterback" type knowledge and probably freedom from coaches to change plays. AN was completely taken out of game re inside handoff plays. BS played like he had been there before. Young running back was what had hoped Johnson would have been like last year.
Overall looked like a team that knew how to play football, were playing against a more experienced and better "schemed" team (not unexpected re team with nice 5th year QB vs. rookie; and defense doing 1st go around in 3/3/5). HC's defense was very good at marshalling to our point of attack and then singling out best coverage/lanes against us when on offense .
So, not predicting anything going forward except looked like a football team to my untrained eyes for the 1st time in a long time. Good enough for me.

 

[Stainmaster]

I have to admit...I was shocked at how bad Newsome looked running the ball in the first half. Against a FCS team. I don't know if it was scheme or the line play...or both. But it was a bit disconcerting to see an FCS team manhandle an FBS line and RB like that. I get the talent isn't there yet...but are we saying that the talent wasn't even FCS level? HC isn't even high FCS.

This has been the case with Newsome against FCS his entire career. I'd have to look at the stats, but I recall being similarly disappointed after SB, Nova, and Maine.

 

[bmayuc]

I think we need to for the simple reason that we do not have the depth on defense to play so many plays. The game just ends up being way too long and injuries will pile up.

I think we should stay no -huddle and hurry up to the line, but then let time run off the clock. We should occasionally snap quickly to keep the defense confused but I think the "hurry up and wait" approach is best going foward or just go back to the huddle, but we can't be playing 5 quarter games.

no. faster. next question.

 

[warbler1055]

IMHO, the hurry up offense is just a scheme to reduce the focus on the weakness of our O line. In the ideal situation the O line would allow some protection for the quarterback and give some opening for the RB. Our O line was so weak, defenders were on Pinnel and Newsome's faces right after the snap. Timing is the issue here.