So who starts at QB next week?

[Exit 4]

Quarterback position doesn't work that way. Team needs to know who is in the cockpit. Give Pindell another start. If it goes off the rails, then you bring in BS and you stick with him no matter what (barring injury) for at least the next handful of games.

My concern is that pindell will bomb out early next week and BS will be back in, then what? BS will have to be your guy for several games after that point because I don't think your do that three weeks in a row.

I think it's easier to tell Pindell that for this one week we are going with BS and that he better study hard to be ready for week three.

 

[HomeKing93]

I'm fine with whatever decision Edsall makes on the starter next week, I'm more concerned with the OL opening up the running game in the 1st half.

 

[blue93]

The OL did look better. But was it truly better, or was there either better timing in running the plays or better reads when BS came in? I don't know -- I'm really just asking for those who know details much better than I do.

BS seems to be better at setting protections, but he also had the benefit of a worn down defense. There's really no way of knowing what that game would have looked like with BS at the helm from the get-go, but I don't think the end result would have been all that different. I'll trust the staff to make the right choice over the next week.

 

[Guapo]

Honestly, both QBs showed me something last night.

The lack of production was not Pindell's fault.

The OL is stinky Swiss cheese.

I would be perfectly fine with either QB getting the start, though I may lean toward Scheirffs due to experience.

I think it could be benifitial to Pindell to get some snaps in to gain experience against a quality defense (you gotta learn somehow).

 

[Jimdish255]

Have you been watching UConn football, because that has been our narrative, a lot.

Ideally, I love to have one guy go to guy leading the team and yes I think that's optimal. I don't think Pindell, who struggled against Holy Cross, is going find the reads easier against USF. I think put him in there has the potential to kill his confidence. I think Bryant is more ready to deal with the speed of the game and the pressure he'll be under. But the bottom line is that the OL has to give these guys more time. If that doesn't happen and the game get out of hand, I have not problem with bring in the #2 (or maybe the 1b) QB.

Good summary. OL needs to get better but right now BS is the guy to right the ship. And it's both possible and likely we see Pindell again because he has the tools, but is lacking in experience and familiarity with this team. His frustration with himself and the OL is a reflection of his high standards and is understandable, but he does need to stay connected even when things go bad. He'll recover and come back stronger. I'm not giving up against USF, but the coaches have a lot of evaluating to do quickly. The good news is some questions were answered (Hopkins), but others were never even asked (TE's?) and hopefully they recognize those areas as well.

 

[Bonehead]

They were both awful compared to what? Tom Brady?

I'm sorry -- that's ludicrous. You just can't look at the numbers and rationally come to that level of trashing.

If stats mean anything the QB play was actually pretty good from what we have seen in the recent past.
Can both guys be better? Sure. Are there other QBs that are better? Sure.


Bryant looked more settled and in control of the offense overall.

Pindell showed his quick release and mobility.

Future is bright at QB - I say Bryant starts but I am wrong alot of the time.

 

[J187Money]

It is interesting - without the two short field touchdowns we gave up because of the fumbles Pindell probably never gets pulled. He played ok. Better than I expected. And yes one of the fumbles was his. But it isn't like he threw 3 picks and looked like a moron out there. We have seen truly bad QB play, and that wasn't it. Just so happened in the game circumstances that we needed a hero - he wasn't it, and BS was.

So I feel like we have 2 healthy and competent QBs on the roster - which is 2 more than we have had in a long time. So I'm less concerned about who starts next week. I'd lean towards BS but won't be upset if it is DP.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

And meanwhile, the losses continue to pile up. We cannot afford to lose games, period. You play the guy that gives you the best chance to win games. It's not about next year. Bobby Fiasco screwed us with his lame approach to a season, supposedly always "building for the future." The future is now.

You want examples? Try Jameis Winston. Stepped in from day one as a true freshman, and didn't have the luxury of any JUCO experience. Yeah I know we don't have any Jameis Winstons on the roster, but Pindell isn't even remotely close to Tyler Lorenzen when he came here with similar prior experience. I was at Lorenzen's first game vs. Duke. He was poised and ready to play at this level. Granted he had an OL and this team obviously doesn't, but he was a leader. The lack of an OL makes it even more imperative for Shirreffs to start. He's proven capable of performing despite that handicap.

Actually...Winston was a redshirt freshman...but I get your point.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I'm fine with whatever decision Edsall makes on the starter next week, I'm more concerned with the OL opening up the running game in the 1st half.

This is where I settle too. I feel it's the right choice to start Bryant just based on results. That being said, either would at least be defensible

 

[UConnNick]

Start him against USF and the kid is really going to take a shot to his confidence. Start Sherriffs bring Pindell in if things get out of hand,

Pindell already took a shot to his confidence last night vs. a mediocre I-AA team. I don't even want to think about what will happen if he plays vs. a real football team like USF. We could easily lose by 40 or 50 points. Even with Shirreffs it's gonna be real ugly, but he proved last night he can lead this offense, while Pindell has a whole lot of work to do in that regard.

 

[huskyinfl]

The kid is human... I think anyone in that spot would feel a little dejected and hard on himself. Lot of pressure on these guys.
Basing everything on one camera shot is unfair.

Way to revise history. There were multiple shots throughout the comeback of Pindell, showing him dejected, not one moment. Agree there is pressure but it's a team game and the QB is the leader. I think he can be solid but this was Holy Cross...

 

[GetTheFacts]

I feel like pulling Pindell after his first collegiate start would affect his confidence a significant amount. Already know what to expect with Shirreffs, even though he did play well last night. I think they should give Pindell another chance and if he performs poorly, start Shirreffs in the third game.

 

[Bonehead]

I feel like pulling Pindell after his first collegiate start would affect his confidence a significant amount. Already know what to expect with Shirreffs, even though he did play well last night. I think they should give Pindell another chance and if he performs poorly, start Shirreffs in the third game.

I dont believe you can really say you know what to expect with Shirreffs - either way.

New regime, new offense, dropped lots of weight.

No one can be judged off last year, in my opinion.

 

[blue93]

Way to revise history. There were multiple shots throughout the comeback of Pindell, showing him dejected, not one moment. Agree there is pressure but it's a team game and the QB is the leader. I think he can be solid but this was Holy Cross...

To be honest I'd be more concerned if he didn't look dejected. Hopefully he comes back ready to redeem himself when his number is called again.

 

[BlueMAB]

Part of the reason it worked last night was the other team wasn't prepared for him. So, yes the offense looked better with him...for one quarter. Pindell completed almost 70% of his passes and was starting to be effective on the ground. Kid better learn how to carry a football.....

LOL. They ran the same offense, you think it worked because Holy Cross wasn't prepared for Shirreffs? That's such a weak excuse.

Pindell completed "almost 70%"? Cool story. FYI he completed 67%, which is pretty good. But Shirreffs completed 69% and had a touchdown. Also, Shirreffs averaged 9.5 yards per completion to Pindell's 5.5. And he didn't turn the ball over.

The nail in the coffin? Shirreffs QBR was 97.1. Pindell's was 35.1

Give Pindell another start.

To quote Randy Edsall "It's earned, not given".

Unless he has a really bad week of practice, Shirreffs has earned the start next week.

And no, you don't know what he'd look like over 4 quarters with this staff, because you've never seen him play 4 quarters with this staff. You can assume, you can believe, you can predict, but you don't know. Even your "he plays better in the second half" logic is flawed because the 3rd/4th quarter was his 1st/2nd quarter of the game.

 

[UConnNick]

I don't think that it is good for the kid or the program to name someone a starting qb and then not start him more than once. Looks like the coaches understand that if a starter is not doing the job, for whatever reason, there will be a change - don't think that would have happened with last 2 HCs. Pindell did have decent stats and I am convinced he has the tools to be very very good. He needs to start next Saturday but needs to understand that if it is not going well, BS is going in. And BS needs to know that he will be on the sidelines Saturday but be assured that they will call his number. It is a luxury to have - now lets work on that OL

You're suggesting we keep starting this kid when he looked like a deer in the headlights vs. a mid-level I-AA team? We will get crucified by USF with him in there. I'll predict right now that if he starts we lose by 40 points or more. I hope I'm wrong, but I also hope I don't have to find out.

It's nothing against him, he's having to perform behind the same dumpster fire OL we saw last season. He showed flashes of what he's capable of doing, but he's having to make quicker decisions than he would prefer to have to, thanks to an OL that's like a sieve. On top of that, he's got the added pressure vs. USF of 1) playing against arguably the best team in our conference, and 2) having to play with one eye over his shoulder, figuring he's gonna get yanked at any moment in the game when he screws up. That's a prescription for destroying the kid's confidence completely in Game 2 of a 12 game season. Pindell may be the answer on a longer term basis, but he's not going to be vs. USF.

 

[tduconn]

By that logic, why play Pindell this season if next year he's just going to be a senior too?

Because he may be the only experienced QB available to play in 2018. If there is someone else on the bench (2017) that may be selected as starting QB over him next year, he may be just as valuable to them as an experienced peer as BS may be to Dave this year

 

[businesslawyer]

BS seems to be better at setting protections, but he also had the benefit of a worn down defense. There's really no way of knowing what that game would have looked like with BS at the helm from the get-go, but I don't think the end result would have been all that different. I'll trust the staff to make the right choice over the next week.

That's where I am. If they go with Pindell, I am fine with it as well.

 

[Matt10]

Nothing to do with how he played. I was sitting behind the uconn bench, one thing I didn't like about Pindell when Uconn scored the go ahead touchdown he didn't go congratulate the team, he just stood right on the side line looking out on the field and wasn't evolved in any offense meeting from that time on. just something that caught my eye

 

[businesslawyer]

View attachment 24531


If stats mean anything the QB play was actually pretty good from what we have seen in the recent past.
Can both guys be better? Sure. Are there other QBs that are better? Sure.


Bryant looked more settled and in control of the offense overall.

Pindell showed his quick release and mobility.

Future is bright at QB - I say Bryant starts but I am wrong alot of the time.

My point exactly. With what he did physically, he didn't suck. Was he in some way responsible -- by timing, or reads, or calling blocking schemes, or otherwise -- for the failure of our OL to keep Arkeel from being consistently overrun? I just don't know enough to know. But his passing was not horrific, and he looks like he can run.

 

[SubbaBub]

I'm good with whatever the coaches decide. If they still believe DP is the best option then stick with him. If the tape shows that BS is well ahead of him then make the change. There is no training on the job in CFB and certainly born at that position.

We lived through 6 years of living for next year. It sucks. When the day comes that a new guy supplants a senior, then fine. Until then we go on the merit system.

Why would anyone play a player who isn't the best option at their position? This isn't minor league baseball.

 

[Palatine]

I liked the move in the game because the starter wasn't producing. And it worked.

However, I would stay with Pindell. BS immediately went to his one receiver offense. He targeted Hergy without looking for anyone else. It worked. But this was a fatal flaw last year and probably will prove to be one again. And BS played with a healthy running game while Pindell did not.

Pindell gives us a chance to have a full and varied offense. His ceiling is much higher. I keep playing him.

 

[warbler1055]

Enough of this nonsense!!! Can we just let the coaches look at the film and decide who would start as they said they would. We should just root for both DP and BS to do well since we will need both of them. It's a long season with lots of tough games. RE and RL both are pretty good judges of talent and they will decide who would gives us the best chance to win.

 

[SubbaBub]

It is interesting - without the two short field touchdowns we gave up because of the fumbles Pindell probably never gets pulled. He played ok. Better than I expected. And yes one of the fumbles was his. But it isn't like he threw 3 picks and looked like a moron out there. We have seen truly bad QB play, and that wasn't it. Just so happened in the game circumstances that we needed a hero - he wasn't it, and BS was.

So I feel like we have 2 healthy and competent QBs on the roster - which is 2 more than we have had in a long time. So I'm less concerned about who starts next week. I'd lean towards BS but won't be upset if it is DP.

He had missed a few wide open throws and that fumble was about as bad a fumble as a QB can have. But I agree that for the third year in a row, QB isn't the main problem here.

 

[BlueMAB]

We already knew that Shirreffs had played under a first time OC. We already knew the offensive coaches at UConn were downright terrible. We learned this week that the head coach spent 95% of his time at practice working with the linebackers. Does anyone think that maybe this hurt his development????

People called Edsall too conservative his first time here. Diaco made Edsall look like Mike Leach. He was so conservative his stated goal was to run as few plays as possible, and refused to even attempt punt returns. Think maybe Shirreffs was coached to tuck and run immediately and not risk throwing into coverage? Think maybe he played scared to make a mistake because that's literally how the head coach approached the game?

We have a new, and proven, OC, and yet people assume that Bryant Shirreffs wouldn't benefit from this new and improved coaching? They "know" that he's going to be the same player he was last year? How exactly? We expect the rest of the team to improve, and rightly so, but somehow Bryant is exempt from this? Why?

Throw away everything you saw under Diaco because it means nothing. The only thing that matters is what he does in practice and the games this year.