The sheer stupidity of the coaching staff on full display

[rich1122]

For those folks who thought that it was a bad decision answer me this. If Griffin had scored, would we have had this post? Probably not.

 

[cohenzone]

For those folks who thought that it was a bad decision answer me this. If Griffin had scored, would we have had this post? Probably not.

Palatine would have found 15 other things to complain about.

 

[rich1122]

I guarantee that it would not have been started and that the doubters would have been falling all over themselves.

 

[Devland]

For those folks who thought that it was a bad decision answer me this. If Griffin had scored, would we have had this post? Probably not.

How about if we had run the ball then attempted to kick a field goal and the field goal was missed or blocked. Then went on to lose the game by a field goal. Then this thread would be about not going for the jugular.

 

[emshorts]

For those folks who thought that it was a bad decision answer me this. If Griffin had scored, would we have had this post? Probably not.

the obvious answer is of course not but this is the 5th game in a row that we haven't gotten a TD in the 2nd half and he hasn't proven that he can lead the team to a TD in the 4th qtr as the stats bear out. half of his int's (7) have been thrown in the 4th qtr so yes it was a dumb call....

 

[FfldCntyFan]

the obvious answer is of course not but this is the 5th game in a row that we haven't gotten a TD in the 2nd half and he hasn't proven that he can lead the team to a TD in the 4th qtr as the stats bear out. half of his int's (7) have been thrown in the 4th qtr so yes it was a dumb call....

?????????????????

So because we haven't scored a TD in the second half in months we need to take the stance that attempting to score a TD in that situation is dumb?

 

[Calhoun's Court]

My biggest concern is that this win has cemented HCPP another year to work his "magic". I hope WM at least looks at the entire body of work and not the last couple games(reasoning that it is turning around).

Like we really need to see the Sultan of STORRS(HCPP) for the next three years on the sidelines.- NOT!!!!!

 

[upstater]

Palatine is right. I'm frankly shocked at all the posters saying otherwise. Under 5 minutes to go, first and goal, 2 TD lead, you run, run, run it. That takes 2:00 at least off the clock. Pitt gets the ball with 2:45 to go needing either 17 or 14 points.

Even more ridiculous about the play is that the offense called the play at a quick pace and snapped it with 12 seconds left on the play clock.

Pasqualoni does not know how to manage a game, play calls, etc. This is nothing but a level of buffoonery you don't see often in D1.

 

[Husky25]

How many of the critics were at the game? Of all the calls I had issues with, that was not one of them. The play was perfect and the ball overthrown by a mile and the real bad luck was that the DB was way out of position to be anywhere near that throw. Can anyone guarantee a field goal?

Crap, I had a load more issues with the 3rd quarter conservatism.after we passed them silly in the first half. I had trouble with running a wide sweep with Hypolitte on 3rd and one. I even had problems with the play that salted the game, namely the pass on third down that could have been both incomplete and a clock stopper. That throw was actually much more risky than the INT play. The first drive of the game was a thing of beauty. Looked big time. Isn't the football rule of thumb that keep doing what works until they stop it? I heard PP's post game where he said they needed to establish the run in the 3rd period. Why?

BTW, not a knock on the kid because he is what he is, but LM as a #1 back is a little problem. Not overpowering and no breakaway. I thought this Williams (?) frosh had that ability and hasn't his redshirt been burned?

What does this have to do with anything? a percieved boycott again? I was at the game but I am just wondering. I'd imagine that most people who post here go to the games. If they are not able to, they at least watch them live.

Incidently, you are correct. The play calling in the 3rd was attrocious. The staff showed -0- confidence in their players.

 

[Doggie Style]

Why do people love that play call in that spot? It happened on 2nd down. I would argue you have a better chance of winning the game by running the ball twice and kicking the FG. If there was ever a time to play conservative there it was. Kick a FG and its a 3 score game. Score a TD and its a 3 score game. We played scared the entire 3rd quarter and we show balls there? We can't call TO's appropriately in a 2 minute drill but we call them to get the punt unit out.
This staff is embarrassing.

I think people like the call because it was absolutely the right call. Not only was Ryan Griffin open, but Nick Williams was wide open as well. In fact Williams was more open than Griffin was. To get two receivers that open in the end zone tells you that it was a play that should of been dialed up at that time based on something they must of seen in the D earlier. The only reason this thread is still going is because Whitmer threw the worst ball he's let go in the last three games.

 

[cohenzone]

Put mor

What does this have to do with anything? a percieved boycott again? I was at the game but I am just wondering. I'd imagine that most people who post here go to the games. If they are not able to, they at least watch them live.

Incidently, you are correct. The play calling in the 3rd was attrocious. The staff showed -0- confidence in their players.

Put more clearly, I have as good a vantage point of the whole field from my seats as you can have. That play had Pitt all screwed up. It was probably the most unexpectedly decent call in the half. Please note that the people who think we should have just taken a knee on the last possession (I agree) are the same people who are confident that two running plays up the middle would have turned into a sure 3 points. No such as thing as a sure 3 points, and I know exactly why they are saying that. But the "results:" test is being applied to the pass, a totally good call that wound up with a bad result, and it took atrocious defensive position for the ball to be intercepted. That defender was a good 10-12 yards away from anyone and if the ball is on target, no way he is there to stop Griffin. And wow, the impact of UConn not falling on the ball to assure a field goal might just make the next couple of opponents worry a bit about how to defend us.

 

[emshorts]

?????????????????

So because we haven't scored a TD in the second half in months we need to take the stance that attempting to score a TD in that situation is dumb?

considering how much time was left in the game and a field goal would have sealed the deal yes it was

 

[Waquoit]

I think people like the call because it was absolutely the right call. Not only was Ryan Griffin open, but Nick Williams was wide open as well. In fact Williams was more open than Griffin was. To get two receivers that open in the end zone tells you that it was a play that should of been dialed up at that time based on something they must of seen in the D earlier. The only reason this thread is still going is because Whitmer threw the worst ball he's let go in the last three games.

It's a moot point. Run, run, FG ices the game, uses more clock. These guys sat on it when they should have been pushing it and pushed it when they should have sat on it. They are lost.

 

[businesslawyer]

For those folks who thought that it was a bad decision answer me this. If Griffin had scored, would we have had this post? Probably not.

I'd love to bash the staff for everything, but in this case it just isn't fair. Was the by the book call to run and kick? Yes. But the by the book call was to punt up 14 in the Temple game and this board treated that decision as if it proved the staff was truly idiotic. They called a play that put players in an easy position to succeed. I know no one here likes to blame the players for anything so long as they have coaches, but that was totally on Chandler. It was not a terrible decision. If you want to argue it was the wrong one -- it probably was but that is different.

 

[emshorts]

It's a moot point. Run, run, FG ices the game, uses more clock. These guys sat on it when they should have been pushing it and pushed it when they should have sat on it. They are lost.

exactly

 

[Doggie Style]

It's a moot point. Run, run, FG ices the game, uses more clock. These guys sat on it when they should have been pushing it and pushed it when they should have sat on it. They are lost.

Again, ur assuming we make the fg right? Temple is still,fresh in my mind so im not putting my eggs in that basket. Again, I am not defending the staff by any means, the 3rd qtr was a joke, and yes MAkING a fg does ice the game but so does an accurate throw. Let me ask you this... Do u have more confidence in Whitmer's ability to hit a wide open receive or our %'s on making a fg? Personally, I'll take Whitmer all day long w/ the way he's been throwing as of
late!!

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Again, ur assuming we make the fg right? Temple is still,fresh in my mind so im not putting my eggs in that basket. Again, I am not defending the staff by any means, the 3rd qtr was a joke, and yes MAkING a fg does ice the game but so does an accurate throw. Let me ask you this... Do u have more confidence in Whitmer's ability to hit a wide open receive or our %'s on making a fg? Personally, I'll take Whitmer all day long w/ the way he's been throwing as of
late!!

Look I like Whitmer but let's not pretend that he has protected the football well this year.

I had no problem with the Temple punt. I took heat here for defending that call. But there is no way the risk is worth the reward in that spot. Running the ball twice there takes another minute plus off the clock (assuming they were smart enough to run it down).

 

[J187Money]

Actually I believe they have a cap on how many times they can throw to Ryan during a game (usually three) but GDL was taking a nap until halftime last night (after all it was a late start) so nobody was around to cut the TE passes off until the second half.

Still searching the grassy knoll?

 

[Chin Diesel]

It's a moot point. Run, run, FG ices the game, uses more clock. These guys sat on it when they should have been pushing it and pushed it when they should have sat on it. They are lost.

This is the correct answer.

They had all third quarter to be creative.

Part of the toughness of football is knowing how long to keep the foot on the accelerator and when to apply the brakes.

You apply the brakes in this situation- when running the ball three times in a row eats up two minutes of the clock and gives you a gimme FG to put you up by three scores with under three minutes on the clock.

 

[Doggie Style]

Look I like Whitmer but let's not pretend that he has protected the football well this year.

I had no problem with the Temple punt. I took heat here for defending that call. But there is no way the risk is worth the reward in that spot. Running the ball twice there takes another minute plus off the clock (assuming they were smart enough to run it down).

I absolutely see your point, and although its conservative, 9 times out of 10 it's the right call.
I'm just saying that I like the way we looked to get away from a predictable set of downs there. Also, no way am I saying that we have been proficient in protecting the ball but we have improved and I like CW's decisions as of late because IMO he has improved tremendously. Last night the line gave him time and he was hitting his targets pretty well.

 

[pj]

Put more clearly, I have as good a vantage point of the whole field from my seats as you can have. That play had Pitt all screwed up. It was probably the most unexpectedly decent call in the half. Please note that the people who think we should have just taken a knee on the last possession (I agree) are the same people who are confident that two running plays up the middle would have turned into a sure 3 points. No such as thing as a sure 3 points, and I know exactly why they are saying that. But the "results:" test is being applied to the pass, a totally good call that wound up with a bad result, and it took atrocious defensive position for the ball to be intercepted. That defender was a good 10-12 yards away from anyone and if the ball is on target, no way he is there to stop Griffin. And wow, the impact of UConn not falling on the ball to assure a field goal might just make the next couple of opponents worry a bit about how to defend us.

I was an early critic of the play but the more I read this conversation, the more I like the play call.

The real coaching screw-up was the unimaginative offense and poor time management of the third quarter. If they had run as many unexpected, well-designed plays as this one in the third quarter, we might have put the game away before that point.

The great thing about running aggressive plays like this is you're teaching the offense how to win. Chandler Whitmer learned more from that play than from any other in the game.

 

[upstater]

The reason the guys were so wide open was because Chryst told his players it was going to be a run 100%. He couldn't have anticipated how stupid Pasqualoni was there. Players were wide open. Big deal. You have the chance to ice the game. You don't throw on the 90% certainty that you'll score a TD there. The flip side odds are 99% certain. And when the game is almost done, you simply don't make that play.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I'm curious as to why we didn't have this much objection on absolutely not by the book game winning play calls in our last two wins over Pitt?

The QB overthrew a wide open receiver, a play which if execute properly would have guaranteed a score (on a more absolute level than a field goal attempt ever could have) in a game where one more score ices the victory. I hate the idea of pulling out something that supports Touchdown Husky's view of how college football should be played but are we really taking the Woody Hayes three things can happen when you pass the ball and two are bad point of view?

 

[upstater]

I'm curious as to why we didn't have this much objection on absolutely not by the book game winning play calls in our last two wins over Pitt?

The QB overthrew a wide open receiver, a play which if execute properly would have guaranteed a score (on a more absolute level than a field goal attempt ever could have) in a game where one more score ices the victory. I hate the idea of pulling out something that supports Touchdown Husky's view of how college football should be played but are we really taking the Woody Hayes three things can happen when you pass the ball and two are bad point of view?

Because the game was as good as over. 2:45 to play. Pitt down either 14 or 17. That's what you were looking at.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Because the game was as good as over. 2:45 to play. Pitt down either 14 or 17. That's what you were looking at.

Pitt scored after driving 80 yards following the interception with 2:26 left in the game. How could there possibly have been 2:45 left if we kick a field goal?

Believe me, there is a laundry list of things to complain about with GDLs's play calling and overall handling of the offense. That one play is not one of them.

By the way, why hasn't anyone questioned the third down pass to Shakim Phillips (that sealed the win)? An incomplete would have stopped the clock before a punt, an interception would have given Pitt the ball ~ 35 yards from the tying score while running the ball could have killed another 40 seconds. A pass in that situation was far more risky than the pass to the end zone that was picked off a few minutes earlier.