The View From Section 241

[gars44]

Nice write up. As coach cap said, it is just a game. I'm not going to condemn this coaching staff, just like I was not a big critic of RE. Give it time. The third down play, on Monday morning, of course looks very bad. Should have done this or that, etc. But at the time, it was an attempt to keep a drive going.

 

[B1GEast]

There were guys open all game, JMac didn't even look at most of them. On the rare instance he threw to right guy, it was a horrible pass. There was that sideline pass in the third period where he threw to an uncovered WR (I. Moore, I believe) who could of walked the 20 yeards for a score. Instead he threw way behind him. This was the worst QB performance in the D-1 era.

My take: I think in his heart PP knows that JMac isn't the guy. But the kid had the support of the players and the other QB's did not distignuish themselves enough to pull ahead. Coach P perhaps felt he had to wait until he played hinself out of the position to make a switch. That time is now.

There were guys open, Johnny missed a streaking receiver who beat his man after the second INT. He looked down his target most of the times and he could learn to use a pump fake. JMac is best at managing the game right now, his maturity level is far beyond the other two, Nebrich and McCummings looked a bit lost and Vandy threw everything at them. It was a terrible loss, I hope the JMac can learn from this loss, I think he can do it, but he's going to need help from the staff, with a 7 point lead and 8 minutes to go on 3rd down, you have to play for field position. Running the ball, even for a short gain would have sealed the game. I think we were the better team, and I think JMac will overcome this.

 

[businesslawyer]

Responding to a few things, and in light of the fact that, on this board, the everything is black and everything is white cries tend to drown out the statements of those who see a lot of grey:

1. McCombs has done a solid job to date and I am not in any way knocking him. Goodness knows where we would be without him. But he does not show the "playmaking" ability that Terry Caulley or Jordan Todman showed as true frosh. I don't know that he'll ever be a big time playmaker. I do think, with a little added weight (and I have no clue that his body will really allow for 15 or 20 pounds without losing quickness) he can be a good player and starter, like a Brockington or a Dixon. One thing that hasn't been mentioned with Shoemate out is that we're also missing Martin Hyppolite who is recovering from something. Do we need a bigger back to share carries? Yes. And, in their absence, we need a second back. If JJL is not the answer (and you have to believe the coaches don't think he is) than Foxx better come along quickly.

2. I reread my original post and I do believe I was fair in my criticism of the coaching staff, noting issues they were left with. I also note that I did not raise the issue of whether Box might have been the most game ready QB because, as I defended Edsall for personnel choices, no one not involved with the team knows enough to intelligently second guess those decisions. So, not matter what I see, I am assuming that the right players (or at least players who one can rationally think are the right players) are on the field. But, if it isn't clear enough, there is a big, big difference in believing that poor decisionmaking cost us this game (which, right or wrong, I absolutely do) and believing that that means this staff can't get it done or won't get it done. I am absolutely committed to giving them a fair shot at it, and will be rooting for them to succeed while they get it. I have no clue what kind of coach Randy Edsall was in his first year here -- I wasn't following UConn closely then and he did not have players.

 

[mattp]

this game was a little dose of reality. the reality is we have no experience at QB. when you're choosing between a true freshman and a former walk-on, it's going to be tough to win games on the road. Nebrich aside, our QB competition was basically between a few guys that couldn't beat out a QB that a lot of people on this board didn't like. i think it is a little ridiculous for some of the posters on the board to second guess every dimension of last saturday when you keep in mind that P doesn't have a lot of excellent options right now. it's easy to say we should have called different plays, but when your only real tools are a decent shifty RB and a sure handed TE it's tough.

personally i think whenever you have a good Oline and a great defense you can potentially win any game so i think we'll still win another 5 or 6, but it'll be almost impossible to do any more than that unless our QB/passing situation improves.

 

[freescooter]

Responding to a few things, and in light of the fact that, on this board, the everything is black and everything is white cries tend to drown out the statements of those who see a lot of grey:

1. McCombs has done a solid job to date and I am not in any way knocking him. Goodness knows where we would be without him. But he does not show the "playmaking" ability that Terry Caulley or Jordan Todman showed as true frosh. I don't know that he'll ever be a big time playmaker. I do think, with a little added weight (and I have no clue that his body will really allow for 15 or 20 pounds without losing quickness) he can be a good player and starter, like a Brockington or a Dixon. One thing that hasn't been mentioned with Shoemate out is that we're also missing Martin Hyppolite who is recovering from something. Do we need a bigger back to share carries? Yes. And, in their absence, we need a second back. If JJL is not the answer (and you have to believe the coaches don't think he is) than Foxx better come along quickly.

2. I reread my original post and I do believe I was fair in my criticism of the coaching staff, noting issues they were left with. I also note that I did not raise the issue of whether Box might have been the most game ready QB because, as I defended Edsall for personnel choices, no one not involved with the team knows enough to intelligently second guess those decisions. So, not matter what I see, I am assuming that the right players (or at least players who one can rationally think are the right players) are on the field. But, if it isn't clear enough, there is a big, big difference in believing that poor decisionmaking cost us this game (which, right or wrong, I absolutely do) and believing that that means this staff can't get it done or won't get it done. I am absolutely committed to giving them a fair shot at it, and will be rooting for them to succeed while they get it. I have no clue what kind of coach Randy Edsall was in his first year here -- I wasn't following UConn closely then and he did not have players.

I wasn't really suggesting that McCombs was going to be another Todman. But I like his abiltiy to read plays, to get through holes...he is a freshman being asked to carry the whole load right now. Nobody since Caulley has been asked to do that and even Caulley got held out a few times. I don't think he carried the ball 52 times in his first two games. You're also right that we really o dn't know if he can carry 20 more pounds, but he's awfully small for an every down back right now. I have to believe that most of it is that Shoemate is still injured and he'll carry some of the load as soon as he's ready.

As far as criticism of the coaching staff, I thinkyou were more than fair. Fact is that despite awful play from the offense and some defensive breakdowns, that was a game we were in position to win in the fourth quarter, on the road. We gave it away with bad decisions by the coaching staff.

 

[Waquoit]

JMac is best at managing the game right now.

What does this even mean "managing a game"? I always thought it was something you say about a QB on a winning team who isn't that good. And if there was ever a game to be managed, it was the Vandy game and that game was "managed" right into the loss column.

 

[IMind]

What does this even mean "managing a game"? I always thought it was something you say about a QB on a winning team who isn't that good. And if there was ever a game to be managed, it was the Vandy game and that game was "managed" right into the loss column.

I always read "manage the game" as don't turn the ball over that much.... don't take that many sacks... throw the ball away. That kind of thing... I'd say McEntee failed to manage the game. So if he's "the best", this is going to be a looong season.

 

[sdhusky]

Responding to a few things, and in light of the fact that, on this board, the everything is black and everything is white cries tend to drown out the statements of those who see a lot of grey:

1. McCombs has done a solid job to date and I am not in any way knocking him. Goodness knows where we would be without him. But he does not show the "playmaking" ability that Terry Caulley or Jordan Todman showed as true frosh. I don't know that he'll ever be a big time playmaker. I do think, with a little added weight (and I have no clue that his body will really allow for 15 or 20 pounds without losing quickness) he can be a good player and starter, like a Brockington or a Dixon. One thing that hasn't been mentioned with Shoemate out is that we're also missing Martin Hyppolite who is recovering from something. Do we need a bigger back to share carries? Yes. And, in their absence, we need a second back. If JJL is not the answer (and you have to believe the coaches don't think he is) than Foxx better come along quickly.

2. I reread my original post and I do believe I was fair in my criticism of the coaching staff, noting issues they were left with. I also note that I did not raise the issue of whether Box might have been the most game ready QB because, as I defended Edsall for personnel choices, no one not involved with the team knows enough to intelligently second guess those decisions. So, not matter what I see, I am assuming that the right players (or at least players who one can rationally think are the right players) are on the field. But, if it isn't clear enough, there is a big, big difference in believing that poor decisionmaking cost us this game (which, right or wrong, I absolutely do) and believing that that means this staff can't get it done or won't get it done. I am absolutely committed to giving them a fair shot at it, and will be rooting for them to succeed while they get it. I have no clue what kind of coach Randy Edsall was in his first year here -- I wasn't following UConn closely then and he did not have players.

Here is your ealier quote " And I say that as someone who will absolutely give P and his staff time before I conclude this hiring was a mistake."

Sounds like you have made up your mind but aren't willing to state it yet.

 

[businesslawyer]

Managing the game is a polite way of saying "you're not good enough to be making plays to win us the game, so avoid the negative plays that can lose us a game."

 

[mets1090]

Here is your ealier quote " And I say that as someone who will absolutely give P and his staff time before I conclude this hiring was a mistake."

Sounds like you have made up your mind but aren't willing to state it yet.

Every coach has bad games. Calhoun has been out coached before many times. The value of a coach is determined in how they adjust to their shortcomings on any given day.

Saturday they tried to go with the "continuity" model. Without knowing how their players would react, this would seem like a rational strategy in the first road game with only Freshmen as the backups. Our QB did not react well. If PP were to go with the same model in a future game with Mac under center, I would criticize him much more for repeating his mistakes than for making mistakes in the first place.

 

[businesslawyer]

Here is your ealier quote " And I say that as someone who will absolutely give P and his staff time before I conclude this hiring was a mistake."

Sounds like you have made up your mind but aren't willing to state it yet.

Absolutely not. The coaching staff sucked Saturday night. I have made up my mind on that. But does that mean they can't be successful? No, it doesn't. It means exactly what I said, which is they cost us this game. Let me ask you a question -- why wouldn't anyone, even someone who is excited about where we are going under this staff, think they were not good Saturday night? I didn't think Edsall coached a good game against Michigan. I pointed specifically to having the DEs split too wide. And I think he overachieved in his tenure here.

 

[sdhusky]

"why wouldn't anyone, even someone who is excited about where we are going under this staff, think they were not good Saturday night?"

Because we were a play from winning. Like I gave Edsall credit for the win at USF when T hit a 50+ yarder.

This wasn't a blow out like Michigan.

 

[Husky68]

Vandy looked like it had 15 guys on the field on defense. This game reminded me of the Bones/DJ season where opponents could play Uconn all within 10 yards of the line of scrimmage. If Uconn has any playmakers, coaching staff needs to get them in game, make the offensive play calls and so be it. If not, play like you don't and try and win games with 250 yards of offense, good specials and takeaways.

Although the offense passing game was bad, it could have been much worse. Several more passes should have been intercepted. One hit defender in the leg, another was a drop. Several of the completions were great throws, over coverage or between defenders. Uconn receivers do not seem to get open often, seems like Uconn is playing on a very small part of the field.

As mentioned in another thread, and agree with this, have never seen a "slower reacting" group of players to the "cadence of a game". Slow substitutions, defense looking for plays from sidelines as offense ready to hike, slow movement by defensive backs to line up with receivers, players bumping into one another getting on an off the field, QB taking forever to get play call. Agree, have never seen it this bad in any 1A game have ever seen.

There is not excuse for play calls in series where interception for TD. Did not run clock down on any plays in series, can not call 3rd and long pass with the JMac that had played those 1st 3 qtrs and half of the 4th, maybe with the JMac you thought you had going into the game but not with the one who you had now seen for some 52 minutes.

This was extraordinarily poor game coaching and also prep work in that looked like there was no way to get players in position promptly at game speed using the methods of substitution and play calling selected by the coaches and I assume practiced by the players.

Game impressions in addition to above. Lyle left lot of yards on the table re breaking tackels and picking when and if to cut back and he looked beat up late; #98 on defense makes a lot of plays; Williams has not shown the ability to position himself to field punts (never mind running them back), its hard for receivers (at least Uconn guys) to catch passes that hit their hands if they are moving in the opposite direction (balls behind) as that seemed to happen several times.

An experienced coaching staff needs to correct all these game management issues for Iowa State, this is not some promoted assistant acting like a deer in headlights, this is an experienced head coach with assistants that have also been head coaches and/or have lots of experience.

 

[Nostical]

Gars, I love ya but any form of justification for that play such as "an attempt to keep a drive going" when we were ahead by 7 (not behind by 7) is indefensible. Want to throw it deep over the middle-- OK, run and punt--fine, but a sideline pass that if picked provides the clearest path to paydirt is the coaching equivilent of a doctor amputating the wrong limb or a lawyer bringing on a default judgment by failing to file on time. You might be able to rationalize those mistakes if made by a rookie doctor, lawyer, or coach...but... need I go on?!

 

[businesslawyer]

"why wouldn't anyone, even someone who is excited about where we are going under this staff, think they were not good Saturday night?"

Because we were a play from winning. Like I gave Edsall credit for the win at USF when T hit a 50+ yarder.

This wasn't a blow out like Michigan.

O.K. I will respect your opinion that coaching did not cost us that game. Please recognize that the opinion that it did is shared by most people who have responded, whether or not they supported Edsall. The point being, I absolutely may be incorrect in my conclusion but there is no reason to think it had anything to do with whether or not I thought Edsall was or wasn't good.

 

[uchusky]

BL - You're spot on...the coaching was awful Saturday night - I can't stop perseverating on the play calling with 7:30 to go. Run it 3 times, run down the play clock on 2nd, 3rd, & 4th downs and punt = win. Grr.

 

[uc1974]

I couldn't believe the pass and how poorly it was thrown. I couldn't believe anyone in his right mind would have called such a play. Telegraph city, ugh. Vandy may not get top notch athletes but it's not a school for the intellectually challenged.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Well, I'll be darned. That was a rational and clear breakdown of what happened.

I'm livid and emotional at what happened out there still. Got damn, we had that game, but you can never, EVER turn the ball over that much on the road and win.

The only thing that sets things straight when something like that happens on the field, is that you're in season and you need to gear up and get ready because we've got another game on Friday.

What I do like, is that they didn't seem to come out flat, and they didn't seem to lose any energy. There were heads hanging at the end, but that's to be expected the way it turned out.

These guys will pull each other back together though and get their heads back up, because we got a game friday night under the lights at home.

That was my biggest issue to look for, the energy coming out onto the field, and staying on the field.

They played with good energy on the road - I thought. They came down the field in the first quarter.......

BUT stalled.

Only thing I can say, is that McEntee seems to have taken a big step backward on the field, and what's most important is that he got plenty of opportunity to make things happen in week 2, and seemed to have the confidence of coaches that the game was his.

Yes, there were mistakes all over the field on offense, but you need to make the plays when you need to make the plays.

You know what - there always are mistakes.

The offense needs to get in the endzone. Period.

Adversity folks. We've got it now. This is where you see what players and caoches are made of.

The buzz words around the offense have been seeing the cream rise to the top, and letting things play out.

We'll have to see if McEntee literally played himself out. Seems like that would be the case, if you ask my emotionally charged self.

 

[Waquoit]

BL - You're spot on...the coaching was awful Saturday night - I can't stop perseverating on the play calling with 7:30 to go. Run it 3 times, run down the play clock on 2nd, 3rd, & 4th downs and punt = win. Grr.

I disagree. Sit on the ball with 7:30 left? That's a lifetime. The D was gassed. Playing big boy football was the right call. Throwing to the Vandy guy instead of throwing it away or or throwing to the wide open reciever down the field was not.

 

[businesslawyer]

I disagree. Sit on the ball with 7:30 left? That's a lifetime. The D was gassed. Playing big boy football was the right call. Throwing to the Vandy guy instead of throwing it away or or throwing to the wide open reciever down the field was not.

The D was gassed? Seriously, W, what game were you watching. But for the one long run we gave up off the missed tackle after they tied the game and the momentum turned back, what did you see to possibly allow you to conclude the D was gassed? i saw a group that was totally dominating their opponent. Last year, you could make the case the D might have been gassed in criticizing Edsall for being too conservative when we got the ball back. But Saturday night, there was no reason to reach that conclusion.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I disagree. Sit on the ball with 7:30 left? That's a lifetime. The D was gassed. Playing big boy football was the right call. Throwing to the Vandy guy instead of throwing it away or or throwing to the wide open reciever down the field was not.

Totally accurate W. 7:30 left was way too soon to sit on the ball. Points on the scoreboard was the way to close out this game - at least a FG. This 1950's approach to the modern game is awful. Open up the offense and score some freaking points. Gosh was there ANYONE in that stadium (or watching on TV) that didn't know UConn was gonna run on 1st down, run again on second and long and then be force to throw in an obvious 3rd and long OR turn it over with lots of time left. Keep running on first down P and you'll break all of Randy's game and season records for 2nd and long.

 

[Husky68]

"why wouldn't anyone, even someone who is excited about where we are going under this staff, think they were not good Saturday night?"

Because we were a play from winning. Like I gave Edsall credit for the win at USF when T hit a 50+ yarder.

This wasn't a blow out like Michigan.

Coaching cost this game. Not only game coaching but prep work. Team was unprepared for game speed play calling, substitutions. Nothing is ever "only coaching" or "execution", other team has coaches and players get scholarships also. Sometimes you just know things, in the stands after the game, turned to wife and said "bad coaching". I'm not an expert but I'll tell you, that was 1st and foremost thought (and really only thought) came immediately to mind. Not JMac played bad, or Vandy lucky or where is Shoemate or why can't Williams field a punt or Uconn players don't belong on same field as Vandy or good try but better team won - no none of these specifically or collectively - just "man, that was bad coaching".

 

[Kgun7]

Managing the game is a polite way of saying "you're not good enough to be making plays to win us the game, so avoid the negative plays that can lose us a game."

Throwing the football, handing the ball off, or running with the football is one of the last things a QB does ... and sadly it's all we know and see. To me, managing a game means pre-snap read, calling protection schemes, route adjustments, post-snap reads, going through your progressions, and then throwing the ball.

 

[Carl Spackler]

As far as play calling goes, I don't have a problem with it. We need a quarterback on this team. You don't develop a quarterback by calling running plays all the time when there's pressure on to "execute".

This is exactly what I was thinking last night, as the Jets were coming back from 24-10 down to the cowboys. Mark Sanchez isn't going to develop as a QB, if they're running the ball all the time.

27 passes for vs. 32 rush attempts on offense for the game.

If we're going to have a successful, balanced offense, we need to have a QB to lean on as well as a RB, when there's pressure on.

 

[uchusky]

I disagree. Sit on the ball with 7:30 left? That's a lifetime. The D was gassed. Playing big boy football was the right call. Throwing to the Vandy guy instead of throwing it away or or throwing to the wide open reciever down the field was not.

No way - To that point, Vandy had run 20 plays for 53 yds with 1 int & 1 fumble in the 2nd half. 3 runs & a punt = victory.