The View From Section 241

[TouchdownHusky]

FWIW, I didn't see multiple open receivers for us.

Not since Marcus Easley.

 

[Uconnalliance]

Best part of Sunday reading BL's post on the game,dead on brother! by the time Cincy comes to town their coaches will be calling our offense!

 

[FfldCntyFan]

My only gripe about our fan base is that we may have too many tea drinkers among us.

As far as Maryland, I unfortunately will be in Texas (with my son) visiting a college that he is interested in so we will not be able to make that trip.

On the the team and yesterday's game:

Generally the eye test gives more information than any statistics. My biggest case in point is the game four years ago against UVA where the offense was clicking on all cylinders and it looked what we could do whatever we wanted against a pretty solid defense. The end of game stats (especially passing) were very pedestrian but the eye test revealed an offense that was capable of completing any pass in any situation. I loved our efficiency in that game and if you could promise me that offense, always, with the very pedestrian box score numbers, I'd take that in a heartbeat. That said, our offense yesterday was as out of synch, unsure of itself and generally lost for all but a handful of plays. This falls entirely on the coaching staff and in my opinion is a result of trying to accomplish too many different things with kids who still need to spend the bulk of their time learning the basics. I'm convinced that (shy of a change within the coaching staff) we won't see an effective offense (shy of perhaps a few flashes) until we have the personnel capable of running all of what DeLeone wants, with enough time in the system to master the entirety of his playbook (which could take years). I do find some solace in the fact that our new AD is far more proactive than his predecessor and that he is also a former (UM no less) football player. The current staff cannot get away with the standard "you don't understand football" line and I doubt that Warde Manuel will have the patience to sit through too much more of this without pointing out the need for change.

Finally, I would have loved to have seen what the defense could have done yesterday if they were defending a lead and NC St was forced to try to come from behind. Perhaps one day we will see this (against a legitimate opponent).

 

[Kevin Caliendo]

If by simplify the offense you mean eliminate the wildcat, then fine. but really, the offense is as vanilla as exists in major college football. These are the same formations and schemes teams ran in the 80s and 90s. The "trickery" is the same stuff you see in high school games. I never saw formations set up to get Davis, Williams or McCombs isolated against LBs or safeties. I saw the other coaching staff go after Mack the first time Bhlidi sat. I saw them run short crossing pattersn on their alst drive when they saw the IL blitz. I saw nothing like that when Uconn had the ball. In fact, I saw almost no changes at all at the line of scrimmage and the success or failure of a play was as much luck (playcall versus defnesive playcall) as I did adjustments. I saw a NCS team that physically bigger than Uconn, but slower at most positions. The NCS d-line dominated the game, and perhaps that is why uconn was unable to do things. but, they didn't move the pocket until the 4th quarter? ugh, its incredibly frustrating

 

[BlueMAB]

I was more upset we punted on 4th and 2 at the 38 yard line than I was BWW not making that play. We're inside the 40 and only need 2 yards. Go for it.

 

[jdb50]

Bringing in Hyppolite, putting him at FB and handing him the ball on 3rd and one on the first drive is raising all sorts of red flags for me. Great analysis as usual BL. Our players have worked awfully hard in the offseason to be saddled with crap coaching such as this. 3rd Q, 2nd and one run up the gut, QB sneak ,punt. Bubble screen to N Williams, penalty on us, run the same play, look out Nick! WHAM. Franks and beans for the offensive coaches until they win a game.

 

[Husky68]

What is your point?

Point is, if 123 of 124 FBS schools do something and you don't, your scheme had better work or you are pretty foolish. Why play one player in a position that gets beat up, needs lot of reps (as we run a lot) and keeps all the players who are one injury from playing from getting any experience.

So you are ok with LM taking all the snaps last year, this year, 2013 and 2014. Only other runs being wildcat or flanker sweeps. Makes absolutely no sense to play a 166 lbs guy with no exceptional escapablility or power all the time. BL said he isn't great but not the problem, I think the problem is he isn't great and PP plays him like he is great to the detriment of the team.

 

[huskysupporter]

Point is, if 123 of 124 FBS schools do something and you don't, your scheme had better work or you are pretty foolish. Why play one player in a position that gets beat up, needs lot of reps (as we run a lot) and keeps all the players who are one injury from playing from getting any experience.

So you are ok with LM taking all the snaps last year, this year, 2013 and 2014. Only other runs being wildcat or flanker sweeps. Makes absolutely no sense to play a 166 lbs guy with no exceptional escapablility or power all the time. BL said he isn't great but not the problem, I think the problem is he isn't great and PP plays him like he is great to the detriment of the team.

I think that the players behind him have not performed well enough in practice to show they will be successful in a game. I would love to have a change of pace/compliment back that would keep McCombs to 18-22 carries a game. But if we don't have a back capable of giving us effective carries, why put them in for the sake of putting them in? That is my point.

Who doesn't want a change of pace back like DeAnthony Thomas(ORE) or James White (WISC)? But if you don't have those players, why not let your bell cow take the majority of the carries?

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I think that the players behind him have not performed well enough in practice to show they will be successful in a game. I would love to have a change of pace/compliment back that would keep McCombs to 18-22 carries a game. But if we don't have a back capable of giving us effective carries, why put them in for the sake of putting them in? (WISC)?

Based on the patheticness of the UConn offense you have to ask yourself . . . Just how bad are these backups and what idiot coaches recruited them. LM is a very good back, but he needs a spell. You have to think somebody (Joe Williams) could giv ethane some production. Just don't think PP & Deli know enough about offense in the modern era.

 

[SAMCRO]

Based on the patheticness of the UConn offense you have to ask yourself . . . what idiot coaches recruited them.

Same coaches who recruited the guys on defense.

 

[rich1122]

I watched the game twice on Power Hour, as well as to have been there.

At times I saw hope, but NC was a good team, maybe as good as we will see, and we just killed everything positive with a penalty or TO. Delahunt's fumble really took the cake. You can't be a senior and do that stuff. More first downs were possible without False Starts etc.. Granted Whitmer was rocky but man we had chances to advance the ball and just blew it.

I mean this was really winnable against a pretty good team. We were by no means outclassed athletically on either side of the ball. Don't blame recruiting or any of that crap.

Second year in a row we look out of sink on the offensive side.

 

[Carl Spackler]

As I sip my first cup of tea on Sunday morning, the first thing that goes through my mind is not to overreact to that game. We played what might have been the best team on our schedule, and we lost 10-7 in a game that was statistically very close but for turnovers. Our defense was, for the second straight week, close to perfect -- this time against a much better foe. Our special teams played very well, and outplayed the other side overall, but just didn't make any big plays. And our offense sucked. Was it a lack of execution by our players? Was it horrific scheming and play calling by the staff? Was it still suffering from a lack of playmakers on this side of the ball when P took over? Yes, yes and yes. We got badly outcoached, but that was far from all that went wrong with the O. We can still win a lot of games on that basis if we just simplify the offense and make less mistakes. This team can still go 8-4 or 9-3, but it will not do it pretending we have Donovan McNabb at QB. It can do it the way we did it in '10. Eliminate the mistakes on O and give the D a chance to win you the game without having to overcome 4 turnovers. Is out staff flexible enough to do that? We'll see. But, while I think the play calling on O was horrid, I don't think we fix our problems merely by changing coaching. Players still win and lose games. Our offensive players didn't execute, and there is a talent gap on that side of the ball.

Funny day weather wise. I thought fans were there early in the lots and the students were in their seats and ready to go early. But the crowd, while o.k., never came near taking over the game. Was it the crowd or early frustration on the lack of any offense? Don't know. The weather was supposed to be a factor, but I think I put my raincoat on 4 or 5 times during the game, but each time there was no more than a sprinkle before I took it off. Not a good thing that we can't sell out a game like this. NC State should be embarassed about the number of fans they brought. Baylor and Iowa State both did much better. But miscellaneous thoughts don't seem as important today, so let's get to the units.

On D, I think we did see more personnel in than you would have seen in the Edsall era. We played Norris off the bench at DE, and Pruitt (who played really well), McBride and Campenni with Wirth (who also played great) at DT. I saw Donohue spell Johnson at LB (didn' t see Ashiru or Vann from scrimmage). We saw Adams play at lot of the third safety in a 3-3-5 (which we played more than 4-3 to my eye), Mack played the nickel back in certain alignments and when Blidi was out and Mack played CB Stevenson took his role in the nickel. The defense, obviously, was great. Frankly, they were one play short of perfect. The one play, unfortunatealy, Blidi was out, Mack got burned badly on a third and long and that was the game. As someone who was pushing Mack to play last year, this, obviously, is why he didn't. I could ask why, with Blidi out, Mack was isolated on a third and long without any safety help, but the D was so unbelievably great it's hard to spend too much time asking why one play didn't go well. It was a great defensive effort, so great that's it is hard to single out individual players. Except one. I never thought Trevardo Williams would be as good as he's become. What a phenomonal game.

Our special teams play was really good. Coverage, kicking, punting, blocking, all executed well. No big returns but not a lot of opportunity. One thing to note -- the one time they tried to block a punt they had a much different unit on the line than normally. Smaller speed guys -- Williams, Foxx, Stevenson -- who I didn't see play normally were all put in next to each other on one side. One thing to keep an eye on later in the season.

On offense, let's start with personnel. I saw on the field 7 OL (both Cruz and Bullock got some run), both TEs, 5 WR (a cameo for Terbucky Jones along with Williams, David, Smith and Phillips), 2 TBs (Huppolyte showed a little burst on the one short passs he caught -- the first time with the ball in his hands I saw something in three years), 3 FBs (with Delorenzo lining up there in 3rd and long once or twice) and, including Michael Smith, 3 QBs. Pages have already been written about the O's failures on the Boneyard, but a few points. Geremy Davis doesn't seem to want to contest balls that the DB has a better, or equal, chance to get. He has to go for the ball regardless. John Delahunt has to hold onto the ball, and someone needs to figure out where Ryan Griffin has gone. They line him up all over the field (WR, H-back and TE) but actually look to throw to him -- not that I saw. The OL needs to figure out who its best five players are, stick with it and see if they can get a push one day. Michael Smith at QB -- I don't get why we'd do that with McCummings here. Deleone's attempt to fool the other team are juvenile. On 3rd and 1, when you line up a 210 pound TB at FB, does anyone in the stadium not know who is going to carry the ball? You think you can show a finesse play, lose it to a penalty, and run it again the next play? It was the worst called game that I have ever seen by a UConn OC. And yes, there is a difference between simple, conservative plays and stupid plays. One is a style -- a style you may not like but a style that doesn't keep a team from winning. Yesterday, Deleone kept us from winning. But having said that, I don't know how much better we are with a good OC. The players did not execute and I think there is a talent shortfall, inherited by P, on that side of the ball. (The McCombs bashing, however, has to stop. He may never be a great back -- probably won't be -- but the thought that he's keeping us from winning is dumb. He's fine)


The bottom line, to me, is this. With the offensive playcalling, and with the lack of offensive explosive playmakers, that was still a winnable game. Upperclassmen have to make plays when they have the opportunity. John Delahunt is a senior. He can't fumble the ball. Blidi is a senior. He can't plant his feet in the endzone and fail to down a punt inside the 3. Taylor Mack is a junior. You can play off a WR until you get your feet wet, but in a 3-0 game you simply can't get beat deep when you have no safety help. And the turnovers have to stop. If that means simplifying the playbook, fine. At some point, if that means going to JM, that can't be off the table (although I am far, far from asking for that). But the turnovers have to stop.

So a winnable game next week, but not an easy one on the road. Maryland has an offense we should be able to dominate defensively. Can our offense win the game? If not, can they keep from losing it? We'll see. But did losing by 3 points to the Wolfpack really change the equation? No, it didn't. Maryland does not have NC State's personnel. We just have to get it done.

Oh -- and it wouldn't hurt the team or the program any if a few thousand of us save the 12 hours they would otherwise spend on the boneyard this week complaining about the coaches and instead get in their cars and make a 24 hour trip to greater DC to support our team. I know I will.

Always the voice of reason. I can't help but spout whatever my emotions are running wild with. Saturday's game, left me more angry, than it's healthy to be. Embarrassing.

THe game's been looked at, many times. It doesn't change with each viewing. The only thing to do is move on and prepare for Maryland week. It's finally here.

A win on Saturday in College Park, MD, and things will seem a lot different than they do now. But what happened Saturday, at our field, for me, is going to need a lot more time, than one week, to be redeemed, forgiven and forgotten for me, and I know exactly who, what, where and why I'm looking at for change, and if it doesnt? I"m on the warpath, because we're 18 months and 14 games into this now. So, with that -

Season 3, of this fall of 12, 1-week seasons - is Maryland.

I've been waiting for this week a long time, and I will be there in College Park, cheering my team, and I hope to see a huge sea of blue.

THe only question really for me - is where Big Red is sitting, and if he's not there - who's leading the UCONN cheer?

 

[Husky68]

I think that the players behind him have not performed well enough in practice to show they will be successful in a game. I would love to have a change of pace/compliment back that would keep McCombs to 18-22 carries a game. But if we don't have a back capable of giving us effective carries, why put them in for the sake of putting them in? That is my point.

Who doesn't want a change of pace back like DeAnthony Thomas(ORE) or James White (WISC)? But if you don't have those players, why not let your bell cow take the majority of the carries?

'cause LM is not a bell cow. I've seen plenty of coaches miss gold right under their nose. Not even saying subs are gold, but for sure LM is not either. Got to play guys to see what they can do. We rotate D line, linebackers, DB's, WR, even OL and even the QB - and LM never rotates on non wildcat plays and is on lot wildcat.

No team in FCS football has a 1st string guy so good or 2nd string so bad that he gets played like LM - and when your team is 6-8 with two of the wins comming from FBS and 1st game FCS schools would not say being different has gotten much.

If LM is that much better than rest of RB's we are one play away from ultimate disaster; to have one of these unprepared and poorly qualified RB's get burn will surely kill the rest of the season. Why didn't he get a juco RB?

 

[spsct]

Agree 100% with the original analysis by BizLaw. And 1000% agreed with the downed punt in the endzone, which happened right in front of us. I turned to my brother and said "WTF was that?!?!?

 

[Bootsthemonkey]

I'm not a fan of using the wildcat offense since it began last year even though in 2011 it produced results at times. The reason it doesn't? UConn doesn't throw out of it. Last year we passed out of the wilcat a few times. One route that I can remember and it surprised defenses a couple of times, and at least one time I remember the tight end being grossly overthrown. I have serious doubts about McCummings ability to throw the ball. However the guy has shown he has good vision running and can be a load. So my question would be, once again, why not make him a tailback? If you have him in the game along with Whitmer the defense has to be honest vs the run and the pass and you now have a 6'2" 220lb tailback with vision and speed. As it stands now when he comes in the game teams can automatically stack the box and just put a spy on the TE in case he releases. It makes at least more sense than running Mike Smith at QB in the wildcat or Hyppolite as FB in power I.

The offense also needs to spread the D out and allow players to get into open space. We go to a two TE set with Frank in power it's pretty much going to be a run between the tackles. When your line isn't pushing anyone around and you have a 160lb running back why do you insist upon telegraphing your offense and try to run power between the tackles?

As far as the defense goes, apart from Mack getting burned I don't think you can ask for more. They came up big every time it was needed and provided the O with great field position all day. While both teams allowed comparable offensive stats overall keep in mind the UConn D did this even though NC State ran 15 more plays than our offense did.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Same coaches who recruited the guys on defense.

A little history. Jim Calhoun made UConn a difficult game for any opponent with players such as Lyman DePriest, Murray Williams and other staunch defenders (great players at defensive end of the floor). But UConn didn't become Final Four contenders and National Champions unti they got the Chris Smith, Donyell Marshalls, Ray Allen's and Richard Hamilton's that could light up the scoreboard. Need better (much better) recruiting on offensive side of ball. Fans have known or should have known this for years now.

 

[RMS25CT]

I'm not a fan of using the wildcat offense since it began last year even though in 2011 it produced results at times. The reason it doesn't? UConn doesn't throw out of it. Last year we passed out of the wilcat a few times. One route that I can remember and it surprised defenses a couple of times, and at least one time I remember the tight end being grossly overthrown. I have serious doubts about McCummings ability to throw the ball. However the guy has shown he has good vision running and can be a load. So my question would be, once again, why not make him a tailback? If you have him in the game along with Whitmer the defense has to be honest vs the run and the pass and you now have a 6'2" 220lb tailback with vision and speed. As it stands now when he comes in the game teams can automatically stack the box and just put a spy on the TE in case he releases. It makes at least more sense than running Mike Smith at QB in the wildcat or Hyppolite as FB in power I.

The offense also needs to spread the D out and allow players to get into open space. We go to a two TE set with Frank in power it's pretty much going to be a run between the tackles. When your line isn't pushing anyone around and you have a 160lb running back why do you insist upon telegraphing your offense and try to run power between the tackles?

As far as the defense goes, apart from Mack getting burned I don't think you can ask for more. They came up big every time it was needed and provided the O with great field position all day. While both teams allowed comparable offensive stats overall keep in mind the UConn D did this even though NC State ran 15 more plays than our offense did.

You are talking about throwing out of the wildcat but how about the QB keeping the ball on occasion. I know its a read option play...pretty much the same play over and over, and you have to read the DE, but I don't think the DE was paying attention to McCummings and yet he keeps handing it off. Even if it isn't the right read, keep the ball once or twice and slow the defense's reaction down a little.

 

[businesslawyer]

You are talking about throwing out of the wildcat but how about the QB keeping the ball on occasion. I know its a read option play...pretty much the same play over and over, and you have to read the DE, but I don't think the DE was paying attention to McCummings and yet he keeps handing it off. Even if it isn't the right read, keep the ball once or twice and slow the defense's reaction down a little.

McCummings seemed so determined not to look to run it that I'm not convinced there wasn't something physically wrong with him that we just haven't heard yet.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I don't know if you guys are discussing something specific that happened, or are generalizing....but I do think that if you try to turn a read/option offensive play calling set, into a scripted play calling set, you're going uphill against water, and I had the distinct feeling on Saturday, that there was very little to nothing that was actually read or option, in any of the play calling that came out of those kinds of offensive formations that we trotted out.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

So the wildcat isn't fooling anyone in that aspect either. A good stat for next week would be zero plays out of the wildcat, period.

 

[Carl Spackler]

So the wildcat isn't fooling anyone in that aspect either. A good stat for next week would be zero plays out of the wildcat, period.

Quiet. The grown ups are talking.

 

[RMS25CT]

I don't know if you guys are discussing something specific that happened, or are generalizing....but I do think that if you try to turn a read/option offensive play calling set, into a scripted play calling set, you're going uphill against water, and I had the distinct feeling on Saturday, that there was very little to nothing that was actually read or option, in any of the play calling that came out of those kinds of offensive formations that we trotted out.

Carl, I almost believe that the read/option play has no option at all because the QB never keeps the ball (maybe one or two times v. UMass). The DE is in on the play most of the time.....if the play is run right he should be tackling the QB, not in on the tackle of the RB.

 

[businesslawyer]

I don't know if you guys are discussing something specific that happened, or are generalizing....but I do think that if you try to turn a read/option offensive play calling set, into a scripted play calling set, you're going uphill against water, and I had the distinct feeling on Saturday, that there was very little to nothing that was actually read or option, in any of the play calling that came out of those kinds of offensive formations that we trotted out.

That is what I was trying to say. But for the one pitch option (which the D blew up), it looked like we were running a fake freeze-option where he had, for whatever reason, decided to hand off before taking the snap. Add to that Michael Smith then getting snaps there to actually run the ball, and I am still guessing something might be wrong with mcCummings that we're not being told.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Quiet. The grown ups are talking.

OK there Mr. "We're going inside of 'em, we're going outside of 'em - inside of 'em outside of 'em - and when we get 'em on the run once, we're going to keep 'em on the run. And we're not going to pass unless their secondary comes up too close. But, don't forget, men - when we get 'em on the run, we're going to go, go, go, go! And we aren't going to stop until we go over that goal line! And don't forget, men - today is the day, we're going to win."

 

[Carl Spackler]

Carl, I almost believe that the read/option play has no option at all because the QB never keeps the ball (maybe one or two times v. UMass). The DE is in on the play most of the time.....if the play is run right he should be tackling the QB, not in on the tackle of the RB.

Right, I get the impression that we've got an offensive set, that gives the outward appearance of an option play, but is not. I don't mind cat and mouse games in x's and o's, as long as the results are positive with whatever you are going with. That didn't happen saturday.