The View From Section 241

[J187Money]

Sio doesn't play on kickoff coverage this year and I'm sure that is a factor.


---
I am here: http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=41.237907,-73.077089

 

[businesslawyer]

Not sure what you are smoking to think the fans can influence ANYTHING, but pass it over.

Seriously? Fans contribute money that allow schools to spend more on coaches, facilities and recruiting. Fans fill stadiums, which attracts recruits. Fans watch games on TV, which leads to more games being televised and more exposure for recruits. And that's not to mention the emotional lift a home crowd can give a team.

You have to be kidding if you don't think large fan bases make it easier to win.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Agreed with more of this post than you'd probably think. You make a good observation about the crowd, but here we are probably gonna part ways. The crowds have been awful this year . . . maybe not so much with attendance (til this past Saturday) but definitely in the level of excitement and amplification. And that's on the UConn athletic department. As the 2010 season came to an end, UConn was poised to position itself as a top Big East team, a bowl regular and a potential Top 25 team. They were coming off of a road win against Notre Dame, a convincing win over the SEC-Steve Spurriers and then a Big East Championship and Fiesta Bowl appearance. So what happened?

1. Bad advice? Maybe. Jordan Todman should have stayed another year. For his sake, let alone UConn.
2. A bad (very bad) hire. PP was the quick, safe and probably politically correct choice. But a horrible selection. . . to old (you don't continue to program construction with someone that far down the road or if you do . . . try for a Bobby Bowden or Lou Holtz, someone with star power). He is also boring . . . how many times has UConn come out flat? And how boring is that offense?
3. The recruiting over the past four years finally caught up with UConn (that's on Randy). Too many players that wouldn't be offered at most BCS schools. Class after class were evaluated as 6th-8th in the Big East, which was rated very low as conferences go. The "analysts", it turns out, were accurate. Oh and absolutely, zero star power. UConn hasn't had a QB in forever. They have been pretty poor at WR, save for somebody remember that Marcus Easley was still riding the bench (four games into the 2009 season) after four years of being around the program.
4. A one-demensional, boring, ground and pound offense that was straight out of the 50's & 60's. I'll give them that they got a lot of mileage out of what they had, but it was too dependent on one or two durable tailbacks. And, there didn't appear to be any thought to upgrading the passing side of the equation.
5. And . . . a "walk on" QB takes over as the starter, performs miserably, and the coaching staff sticks with him? Really? Look no further for the State of the Union.
6. This whole Big East/ACC/Big 12 defections (poaching) fiasco. One big game of musical chairs and UConn looks to be without the security of a long-term seat (remember they had deck chairs on the Titanic). Gotta hope the ACC realizes what UConn hoops would do for there conference.
7. This one's an add on . . . in a totally lackluster season, devoid of excitement, the security was gonna make sure the students didn't rush the field after the Syracuse win. Don't want to look like those "football factories" at the major college level where fans everywhere get all rev'ed up about those kinds of things. We're New England, we stay in our seats. LET THE WILD RUMPUS BEGIN. . . geez.

 

[BugsyCT]

Still plenty for this team to play for Saturday:

1. Arch rival who's had our number in recent years (plus BCS implications for them)
2. Still alive for bowl eligibility
3. Senior day

Should be another ideal football weather day (despite all the hardships of this season, the weather for home games has been near perfect.) No reason - NO GOOD REASON why people shouldn't pack the Rent, be loud and stick around. If we strive to be a solid football program and a loyal fan base, we just have to endure seasons like this and support the team & players no mater what. Even in down years, these are still amateur athletes getting an education and doing their best out there for the team.

 

[businesslawyer]

Agreed with more of this post than you'd probably think. You make a good observation about the crowd, but here we are probably gonna part ways. The crowds have been awful this year . . . maybe not so much with attendance (til this past Saturday) but definitely in the level of excitement and amplification. And that's on the UConn athletic department. As the 2010 season came to an end, UConn was poised to position itself as a top Big East team, a bowl regular and a potential Top 25 team. They were coming off of a road win against Notre Dame, a convincing win over the SEC-Steve Spurriers and then a Big East Championship and Fiesta Bowl appearance. So what happened?

1. Bad advice? Maybe. Jordan Todman should have stayed another year. For his sake, let alone UConn.
2. A bad (very bad) hire. PP was the quick, safe and probably politically correct choice. But a horrible selection. . . to old (you don't continue to program construction with someone that far down the road or if you do . . . try for a Bobby Bowden or Lou Holtz, someone with star power). He is also boring . . . how many times has UConn come out flat? And how boring is that offense?
3. The recruiting over the past four years finally caught up with UConn (that's on Randy). Too many players that wouldn't be offered at most BCS schools. Class after class were evaluated as 6th-8th in the Big East, which was rated very low as conferences go. The "analysts", it turns out, were accurate. Oh and absolutely, zero star power. UConn hasn't had a QB in forever. They have been pretty poor at WR, save for somebody remember that Marcus Easley was still riding the bench (four games into the 2009 season) after four years of being around the program.
4. A one-demensional, boring, ground and pound offense that was straight out of the 50's & 60's. I'll give them that they got a lot of mileage out of what they had, but it was too dependent on one or two durable tailbacks. And, there didn't appear to be any thought to upgrading the passing side of the equation.
5. And . . . a "walk on" QB takes over as the starter, performs miserably, and the coaching staff sticks with him? Really? Look no further for the State of the Union.
6. This whole Big East/ACC/Big 12 defections (poaching) fiasco. One big game of musical chairs and UConn looks to be without the security of a long-term seat (remember they had deck chairs on the Titanic). Gotta hope the ACC realizes what UConn hoops would do for there conference.
7. This one's an add on . . . in a totally lackluster season, devoid of excitement, the security was gonna make sure the students didn't rush the field after the Syracuse win. Don't want to look like those "football factories" at the major college level where fans everywhere get all rev'ed up about those kinds of things.
We're New England, we stay in our seats. LET THE WILD RUMPUS BEGIN. . . geez.

Well, TDH, I agree with a lot of that. But the point I don't agree with is that it was Edsall's inability to get higher rated classes that has caused this season. On offense, think of how different the O would look if we had Michael Smith as another WR, Cody Endres as the QB, the Bus at LG and, if not Todman at TB, even Frey or Wylie sharing the load with McCombs and in to be the 3rd down back. The offense would be much better this year if it wasn't for the string of defections and early departures. Is Edsall responsible for some of that? Yes. But it wasn't a failure to bring more highly recruited players in the door. The players we brought in the door would have made us significantly better if they were still here.

And on D, as I said in another post, we returned 9 starters -- 9 starters -- from a defense that was outstanding down the stretch last year. You can blame this year's fiascos on injuries. You can blame it on the change in coaching. You can blame it on the players not playing hard or good enough. But to blame it on recruiting, when 9 of the 11 starters (10 if you count Jory Johnson who was fine last year in Lutrus's absence) had already played on an outstanding defensive unit just isn't right. These players on D were more than good enough for us to have a dominant D this year. Something else is the cause of the mediocre to poor performance.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Thanks for the write-up as always, Biz. I'm not totally sure I agree that this was the worst effort I've ever seen. Perhaps at The Rent. Last year's drubbing against Louisville was also particularly sad.

Sadly I won't be able to make the last game because I'm traveling, but I gave my tickets to some die-hards who should show up and scream their heads off. Especially against hated Rutgers.

I do agree about the playcalling, however. I thought the coaches did a great job putting people in a position to make plays, and all this talk about making the coaches responsible because the kids aren't focused enough to catch a simple ball is ridiculous. If you can't get amped up to play in front of thousands of people and catch a ball, I don't know what a coach is going to tell you to make it better. These kids have been playing their whole lives. This is simple fundamentals.

We needed to play a near-perfect game to make up for the talent gap, and we absolutely failed to play that game. We deserved the loss, and I am not optimistic about the last two games. But I'll still be rooting for our boys because you don't turn your back on a team when the going gets rough.

Good luck to them and I hope everybody comes out for Senior Day. Despite an ugly play on Saturday, Reyes, Kashif Moore, Isiah Moore, Moe Petrus, Mike Ryan, Dave Teggart and the rest deserve a good send-off.

 

[businesslawyer]

Thanks for the write-up as always, Biz. I'm not totally sure I agree that this was the worst effort I've ever seen. Perhaps at The Rent. Last year's drubbing against Louisville was also particularly sad.

Sadly I won't be able to make the last game because I'm traveling, but I gave my tickets to some die-hards who should show up and scream their heads off. Especially against hated Rutgers.

I do agree about the playcalling, however. I thought the coaches did a great job putting people in a position to make plays, and all this talk about making the coaches responsible because the kids aren't focused enough to catch a simple ball is ridiculous. If you can't get amped up to play in front of thousands of people and catch a ball, I don't know what a coach is going to tell you to make it better. These kids have been playing their whole lives. This is simple fundamentals.

We needed to play a near-perfect game to make up for the talent gap, and we absolutely failed to play that game. We deserved the loss, and I am not optimistic about the last two games. But I'll still be rooting for our boys because you don't turn your back on a team when the going gets rough.

Good luck to them and I hope everybody comes out for Senior Day. Despite an ugly play on Saturday, Reyes, Kashif Moore, Isiah Moore, Moe Petrus, Mike Ryan, Dave Teggart and the rest deserve a good send-off.

1. I do not believe there was a talent gap between Louisville and UConn on Saturday. One team played like crap and one didn't.

2. I was not claiming we had never played a worse game than this one. However, I will say that we've never played a late November big game (and this was a big game) and come out anywhere near this flat. (and don't tell me WVU in '07 -- that was a talent gap).

 

[Waquoit]

No reason - NO GOOD REASON why people shouldn't pack the Rent, be loud and stick around. If we strive to be a solid football program and a loyal fan base, we just have to endure seasons like this and support the team & players no mater what. Even in down years, these are still amateur athletes getting an education and doing their best out there for the team.

Are you gonna be there Bugsy? If so, if you see some fans that aren't measuring up to your standards make sure you call them out. How will other fans know what to do if you Superfans don't tell them.

 

[businesslawyer]

Are you gonna be there Bugsy? If so, if you see some fans that aren't measuring up to your standards make sure you call them out. How will other fans know what to do if you Superfans don't tell them.

Not surprisingly, this kind of snide comments misses the point. Maybe W isn't directing this at my statements, and because I often misinterpret snide maybe I'm totally off base in my interpretation (and if I am I apologize) but in case he is I'll try again.

No one has any right to tell a particular fan what to do. This is a free country. Everyone can do what they want in terms of coming or not coming, cheering or booing, getting there late or early, wearing blue or not, whatever. This is not a moral conversation.

Having said that you, or anyone else, can choose to be exactly the kind of fan they want to be and nothing more, however, does not mean that there are not consequences to the program for not having fans that give money and fill the building and travel on road trips and make the game day experience exciting for the players. There are consequences of having a fan base that doesn't act big time. And you, or anyone else, can get all snide about your individual behavior but it doesn't change the fact that we would be more attractive to the ACC if we sold out our building, looked enthusiastic during games, travelled to road games and donated more money. These are just facts that don't change whether someone's feelings are hurt or not.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Well, TDH, I agree with a lot of that. But the point I don't agree with is that it was Edsall's inability to get higher rated classes that has caused this season. On offense, think of how different the O would look if we had Michael Smith as another WR, Cody Endres as the QB, the Bus at LG and, if not Todman at TB, even Frey or Wylie sharing the load with McCombs and in to be the 3rd down back. The offense would be much better this year if it wasn't for the string of defections and early departures. Is Edsall responsible for some of that? Yes. But it wasn't a failure to bring more highly recruited players in the door. The players we brought in the door would have made us significantly better if they were still here.

And on D, as I said in another post, we returned 9 starters -- 9 starters -- from a defense that was outstanding down the stretch last year. You can blame this year's fiascos on injuries. You can blame it on the change in coaching. You can blame it on the players not playing hard or good enough. But to blame it on recruiting, when 9 of the 11 starters (10 if you count Jory Johnson who was fine last year in Lutrus's absence) had already played on an outstanding defensive unit just isn't right. These players on D were more than good enough for us to have a dominant D this year. Something else is the cause of the mediocre to poor performance.

If I may counselor, this is the problem that is entirely about recruiting. When a player goes down, or out, and they always, ALWAYS do in football, the next player needs to step in an do the job.

I do not agree with your points on this matter. I think that our philosophy of constant finding players to "coach up" and build a program is a direct causaully related effect on where we are in 2011.

And what I meant by "coach up" is simply get players ready to compete at the level. Coaching up at this level of football, IMO, at any level of football, means getting players to play at the NEXT level.

Idk why I'm thinking about i reight now, but one of my favorite coaches of all time is Gunther Cunningham, you want to talk about intense, the guy was not suited for the college game, he was there for a while, because he demands football 24/7. I have never met a more intense individual, from what I understand, Don Brown comes close, but I've never spent any time with Don Brown.

Amari Spievey is a CT footbal kid, that plays for Gun now, and he put himthrough the fire from what I understand, but the kid as a safety I believe that Gun moved to corner back. It took about 3 weeks to get him trained and performing well enough to cover NFL receivers. Not two years, not years of development time. The kid can now play all over the defensive backfield in the NFL.

WHy? because the kid had the physical ability.

I'm really tired of tippy toeing around it anymore. I"m expecting a major, major change in the level of athlete we see on the field in coming years.

for the record, I am NOT disrespecting anybody that suits up for this uconn program. They are all deserving of where they're at and what they've got. YOu are what your record says you are though, and we are not yet a top 25 team.

So back to the point, because we lost a whole bunch of players off the depth chart, is no excuse for where we're at. It's a directly related to the ability to fill 85 scholarships with players that can step on the field and compete from the moment they step on the field.

 

[businesslawyer]

If I may counselor, this is the problem that is entirely about recruiting. When a player goes down, or out, and they always, ALWAYS do in football, the next player needs to step in an do the job.

I do not agree with your points on this matter. I think that our philosophy of constant finding players to "coach up" and build a program is a direct causaully related effect on where we are in 2011.

And what I meant by "coach up" is simply get players ready to compete at the level. Coaching up at this level of football, IMO, at any level of football, means getting players to play at the NEXT level.

Idk why I'm thinking about i reight now, but one of my favorite coaches of all time is Gunther Cunningham, you want to talk about intense, the guy was not suited for the college game, he was there for a while, because he demands football 24/7. I have never met a more intense individual, from what I understand, Don Brown comes close, but I've never spent any time with Don Brown.

Amari Spievey is a CT footbal kid, that plays for Gun now, and he put himthrough the fire from what I understand, but the kid as a safety I believe that Gun moved to corner back. It took about 3 weeks to get him trained and performing well enough to cover NFL receivers. Not two years, not years of development time. The kid can now play all over the defensive backfield in the NFL.

WHy? because the kid had the physical ability.

I'm really tired of tippy toeing around it anymore. I"m expecting a major, major change in the level of athlete we see on the field in coming years.

for the record, I am NOT disrespecting anybody that suits up for this uconn program. They are all deserving of where they're at and what they've got. YOu are what your record says you are though, and we are not yet a top 25 team.

So back to the point, because we lost a whole bunch of players off the depth chart, is no excuse for where we're at. It's a directly related to the ability to fill 85 scholarships with players that can step on the field and compete from the moment they step on the field.

You are right in theory, but ignoring reality. Why has Texas suffered a decline in level of play when they had injuries at the skill positions? Because not all 85 players on the roster will ever be as good or as ready to play as others. And if it's not true at Texas, how in the world will it be true at schools that don't have Texas's recruiting advantages. I think Cincy will be surprised to see their offense dropping off without Collaros.

Look, I am not really disagreeing with your point. I said the day P was hired that I expect him to bring in more highly rated recruiting classes than Edsall, and I still do. My point, however, is that we went 8-4 and won the conference championship last year following Edsall's recruiting model. Is it the best model to follow? No. Everything being equal, every program at the country would take more highly rated kids. But to blame that for a sudden drop off in performance is intellectually dishonest. You only wrote about offense. Do you believe that our nine defensive starters became worse this year because they weren't highly recruited to begin with?

 

[jdb50]

Weren't we using 2 LB's alot last year? Sio and Bama while Lutus was hurt? Sio was inside stopping the run and blitzing on rare occasions. He's been taken out of that mix by moving outside in coverage. The staff felt he had the best chance to succeed there rather than Jory or Yawin and I can see that point. Still hurt though. The defense has been disapointing but against L-ville they gave up 20 points which is not a melt down. This year the long drives given up after we had taken a lead or scored are what hurt.

 

[rvfan]

Well, it took me this long to even want to reply. Yes, I too am one of those who sees the kickoff and the final play..... no matter what.
BUT, BUT Coach P is a DUD. Not a dude...... A DUD.
This team is young. Actually all college teams are young. The major responsibility of coaches is to prepare the team to play. This especially includes motivation.
With Coach P
modeling a freaking sloth for our young players, how can they be fired up to play?
I am a senior citizen fan. It is my opinion that Coach P should be a senior citizen fan too..... not UCONN's head coach...
RVFAN

 

[metsfan2323]

My point, however, is that we went 8-4 and won the conference championship

8-4 and a conference championship. Last year was a fun season and I am forever greatful to the players and coaches who gave me such great memories, but to keep it real there were at least 30 teams in the country better than we were. We took advantage of a very weak conference and a couple of teams that thought they could just show up to the Rent and beat us. The stars aligned for us.

In a head to head matchup I'm not sure if last years team would beat the 2004 Huskies. Certainly the 2004 offense (we had a quarterback) was better.

 

[businesslawyer]

8-4 and a conference championship. Last year was a fun season and I am forever greatful to the players and coaches who gave me such great memories, but to keep it real there were at least 30 teams in the country better than we were. We took advantage of a very weak conference and a couple of teams that thought they could just show up to the Rent and beat us. The stars aligned for us. In a head to head matchup I'm not sure if last years team would beat the 2004 Huskies. Certainly the 2004 offense was better.

You are correct. There were at least thirty teams in the country better than us last year.

This year, however, as someone has noted in a recent thread, there are 80. Is the failure to have more highly recruited classes a reason why we're not a year in and year out ranked team. Of course it is. But it's not the reason we are nowhere near as good a team this year as we were last year.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

If I may counselor, this is the problem that is entirely about recruiting. When a player goes down, or out, and they always, ALWAYS do in football, the next player needs to step in an do the job.

I do not agree with your points on this matter. I think that our philosophy of constant finding players to "coach up" and build a program is a direct causaully related effect on where we are in 2011. . . . .
I'm really tired of tippy toeing around it anymore. I"m expecting a major, major change in the level of athlete we see on the field in coming years.

You are what your record says you are though, and we are not yet a top 25 team. Perhaps too. . . "you are afterall, what the strength of your recruiting classes say you are - at least year after year"

So back to the point, because we lost a whole bunch of players off the depth chart, is no excuse for where we're at. It's a directly related to the ability to fill 85 scholarships with players that can step on the field and compete from the moment they step on the field.

Agreed. This year's on the field woes are directly related to the level of talent that Randy brought in over the past few years. PP will start owning that next year.

 

[BlueMAB]

Year after year we outperformed what our recruiting rankings said we were.

Either Randy was that good, the rankings were inaccurate, or (and this is my opinion) Randy was better than many gave him credit for (good, but not great) and many of our players were not fully evaluated and were under rated.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

Year after year we outperformed what our recruiting rankings said we were.

Either Randy was that good, the rankings were inaccurate, or (and this is my opinion) Randy was better than many gave him credit for (good, but not great) and many of our players were not fully evaluated and were under rated.

So what you're saying is that overachieving for UConn is 8-5, 9-4. At other schools they're a lot of unrest. Good pinch hitters in baseball are invaluable coming off the bench and can win games for you, but there is a reason they are on the bench in the first place.

 

[Carl Spackler]

1. I do not believe there was a talent gap between Louisville and UConn on Saturday. One team played like crap and one didn't.

Nope, louisville played like , and except for simple athleticism, they don't win this game. They beat us by making plays in our faces, while being closely defended, while under pressure, while players were in position to stop them. They had more, penalties and gave up more sacks, etc., etc. ran less then 3 yards on average per carry, had less overall offensive yardage (less than 300 yards total offense for the game) We had players running free through their defense. We had time to throw. We passed the ball alot against a defense who's only strength is against the run, and it showed. I'll just say I completely disagree and move on.

Players were in position to succeed. They failed. they'll get another opportunity in a couple days, and I fully expect them to be in te same positions to get the job done again. We'll see if they can do it this time.

 

[Husky68]

Not sure what you are smoking to think the fans can influence ANYTHING, but pass it over.

I agree. I was at the Vandy game and the Uconn experience at Memorial Stadium was better than Vandy. The Uconn crowd was louder than the whole rest of the stadium at the Vandy game. BL, does that mean we get Vandy's seat at the SEC table?

 

[whaler11]

Year after year we outperformed what our recruiting rankings said we were.

Either Randy was that good, the rankings were inaccurate, or (and this is my opinion) Randy was better than many gave him credit for (good, but not great) and many of our players were not fully evaluated and were under rated.

Hard to believe that the simplest reason might be true isn't it?

 

[whaler11]

Sadly I won't be able to make the last game because I'm traveling, but I gave my tickets to some die-hards who should show up and scream their heads off. Especially against hated Rutgers.

This might be splitting hairs.. but die hards don't need to be given tickets.

 

[businesslawyer]

I agree. I was at the Vandy game and the Uconn experience at Memorial Stadium was better than Vandy. The Uconn crowd was louder than the whole rest of the stadium at the Vandy game. BL, does that mean we get Vandy's seat at the SEC table?

Yes. Great point. The fact that Vandy doesn't support big time football disproves everything I've been saying. Because they have clearly stayed a superpower without it.

 

[CTpessimist]

This might be splitting hairs.. but die hards don't need to be given tickets.

Completely disagree with this post. I am friends with a couple die hards. In fact they go to every game. However, they don't have season tickets and thus need to be either given them or they buy them on game day.

 

[whaler11]

Completely disagree with this post. I am friends with a couple die hards. In fact they go to every game. However, they don't have season tickets and thus need to be either given them or they buy them on game day.

When they wake up and find UConn in CUSA 2.0 can't wait to see who they blame.