This team is poorly coached.

[Hoophound]

Zone blocking is complicated. You have multiple assignments and you need much better lateral movement. "Sheer inability" is all the more reason not to use it. Yes, zone blocking is utilized by many, but not at all times. It also isn't used as much by less talented teams. Last year we scrapped it and became immediately better. Time to scrap it again. We've been to this rodeo.

 

[junglehusky]

Totally fair questions to be asking the HC. That being said, there are very few instances where a HC will answer it with "yeah, the coaches dropped the ball". Usually it would be in a big game between elite level teams where the losing team is campaigning for a major bowl, or nowadays, a playoff bid. Then the coach can try to keep the public opinion of his team's stature high by playing mea culpa. You won't see that however in a program building situation when a coach is worried about buy in from players. (And if you think coaches worry about buy in from fans, I would disagree).

 

[UConnDan97]

Last year we scrapped it and became immediately better.

This. ^^^

This is the reason why I'm not on board with the quote that Medic put up. While everyone is going to have a different opinion, the bottom line is that the exact same players last year all of the sudden became "capable" instead of "incapable" when the system was switched. The same exact line that was hapless last year somehow managed to put up 28 on Temple, 28 on Rutgers, and 45 on Memphis. The idea that this is primarily a talent-driven issue rather than a schematic or play-calling issue in my opinion is false. And I think we have enough data to prove it. So let's get back to simplifying the offense again, and get back to short passes, standard or bubble screens, etc., and put these kids in a position to succeed. Otherwise, we are going to need separate medical staffs for Whitmer and Boyle respectively...

 

[huskymedic]

This. ^^^

This is the reason why I'm not on board with the quote that Medic put up. While everyone is going to have a different opinion, the bottom line is that the exact same players last year all of the sudden became "capable" instead of "incapable" when the system was switched. The same exact line that was hapless last year somehow managed to put up 28 on Temple, 28 on Rutgers, and 45 on Memphis. The idea that this is primarily a talent-driven issue rather than a schematic or play-calling issue in my opinion is false. And I think we have enough data to prove it. So let's get back to simplifying the offense again, and get back to short passes, standard or bubble screens, etc., and put these kids in a position to succeed. Otherwise, we are going to need separate medical staffs for Whitmer and Boyle respectively...

But we don't have the "exact same players" as last year - this year. And the scheme is not 100% zone blocking, it's a split. I don't have the time, but look at which plays get blown up - are they zone blocking or man blocking calls. My eyeballs tell me it's both, which makes it not a scheme issue. Not looking to get people "on board" Dan - my only point/opinion is that our problems are not just zone blocking issues. Even the screens that were run yesterday were not crisp.

 

[UConnDan97]

But we don't have the "exact same players" as last year - this year. And the scheme is not 100% zone blocking, it's a split. I don't have the time, but look at which plays get blown up - are they zone blocking or man blocking calls. My eyeballs me it's both, which makes it not a scheme issue. Not looking to get people "on board" - my only point/opinion is that our problems are not just zone blocking issues.

Then you misunderstood what I was saying. I was comparing last year's OLine to last year's OLine, not this year's OLine. In other words, by simplifying the offense, both through OLine simplifications and play-calling simplifications, the same OLine players performed much much better. That was my point. The idea that our protection is THIS BAD simply because our players have no talent is very unlikely to be the case. Very unlikely. They might not have the talent to be a strong line, but they sure as hell have more talent than what we've seen so far. I agree with your statement that the problem is not just the zone blocking issues (because of the aforementioned OC playcalls that can help the situation), but it is most certainly part of the problem...

 

[Marty Jackson]

At some point, Diaco has to take responsibility for the team's constant mistakes. He's the coach.

If the team can't kick off without making a mistake, isn't that the coaches fault?

If the starting QB gives the opponents 20+ points. Should the coaches decision to keep playing him enter into the discussion?

If the team keeps committing pre-snap penalties -at home- shouldn't the coach fix it?

If the offensive line can't pick up a blitz, do they have to figure it out on their own or does the coach have to take the blame?

If the offense doesn't have plays to neutralize the blitz, is it the coaches fault for not calling those plays?

If play makers are on the bench instead of in the game, who controls the personnel decisions?

If you believe these questions are unfair, then none of it is on the coach. Otherwise the coach has to pick up HIS game.

an appropriate quote from history...

"It is not the critic who counts; nor the one who points out how the strong person stumbled, or where the doer of a deed could have done better.

The credit belongs to the person who is actually in the arena; whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; who does actually strive to do deeds; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotion, spends oneself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement; and who at worst, if he or she fails, at least fails while daring greatly.

Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those timid spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
Theordore Roosevelt - 1906

there is a reason people like Diaco head into the spotlight and dare to be great while others hide behind a pseudonym and a keyboard, questioning that very effort as if it's their entitlement to do so.

The guys been head coach for 5 freakin' games!!!

 

[Srqhusky]

Honestly on defense coach poindexter and Vincent brown are doing a great job. Not really impressed and kind of red flagged from the beginning was the offensive coordinator. All I thought about was what is we could keep tj although I know it was impossible. I could only imagine this years defense with last years last three game offense

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

We have 3 guys on the OL who are not FBS level players. Period. And the other 2 aren't very good.

People who think losing Cochran was a big deal are fooling themselves. It never mattered. The OL is just bad. I don't care which scheme they use. Our tackles resemble revolving doors.

 

[tduconn]

There may be some legitimate coaching technique concerns, but a lot has to do with individual efforts, abilities, and talent.

If wasn't too long ago where BD suggested they had to simplify the schemes. That sort of raises a red flag for me.

I'll try an analogy for which many of you may call me nuts

Take some basic math courses in high school as an example. Assume everyone enters high school fairly good at arithmetic. If someone aspires to a profession that requires science and math background, they may run a curriculum through high school that progresses from freshman math to geometry, trigonometry, calculus, advanced calculus, etc.

I and many of may classmates luckily had the ability to excel at the highest level of mathematics. Also, other classmates could do ok at the beginning math class, but eventually digressed from a math/science emphasis because they couldn't master the challenges of more advanced mathematics classes. They never said the teachers stunk,,,,,,,but realized they, on a personal level, wasn't up to the challenge. Never heard the parents of those students that couldn't progress in those lines of study suggest the teachers didn't know what they were doing. Mathematics, absent basics, were beyond comprehension for their kids. Those student went and excelled in other areas of study according to individual abilities and talent.

Now, drawing a parallel with the team.........we have a number of athletes that excelled at the high school level, but may not have the abilities to compete of the BCS level.
Maybe they'd be o.k. in Div. 1-aa, II, or III,.......where the challenges are less intense. Just like the HS students that good in basic math, that is their limit.

I want to make my rambling clear....... I'm not picking on any HS student, or the current players on the team. They are all good people, and try their darnest, but maybe they are also in over their head. Again, BD stated the coaches decided they had to make things simpler.

Don't forget, historically UConn class have not been highly regarded. They have never been considered an offensive powerhouse.

 

[tduconn]

There may be some legitimate coaching technique concerns, but a lot has to do with individual efforts, abilities, and talent.

If wasn't too long ago where BD suggested they had to simplify the schemes. That sort of raises a red flag for me.

I'll try an analogy for which many of you may call me nuts

Take some basic math courses in high school as an example. Assume everyone enters high school fairly good at arithmetic. If someone aspires to a profession that requires science and math background, they may run a curriculum through high school that progresses from freshman math to geometry, trigonometry, calculus, advanced calculus, etc.

I and many of may classmates luckily had the ability to excel at the highest level of mathematics. Also, other classmates could do ok at the beginning math class, but eventually digressed from a math/science emphasis because they couldn't master the challenges of more advanced mathematics classes. They never said the teachers stunk,,,,,,,but realized they, on a personal level, wasn't up to the challenge. Never heard the parents of those students that couldn't progress in those lines of study suggest the teachers didn't know what they were doing. Mathematics, absent basics, were beyond comprehension for their kids. Those student went and excelled in other areas of study according to individual abilities and talent.

Now, drawing a parallel with the team.........we have a number of athletes that excelled at the high school level, but may not have the abilities to compete of the BCS level.
Maybe they'd be o.k. in Div. 1-aa, II, or III,.......where the challenges are less intense. Just like the HS students that good in basic math, that is their limit.

I want to make my rambling clear....... I'm not picking on any HS student, or the current players on the team. They are all good people, and try their darnest, but maybe they are also in over their head. Again, BD stated the coaches decided they had to make things simpler.

Don't forget, historically UConn class have not been highly regarded. They have never been considered an offensive powerhouse.

 

[ZOOCONN]

Oops, left out, a coach has responsibility for halftime adjustments. If the team is worse in the second half, who shoulders the blame?

I have to disagree with you, I honestly feel like this regime has made far more half time changes than edsall or PP ever made. I mean the score at half time did not dictate much change, take away the stupid mistakes and we were in good shape coming into the second half.

 

[Confident Carl]

I still believe part play calling. Stop calling 7 step drop passing plays and run wr screens/slants. The one big play was the RB screen pass. Quick throws instead of routes taking time.

I too would like to see more screens and quick slant routes. It seemed like each time we went wide and long at USF (strip sack) and Temple (interception) we didn't have to run those plays and they set us up for the turnovers. Against Temple we didn't have to go deep at that point in the game. We were eating up clock and getting into a groove. The offense does look Bi-poler at times. I'm not blind.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I'm just guessing here but my guess on the reason for so few quick slants is that with the heights of who the staff initially expected to be our QB's this season and questions on the OL's ability to hold their ground this was taken out of the playbook.

Screens can be a bit complicated in terms of blocking assignments and from what I have seen from our line, this may be well outside of their knowledge base.

 

[gioff23]

I'm sorry, can someone point out where the staff or HC did not accept responsibility? I don't disagree with a lot of the commentary here, I'm just having trouble with the premise.

In full disclosure, I see a lot of growth on D and on ST (offsides on KO notwithstanding). And aside from Byron, I see no one graduating from either. My biggest issue w/our O (aside from the OL and the fact that we lost several starters from a horrific OL - meaning, these are the guys who couldn't beat out those guys), is that we seem to have guys who can make plays in space but we never run plays designed to allow them to do so - at least not before the game is out of hand.

 

[Palatine]

I'm just guessing here but my guess on the reason for so few quick slants is that with the heights of who the staff initially expected to be our QB's this season and questions on the OL's ability to hold their ground this was taken out of the playbook.

Screens can be a bit complicated in terms of blocking assignments and from what I have seen from our line, this may be well outside of their knowledge base.

I agree. So why leave the 6-4 guy on the bench?

 

[SubbaBub]

I asked someone who watches and analyzes offensive schemes much more than I ever could for his opinion on the "zone blocking narrative" because I don't buy it. Here is his response:

"The culprit behind UConn's O-line struggles is simple, and the same that felled last year's group: blatant inability. Last season, the narrative that a zone-blocking scheme was at fault for the team's running woes was purported by a few more prominent members of UConn football media and consequently frustrated fans. But it was never, ever true. In fact, some of the Huskies' biggest running gains in 2013 came off of zone blocking. If you watched the tape, you saw this. If you didn't, you most likely accepted the narrative because it provided a simplistic explanation for UConn's troubles that didn't directly fault the team and left you feeling frustrated but not hopeless towards the program.

Furthermore, the zone blocking scheme is responsible for some of the greatest rushing teams in NCAA and NFL history. The key here is not one of the 2013 O-line starters, save for Steve Greene, was fit to block against top-100 competition in college football. This is the same case in 2014. And when you have a group that overall is incapable or lacking, utilizing a zone scheme is actually not a poor idea. In the scheme, linemen are responsible for clearing out a gap (generally to their right or left) and not a particular defender. In this case, it's rare that a blocking linemen will be matched up head-on with an defensive linemen, who could potentially overpower him in such a situation."

Take it for what it's worth...

Sounds like a horrible scheme for linemen with poor footwork, which we have. But they are big and reportedly strong. Why not change the scheme to fit that?

 

[BNich]

Sounds like a horrible scheme for linemen with poor footwork, which we have. But they are big and reportedly strong. Why not change the scheme to fit that?

One would think. Isn't the general rule of thumb to play to your strengths?

 

[HuskyHawk]

I have to disagree with you, I honestly feel like this regime has made far more half time changes than edsall or PP ever made. I mean the score at half time did not dictate much change, take away the stupid mistakes and we were in good shape coming into the second half.

And but for a few toes over an imaginary line...they'd be ahead from the opening kickoff.

 

[Palatine]

And but for a few toes over an imaginary line...they'd be ahead from the opening kickoff.

True but if a freshman is off sides on the kick off, isn't that a product of coaching?

 

[Bonehead]

True but if a freshman is off sides on the kick off, isn't that a product of coaching?

No - poor execution by player.
The coach is a Broyles Award winner - he knows how to coach. Completely explained the offsides rule and the kid failed to execute properly.

He then told the freshman he loves him and he cares for him and reminded him that he was taught not to be offsides on a kickoff - asked him to pretty please not do it again.

 

[Palatine]

No - poor execution by player.
The coach is a Broyles Award winner - he knows how to coach. Completely explained the offsides rule and the kid failed to execute properly.

He then told the freshman he loves him and he cares for him and reminded him that he was taught not to be offsides on a kickoff - asked him to pretty please not do it again.

It's the coaches responsibility to make that a point of emphasis. It is absolutely a reflection of coaching. That off sides wasn't technique or execution. He didn't miss a block or get overpowered. It's a lack of focus. A mental error. It lies squarely with the coach.

He should have been TAUGHT not to run offside well before game five. If he was he wouldn't have run off sides. Obviously the kids were not drilled well enough. The point was not made well enough.

 

[HuskyHawk]

True but if a freshman is off sides on the kick off, isn't that a product of coaching?

Really? That's ridiculous. No. It's a product of a kid having his foot land about 3 inches too far. Yeah, that's Diaco's fault. Good grief. It's amazing it was called or that the ref saw it live. It wasn't a stride, or a step or even a foot, it was about 2-3 inches.

 

[Bonehead]

It's the coaches responsibility to make that a point of emphasis. It is absolutely a reflection of coaching. That off sides wasn't technique or execution. He didn't miss a block or get overpowered. It's a lack of focus. A mental error. It lies squarely with the coach.

He should have been TAUGHT not to run offside well before game five. If he was he wouldn't have run off sides. Obviously the kids were not drilled well enough. The point was not made well enough.

Even if the coaches taught/told him 100 times not to go offsides on a kickoff, which I think we would agree is enough drilling and that the point was made clear, and the player lost focus (for whatever reason) and went offsides anyways, that is coaching?
I would think having a Broyles Award winning coach all of our players have been drilled enough on all aspects of the game of football - they dont just give those awards away, you have to earn them.

 

[HuskyHawk]

It's the coaches responsibility to make that a point of emphasis. It is absolutely a reflection of coaching. That off sides wasn't technique or execution. He didn't miss a block or get overpowered. It's a lack of focus. A mental error. It lies squarely with the coach.

He should have been TAUGHT not to run offside well before game five. If he was he wouldn't have run off sides. Obviously the kids were not drilled well enough. The point was not made well enough.

So let me get this straight. No 18 year old kid who has been taught not to do a thing has ever done it before. That's your premise? That once the knowledge is imparted, all execution will thereafter always be perfect? Or are you saying that if Nick Saban had told him not to go offsides it would have sunk in better? Or are you saying something even more stupid, that somehow Diaco didn't actually already teach them all not to go offsides on the kickoff? That he just forgot it...oops, meant to bring that up and missed it.

 

[CTMike]

If only Palatine was coach, we'd be 5-0.

 

[sdhusky]

If only Palatine was coach, we'd be 5-0.

Its just schemes. And telling the kids not to make mistakes.

I can't believe Diaco hasn't told the kids to stop making mistakes.

 

[BlueDogs]

Guessing at the nature of the systematic dysfunction is increasingly less clear to me. All I can observe is that Weist got them producing the last 3 games. So, what's different? Clearly Weist was a different type of no nonsense disciplinarian. Diaco is a new ager, positive vibes guy. It's clear that discipline is not taking hold on the field. Who the flock knows anymore.

 

[Bonehead]

Guessing at the nature of the systematic dysfunction is increasingly less clear to me. All I can observe is that Weist got them producing the last 3 games. So, what's different? Clearly Weist was a different type of no nonsense disciplinarian. Diaco is a new ager, positive vibes guy. It's clear that discipline is not taking hold on the field. Who the flock knows anymore.

There is NO need for discipline when there is love, care and a participation trophy for everyone - that overcomes all. You dont even need to be accountable. Its ok - we know you tried and we will help you be better.

 

[ShakyTheMohel]

There is NO need for discipline when there is love, care and a participation trophy for everyone - that overcomes all. You dont even need to be accountable. Its ok - we know you tried and we will help you be better.

You are an odd dude. You have a HFD maniacal posting approach.

So what's your story? You have 672 posts...but your posting the last couple weeks makes me think you should have a lot more posts. Did you migrate from a different handle? Or does the current play of this team just bring out the posting fiend in you?

 

[Bonehead]

You are an odd dude. You have a HFD maniacal posting approach.

So what's your story? You have 672 posts...but your posting the last couple weeks makes me think you should have a lot more posts. Did you migrate from a different handle? Or does the current play of this team just bring out the posting fiend in you?

Is that a compliment?



My story or my post about love and care?
The love and care post is straight from Bob Diaco - his response.

My story -

Born and Raised in CT
USMC 5 years
Back to CT in 1998
Have Wife, Kids, Dogs, Cats, Fish
Project Manager
Volunteer, Church Goer
8th year as Season Ticket holder Section 130
Oh - Boneyard story - I did migrate from a different handle - Karl Hobbs - I dont remember why it was shut down but it was for nothing I posted (Before he joined staff at UConn) - more because of the handle name itself if I remember correctly and definetly not banned for anything I posted but Temery could tell you, but then I could not access account anymore as email address had changed - but I wasnt that vocal then as I am now and it was a while back.

And yes - I didnt feel the need to post alot under the Randy years - that was smooth sailing but as the team has slipped into disarray I am finding it harder and harder to not say anything as I care about UConn FB.

I pretty much stopped posting about football knowledge (X's and O's) - its useless on this board - and I would be happy to carry the torch in the absence of HFD - and as I get called out the more maniacal I become.

Thanks for asking,

GO TEAM!!