UCONN's Offense Rankings Since The Rent Opened

[UConnJim]

No analysis, just the rankings:

Year____Total Offense/Rushing Offense/Passing Offense

2003____8/34/10
2004____19/66/10
2005____94/34/106
2006____73/13/110
2007____90/49/97
2008____62/13/109
2009____57/39/61
2010____96/35/110

2011____108/97/84
2012____110/117/65
2013____115/122/60

Edsall era: 62/35/77

PP era: 111/112/70

 

[willie99]

No analysis, just the rankings:

Year____Total Offense/Rushing Offense/Passing Offense

2003____8/34/10
2004____19/66/10
2005____94/34/106
2006____73/13/110
2007____90/49/97
2008____62/13/109
2009____57/39/61
2010____96/35/110

2011____108/97/84
2012____110/117/65
2013____115/122/60

Edsall era: 62/35/77

PP era: 111/112/70

but but but but, it's not coaching

those numbers help put the nonsense we're all seeing into perspective, Pee Pee ruined the program he inherited

 

[J187Money]

He took over the 96th ranked offense - one that lost its RB to the NFL and it's QB, who wasn't great but knew how to win.

Edsall didn't have a great offense in 2010. He just was a great game planner with the kids he had.

P is a much worse game planner and doesn't seem to fit his game planning to the kids. And there is no question that Edsall would have done better and we would have gone to bowls the last two years.

But the narrative that P took a BCS level offense and destroyed it doesn't hold water.

(And of course that doesn't mean that P shouldn't be fired because he absolutely should be--it just means that people don't remember that our offense wasn't very good and it took 7 turnovers to barely beat WV for the first time)

 

[john2153]

Man if only we had won some of those close games in 2009.....

 

[tduconn]

2003 was mostly a MAC-CUSA type schedule.

2004 was 50-50.......MAC/CUSA and BCS teams

UConn never had a powerful total offense in the BCS era (since full fledged BE member), and that is why the offensive total offensive rankings have been and continue to be in the lower 33%-50% of the BCS rankings since 2005.

UConn won because of good defense and a few lucky bounces........which is always part of football.

P can be questioned about his coaching, but I agree with a previous poster.......he didn't destroy a BCS level offense. With a couple of exceptions, there wasn't ever much of a BCS all around offense.

I don't think the last two years were the sole reason UConn was not selected as an expansion candidate. A number of years ago a fan of a prominant BE team told me "UConn is as boring as heck to watch".........and he came to many games with me. There rests our problem.....perception. The overall offense rankings probably add substance to that perception.

 

[ruskin]

"Not a BCS level offense" -- C'MON MAN!!!!! After Dan O left there's no question the passing game has not been of high BCS quality. But the running game most certainly had been until GDL arrived on the scene.

And the notion that UConn's 'boring' offense had anything to do with being left out in CR is beyond laughable. The crazy Oregon & Oklahoma State style offenses is a relatively new phenomenon. Until very recently Big 10 football wasn't exactly known for its run & fun & gun offenses. Losing and the unserious hire of P had much more to do with losing out to Louisville. If the Michigan game had been at the Rent in 201o or 2011 with that crowd and that TV rating, we would be in much better shape in that regard. As it is, UConn did itself a lot of CR good last Saturday.

 

[SubbaBub]

Umm...two All-American running backs would disagree with the non-BCS offense part.

 

[J187Money]

"Not a BCS level offense" -- C'MON MAN!!!!! After Dan O left there's no question the passing game has not been of high BCS quality. But the running game most certainly had been until GDL arrived on the scene.

And the notion that UConn's 'boring' offense had anything to do with being left out in CR is beyond laughable. The crazy Oregon & Oklahoma State style offenses is a relatively new phenomenon. Until very recently Big 10 football wasn't exactly known for its run & fun & gun offenses. Losing and the unserious hire of P had much more to do with losing out to Louisville. If the Michigan game had been at the Rent in 201o or 2011 with that crowd and that TV rating, we would be in much better shape in that regard. As it is, UConn did itself a lot of CR good last Saturday.

I'm not saying anything re CR because we've beat that to death and none of us have any actual facts (other than we got left out).

And yes - we did have a BCS level running game prior to 2011. But that was because we had NFL caliber backs. Yes, the line was better and the blocking schemes were better, but McCombs isn't in the same class.

But this is telling:

2008____62/13/109 (the last year of DB - and if your running game is top 15 you don't need a passing game to win)
2009____57/39/61 (Todman - who was very good BUT not as good as DB or the combo of DB and Dixon prior - we were also helped a lot by the emergence of Easley)
2010____96/35/110 (Todman again - with NO passing game because nobody could catch (and maybe because of the Nick Williams conspiracy))

2011____108/97/84 (McCombs era begins. He isn't as good as Todman or DB or Dixon or Cauley (and you wouldn't trade any of the above for McCombs)

Bottom line - we don't have 1 back on the roster that is anywhere near as good as Todman. And with McCombs rushing for over 1000 yards as a freshman we still had the 97th ranked run game in 2011.

If Todman hadn't left early, he probably runs for 1400 yards easy and we end up 7-5 at least - even with P coaching and the GDL blocking scheme.

2012 and 2013 would be the same - and P should still be canned. But I just don't buy the narrative that he ruined something great. Because the 2 thing that was most instrumental in making it great was gone when he walked in the door. A gritty QB who knew how to survive and an NFL caliber running back. If Whitmer/McCombs were running the 2010 squad we don't go to the Fiesta Bowl. And if we do, its because of Whitmer, not McCombs.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'm not saying anything re CR because we've beat that to death and none of us have any actual facts (other than we got left out).

And yes - we did have a BCS level running game prior to 2011. But that was because we had NFL caliber backs. Yes, the line was better and the blocking schemes were better, but McCombs isn't in the same class.

But this is telling:

2008____62/13/109 (the last year of DB - and if your running game is top 15 you don't need a passing game to win)
2009____57/39/61 (Todman - who was very good BUT not as good as DB or the combo of DB and Dixon prior - we were also helped a lot by the emergence of Easley)
2010____96/35/110 (Todman again - with NO passing game because nobody could catch (and maybe because of the Nick Williams conspiracy))

2011____108/97/84 (McCombs era begins. He isn't as good as Todman or DB or Dixon or Cauley (and you wouldn't trade any of the above for McCombs)

Bottom line - we don't have 1 back on the roster that is anywhere near as good as Todman. And with McCombs rushing for over 1000 yards as a freshman we still had the 97th ranked run game in 2011.

If Todman hadn't left early, he probably runs for 1400 yards easy and we end up 7-5 at least - even with P coaching and the GDL blocking scheme.

2012 and 2013 would be the same - and P should still be canned. But I just don't buy the narrative that he ruined something great. Because the 2 thing that was most instrumental in making it great was gone when he walked in the door. A gritty QB who knew how to survive and an NFL caliber running back. If Whitmer/McCombs were running the 2010 squad we don't go to the Fiesta Bowl. And if we do, its because of Whitmer, not McCombs.

Wait - are you saying that we need players to play better in the running game? how can that be? LOL.

I hate losing. What this team needs is a blowout win. They need to go up to Buffalo and blow that team up and out. THey need the feeling that all the work they've put in over the past 2 years means something. As much as people don't like the coaching staff, it is on the players to do this. The offensive game plans, and play calling THIS season, contrary to popular opinion, have NOT put these kids in position to fail. Our offense under Deleone, in 2011 dn 2012, you can't say the same things. The defense played argueably one of their best games of the past few years last Saturday night, with lots of young blood on the field.

THey need to make the plays - esoecially on offense. we have the ability and talent as a team, to blow this team out this weekend, and realize that they've put a ton of work in that can build something. It's up to them to get it done.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

2003 was mostly a MAC-CUSA type schedule.

2004 was 50-50.......MAC/CUSA and BCS teams

UConn never had a powerful total offense in the BCS era (since full fledged BE member), and that is why the offensive total offensive rankings have been and continue to be in the lower 33%-50% of the BCS rankings since 2005.

UConn won because of good defense and a few lucky bounces........which is always part of football.

P can be questioned about his coaching, but I agree with a previous poster.......he didn't destroy a BCS level offense. With a couple of exceptions, there wasn't ever much of a BCS all around offense.

I don't think the last two years were the sole reason UConn was not selected as an expansion candidate. A number of years ago a fan of a prominant BE team told me "UConn is as boring as heck to watch".........and he came to many games with me. There rests our problem.....perception. The overall offense rankings probably add substance to that perception.

Totally agree with everything in this post (particularly what I highlighted in green). Randy Edsall did have a few good backs to work with (Brown, Caulley, Todman and Dixon, not to mention, Brockington, Bellamy and Lawrence who all filled in quite capably). It was the one position on offense he overachieved in as a recruiter. Where he failed miserably is at QB and at WR - and at a time when college football was moving to a more wide open offensive flavor.

I personally think that the Fiesta Bowl was the beginning of the end. A national TV audience had to sit through a game that could have been surprisingly exciting (for those who didn't know UConn football) except for the offense. Remember, the defense scored a TD, special teams scored a TD and I believe there was a FG, but not a single offensive TD. I remember checking the next day and with at least 7 or 8 games having been played, UConn was the only team (win or lose) that could not muster up even one offensive TD. It was "shutdown Todman, shutdown the Huskies" - case closed. Still waiting for Robby Frey to turn the corner (north/south running) on that glacier-like fourth and a foot play inside the five to develop before Oklahoma smothered it. Randy - USE JORDAN TODMAN LIKE IN THE PITT GAME or HAVE YOUR 6'4" QB FALL FORWARD!!!!!!!!

 

[uconndogs]

Honestly, I can't even begin to understand some of this.

First, I really enjoy winning a hell of a lot more than losing. Would have been great if the former coaching regime could have put together better passing attaches, but I view that as a minor anoyance compared to the absolute pile of we currently have in this program.

As for the Fiesta Bowl......well.....I view getting handled by Oklohoma as being just a wee bit different than being handled by Towson....but maybe that's just me........

 

[willie99]

He took over the 96th ranked offense - one that lost its RB to the NFL and it's QB, who wasn't great but knew how to win.

Edsall didn't have a great offense in 2010. He just was a great game planner with the kids he had.

P is a much worse game planner and doesn't seem to fit his game planning to the kids. And there is no question that Edsall would have done better and we would have gone to bowls the last two years.

But the narrative that P took a BCS level offense and destroyed it doesn't hold water.

(And of course that doesn't mean that P shouldn't be fired because he absolutely should be--it just means that people don't remember that our offense wasn't very good and it took 7 turnovers to barely beat WV for the first time)

we could run the ball which gave us an opportunity to win, that's what he destroyed

we had a great offensive line with 3 returning starters and at least two all conference members and all of a sudden they can't block, that's what he destroyed

does anyone really think we'd be this bad if randy stayed? seriously?

 

[J187Money]

we could run the ball which gave us an opportunity to win, that's what he destroyed

we had a great offensive line with 3 returning starters and at least two all conference members and all of a sudden they can't block, that's what he destroyed

does anyone really think we'd be this bad if randy stayed? seriously?

No. My post clearly explains that. BUT, there is no question we would have been worse in 2011 v. 2010 anyway, even if Edsall remained, solely due to downgrades at QB and RB. Perhaps we would have won more because our D was better. But the offense would have been worse. And it was already 96th.

 

[CL82]

With Edsall we'd have gone bowling the last two years and people would be bitching about how needed a new coach to take us to the next level.