- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 12,440
- Reaction Score
- 19,952
Stray dog,You say we can get late developing kids for the O-Line but how has that worked out? Perhaps under Randy it did, but lately I don't see it and worse if we are bragging about our talented "recruits" coming in and playing QB with the necessary intensity and having targets that know how to catch a pass, well it wont do any good without blocking their defense from slamming the QB into the ground. Right now the best players we need are the players that can give time for the play to develop. The issue we have had this year is panic from our offense because the O-line can not protect or create a crease for the running backs. And when I say can not I don't imply ever I mean with an expected level of consistency. The biggest flaw with this team is not knowing the game - the basic fundamentals and executing to those standards. This is why coach is constantly trying to make the play calling more simple each week. So when we talk about development and the players getting better, look at our offensive schemes and packages and ask yourselves if the game plans themselves are moving in the right direction. It appears the Huskies keep moving the bar lower in hopes to get ahead of this curve, trying to different personal as though the team was playing a scrimmage. Control the line of scrimmage and you control the game, hope that players will develop in year 3, does not appear to be a winning formula- JMO! Now if UConn had a functioning O-Line then the Huskies could count on our 2nd or 3rd teams to develop over a 2-3 year period that would be one thing, but we don't have that current luxury.
Here's the thing. Pasqualoni and he who shall not be named recruited "prototype" kids. they tended to be bigger and supposedly more ready to step in, though in fact it seems they weren't. If you look at the olinemen they brought in, they tended to be much heavier, 280, 290 as opposed to guys who were going to add weight.