Utah State Post Game Thread | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Utah State Post Game Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
JohnFSilver said:
Whet is a DC supposed to do? The issue isn’t scheme, it is execution. They got beat on a 72 yard and 52 yard pass plays.

I mean, come on. That isnt scheme.
Expand ...
Are you kidding??? With all the missed assignments? We need a DC who can teach these kids what coverage is.
 
ktuck911 said:
Taquan Roberson grew up a little today. He showed that he could drive the ball down field. But I still hope he continues to grow and use other weapons allotted to him. Go through more progressions and find other receivers not named Buckman, Joly, and Ross.... Nice to see he found TE Davis and WR Porter in the endzone today. Hope we see more of those guys making catches...
One last thing, it'd be nice if he can get accuracy down for those out other backfield to RBs
Expand ...
He played better today, but if he really wants to grow up he needs to run with the ball when he has ten open yards in front of him.
 
ktuck911 said:
Taquan Roberson grew up a little today. He showed that he could drive the ball down field. But I still hope he continues to grow and use other weapons allotted to him. Go through more progressions and find other receivers not named Buckman, Joly, and Ross.... Nice to see he found TE Davis and WR Porter in the endzone today. Hope we see more of those guys making catches...
One last thing, it'd be nice if he can get accuracy down for those out other backfield to RBs
Expand ...
I agree and (unpopular opinion warning) I don’t think it’s time for a QB change based on his improved play.
 
Didn't have the time to go through five pages of this thread, but the extra point really shouldn't have been a factor because we shouldn't have given up the 63-yard pass play and touchdown with seconds on the clock before halftime. That said, there is no way that guy should have made his way to the kicker unscathed to block the PAT. Credit to Utah State though for grinding out a win on the road. This is a tough loss for the Huskies but I liked a lot of what I saw on offense today. They showed they have a pulse.
 
.-.
I wasn’t able to watch the game, just followed on my phone via The Score app.

What guys were responsible for letting up those huge pass plays? I’m not trying to pile on or trash players, but just curious as I’ve been on the fence about some of the personal moves Mora has done in the secondary.
 
The simple fact of the matter is that UConn has been trying to play FBS football for what, 20 years or so? And that UConn has been playing high level BB for maybe twice as long, without quibbling about definitions? That paying, say, 20 players (total) handsomely enough to keep UConn relevant nationally both in MBB and WBB is doable, yet without adding P4 TV revenues, adding 40 players salaries and signing bonuses at market rates to be relevant in FB is NOT doable given the accessible donor base for football.

Given that background, today's result is perfectly understandable. UConn is getting what it pays for. Anything more is unsustainable. Especially in a year when UConn is poised to win two more basketball championships. That was not the case last year. So yes, UConn I am sure allocated less money for FB players this year in order to capitalize on their position in BB. Never has this been clearer than today after this week's Structural Barriers discussions.

We are at a critical juncture. Does it make sense for UConn to play FB in this environment? I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that barring a P4 invitation next year, the answer is probably not.
 
.-.
JohnFSilver said:
What would coaching help with? I am sorry, so down on players. Poor angles, boneheaded decisions, mixed up assignments, missed tackles, easily beaten, blown coverages and blocks, dropped passes.

Coaching doesn’t guarantee execution.
Expand ...
I agree with this, but it’s not the coaches, it’s not the players, at least not their fault. They play to the best of their ability, but we don’t get to pick from the top of the barrel. We get to pick what’s left. Some of our guys played really well today. But we have some holes to fill. I don’t get the obsession with the coaches. I don’t think Nick Saban would be doing all that much better . . .
 
Last edited:
JohnFSilver said:
Wait. So Mora can’t teach coverages? They don’t have DB back coaches? I guarantee you they are getting good fundamental coaching. They aren’t performing.
Expand ...

At least one of those TDs was a mismatch on Shearin. He’s not covering that guy well 9 times out of 10. That was poor scheme.

Charlton meanwhile is garbage and couldn’t get Joly matched up well enough. Joly should have had more touches.
 
RSTuthill said:
The simple fact of the matter is that UConn has been trying to play FBS football for what, 20 years or so? And that UConn has been playing high level BB for maybe twice as long, without quibbling about definitions? That paying, say, 20 players (total) handsomely enough to keep UConn relevant nationally both in MBB and WBB is doable, yet without adding P4 TV revenues, adding 40 players salaries and signing bonuses at market rates to be relevant in FB is NOT doable given the accessible donor base for football.

Given that background, today's result is perfectly understandable. UConn is getting what it pays for. Anything more is unsustainable. Especially in a year when UConn is poised to win two more basketball championships. That was not the case last year. So yes, UConn I am sure allocated less money for FB players this year in order to capitalize on their position in BB. Never has this been clearer than today after this week's Structural Barriers discussions.

We are at a critical juncture. Does it make sense for UConn to play FB in this environment? I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that barring a P4 invitation next year, the answer is probably not.
Expand ...
too rational.
 
RSTuthill said:
The simple fact of the matter is that UConn has been trying to play FBS football for what, 20 years or so? And that UConn has been playing high level BB for maybe twice as long, without quibbling about definitions? That paying, say, 20 players (total) handsomely enough to keep UConn relevant nationally both in MBB and WBB is doable, yet without adding P4 TV revenues, adding 40 players salaries and signing bonuses at market rates to be relevant in FB is NOT doable given the accessible donor base for football.

Given that background, today's result is perfectly understandable. UConn is getting what it pays for. Anything more is unsustainable. Especially in a year when UConn is poised to win two more basketball championships. That was not the case last year. So yes, UConn I am sure allocated less money for FB players this year in order to capitalize on their position in BB. Never has this been clearer than today after this week's Structural Barriers discussions.

We are at a critical juncture. Does it make sense for UConn to play FB in this environment? I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that barring a P4 invitation next year, the answer is probably not.
Expand ...
Not sure about about your time frame for point of no return, but I completely agree with your general premise.
 
RSTuthill said:
The simple fact of the matter is that UConn has been trying to play FBS football for what, 20 years or so? And that UConn has been playing high level BB for maybe twice as long, without quibbling about definitions? That paying, say, 20 players (total) handsomely enough to keep UConn relevant nationally both in MBB and WBB is doable, yet without adding P4 TV revenues, adding 40 players salaries and signing bonuses at market rates to be relevant in FB is NOT doable given the accessible donor base for football.

Given that background, today's result is perfectly understandable. UConn is getting what it pays for. Anything more is unsustainable. Especially in a year when UConn is poised to win two more basketball championships. That was not the case last year. So yes, UConn I am sure allocated less money for FB players this year in order to capitalize on their position in BB. Never has this been clearer than today after this week's Structural Barriers discussions.

We are at a critical juncture. Does it make sense for UConn to play FB in this environment? I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that barring a P4 invitation next year, the answer is probably not.
Expand ...

Go watch something else then.

UConn isn’t paying the players. The donors are.

This season is a huge disappointment but it’s not like it was under Edsall where we lose a game like this by 40.
 
RSTuthill said:
The simple fact of the matter is that UConn has been trying to play FBS football for what, 20 years or so? And that UConn has been playing high level BB for maybe twice as long, without quibbling about definitions? That paying, say, 20 players (total) handsomely enough to keep UConn relevant nationally both in MBB and WBB is doable, yet without adding P4 TV revenues, adding 40 players salaries and signing bonuses at market rates to be relevant in FB is NOT doable given the accessible donor base for football.

Given that background, today's result is perfectly understandable. UConn is getting what it pays for. Anything more is unsustainable. Especially in a year when UConn is poised to win two more basketball championships. That was not the case last year. So yes, UConn I am sure allocated less money for FB players this year in order to capitalize on their position in BB. Never has this been clearer than today after this week's Structural Barriers discussions.

We are at a critical juncture. Does it make sense for UConn to play FB in this environment? I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that barring a P4 invitation next year, the answer is probably not.
Expand ...
I would remind you that almost every major public research university is FBS I don't think it is a coincidence. I would not leave FBS and I would not get rid of Mora. I would use the transfer portal and spend some more cash to get some decent assistant coaches.
 
.-.
JustbrewitMan said:
I don’t disagree with what you’re saying, but as a coach, if you know your DBs are a major liability, you don’t play a defense that allows them to get burned at the end of the 1st half. This is twice it’s happened. Put them in an extreme prevent D and at least limit it to a FG at worst. Bad coaching.
Expand ...
100% … they were burned in what looks like a cover 2 zone (2 DBs covering each deep half. It is totally vulnerable to middle seam deep passes. It’s vulnerable to deep outside routes if you bring another receiver into the middle and draw coverage that way. Should have been in a prevent with a 3 man rush. Nobody was over the top.
 
Just a poor performance. They are better than Utah State and are better than FIU. Should be 2-3.

What is getting to me is mistakes. Players not making fundamental plays that they should make at this level.

For all the whining on the coaching, the players are not consistent and miss critical plays. The 73-yard td was scandalous.
 
Charlton ran a motion play that had Joly getting hit by the snap. We had way too many crap plays on first down. The rushed QB sneak with Roberson with Rosa pushing really screwed us before halftime. UtSt runs a designed QB draw for 12 and then a skinny post for a TD. Second half they come out and get 4 first downs on 6 plays. Hot knife through butter. Our D was a mess after owning the first half except for 34 seconds. Our offense started the second half with 2 three and outs. 4th Q Roberson could have run for close to a first down heading towards our bench but forced a throw to Joly who was double covered on the sideline. Joly was having his left shoulder looked at after that play. We continue to not run vertical routes on most plays so the D can overload coverage on sideline routes. The middle of the field is open. Cam Edwards looked to be attacking holes that the lineman were creating rather than bounce plays outside and he had some solid gains.
 
Just brutal all around. Sad part is there’s no clear answer of what to do. We’ve tried pretty much everything. Once we left the OBE it’s just been a consistent dumpster fire. The recruiting is going to continue to be subpar so maybe the answer is we just find a DC and OC who can make lemonade out of lemons but idk who in their right mind would come coach us right now.
 
DawgEnjoyer said:
I wasn’t able to watch the game, just followed on my phone via The Score app.

What guys were responsible for letting up those huge pass plays? I’m not trying to pile on or trash players, but just curious as I’ve been on the fence about some of the personal moves Mora has done in the secondary.
Expand ...
The who doesn’t really matter - it’s the what. On several plays it appeared some of the secondary were playing man and some were playing zone. That, predictably, led to problems.

I think Mora is the right guy - I believe in what he can do here. But I think he needs to focus on being the head coach and get someone he trusts to run DC. We are not good enough to succeed if anyone’s attention is divided.
 
.-.
Cant keep losing to garbage teams at home, playing bad fundamental footfall, being afraid of tackling and playing physical defense, etc. It's showing and is a bad look. With players now starting to walk, this becomes a negative virtuous cycle. Mora and many others overrated the talent on this team, and now any good talent is starting to leave. Mora's biggest mistake (besides hiring this OC) was not turning over the talent through the Portal during the off-season. Thats the only way to fix this going forward, imo.
 
jdb50 said:
Charlton ran a motion play that had Joly getting hit by the snap. We had way too many crap plays on first down. The rushed QB sneak with Roberson with Rosa pushing really screwed us before halftime. UtSt runs a designed QB draw for 12 and then a skinny post for a TD. Second half they come out and get 4 first downs on 6 plays. Hot knife through butter. Our D was a mess after owning the first half except for 34 seconds. Our offense started the second half with 2 three and outs. 4th Q Roberson could have run for close to a first down heading towards our bench but forced a throw to Joly who was double covered on the sideline. Joly was having his left shoulder looked at after that play. We continue to not run vertical routes on most plays so the D can overload coverage on sideline routes. The middle of the field is open. Cam Edwards looked to be attacking holes that the lineman were creating rather than bounce plays outside and he had some solid gains.
Expand ...
Joly getting hit by the snap is on Roberson, HE calls the cadence. HE sees Joly in motion in front of him. HE calls “hut”.
 
The Viking said:
You know how we lost an automatic 3 or 7 points that in Retrospect cost us a win?

Toward the end of the second half a fourth and 1. Instead of taking time and putting in THE FRIDGE we RUSH to the line for a qb sneak and get stuffed.

Why? Why the rush? It was an easy yard for stafford to make, he gets it, then we get 3 or 7 and wind off more clock which would have prevented a last second TD.
Expand ...
You’re 100% correct. Terrible call, I chalk that one up to Charlton. Mora knows what he has to do, but he’s a gentleman, he will wait for early December.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,235
Messages
4,559,081
Members
10,445
Latest member
Azerion


Top Bottom