What's the consensus expectation this year for the Huskies?

[ZooCougar]

One could argue that recent evidence says he does... UConn Players Say Pasqualoni Prepared Them For NFL Future. Ryan Griffin has been equally complementary as have others.

That's great. Can we incorporate winning some football games into that preparation now as well? Unbelievable the lengths people will go to defend their boy.

 

[Calhoun's Court]

If anything P is consistent. 5 wins max.

 

[huskymedic]

That's great. Can we incorporate winning some football games into that preparation now as well? Unbelievable the lengths people will go to defend their boy.

... as well as the lengths that people will go to continue to shoot someone no matter how many holes are already in the body. Don't disagree on the winning though.

 

[huskynation]

PP at the best gets a C for his performance at Uconn. Probably a C -.

The win at Louisville helps ( beating a top 25 team, with an elite QB on the road). The Maryland win was a positive and The recruiting boast helps also. he is upgrading the talent relative to what he started with in 2011. (Which should help in the long term).

His main problem is complacency (with his tactics) and his nepotism relating to his former OC. specifically, he made a preferential hire. Who was unwilling or incapable of adapting to the players on the roster and or alternatively, developing the players effectively to implement his schemes.This is all well known from 2011 and 2012.

Now as a HC, when you and your staff go over all of the film breakdown everyone's performance for the year (players and coaches), it is his (PP) responsibility to make sure all the necessary changes are made. He's the captain of the ship. So when the offense comes in 2012 with high hopes, a new qb and supposed momentum from a year in the system, and they are absolutely horrible, even worse than the prior year, it falls right in PP's lap.

No excuses.

 

[HuskyHawk]

what happens to this board if the team goes 7-5 this year.
Does PP get any credit for that? Or do people suggest that this team should have been 9-3 or 10-2.
It seems that PP is going to be the next Edsall. No matter what he does, someone will always bring up some shortcoming or some argument about how the program could have been better.

I've said it before, but even Calhoun with over 800 wins and 3 NC's was severely questioned the year before winning the 3rd NC... numerous posts about him retiring or past his prime. If we can do that to one of the greatest coaches of all time, coaches like PP or Edsall don't stand a chance.

BTW, if Geno can't figure out a way to beat ND and loses to them again, he should be gone. The guy is losing it. Uconn can't afford another crap season like this.

And last year, while getting the credit for the lousy offense, he got no credit for the very strong defense. On the whole, the team underperformed. We all know it and PP knows it. Changes were made. If the talent held us back or just the coaching, we'll find out soon enough. Given the close losses with few points scored, it wouldn't take much for the same talent level to perform just better enough for 7 wins. That talent should have won games against NC State, USF and Temple for sure and probably should have lost to Louisville.

 

[freescooter]

Are you trying to defend Coach Pasqualoni, by saying he has no interest to performing the duties required to succeed in the position for which he was hired? If not, you need to pick your words a tad more carefully. The word is right there in his title (Coach)?

It is absolutely a major part of his job to ensure each and every player in his charge is coached to the appropriate level. If he doesn't do it, his assistant coaches should. If they don't, the whole lot should be relieved from their coaching obligations forthwith.

There is more to coaching than recruiting, there is more to coaching than play calling, and there is more to coaching than teaching. He's been around for decades. He should understand that.

It is really a question of how you go about things. I'm not saying I agree or disagree. Just that there are two different approaches. Edsall's was to take 1 and 2 star players and get them to play like 3 and 4 star players. Pasqualoni' is different. He wants to get 3 and 4 star players to begin with. the problem is that it takes a few years to do that, and in the mean time you have all these lesser players you need to either replace or coach up. Pasqualoni is trying to replace them. It might work. It might not work. So he's willing to take a step back before he goes forward. The question is whether he'll run out of time. Another 5-7 or worse and we will never know if his plan would have worked. By the way, it is not at all part of his job to get each and every player to his highest level. It is to put together a winning football team. If that means some guys never get off the bench, so be it.

 

[ZooCougar]

... as well as the lengths that people will go to continue to shoot someone no matter how many holes are already in the body. Don't disagree on the winning though.

Well, he shot himself full of holes when hired Dummy DeLeone to run his offense for him and then made a bad situation worse by demoting a successful offensive line coach and having Dummy coach that position too.

 

[Husky25]

It is really a question of how you go about things. I'm not saying I agree or disagree. Just that there are two different approaches. Edsall's was to take 1 and 2 star players and get them to play like 3 and 4 star players. Pasqualoni' is different. He wants to get 3 and 4 star players to begin with. the problem is that it takes a few years to do that, and in the mean time you have all these lesser players you need to either replace or coach up. Pasqualoni is trying to replace them. It might work. It might not work. So he's willing to take a step back before he goes forward. The question is whether he'll run out of time. Another 5-7 or worse and we will never know if his plan would have worked. By the way, it is not at all part of his job to get each and every player to his highest level. It is to put together a winning football team. If that means some guys never get off the bench, so be it.

Nice response. Well, thought out, well supported, informative, and (best of all) rational...

However...I didn't said "highest level." I said "appropriate level," which dovetails nicely with putting together a winning football team. Fine line, maybe, but here's the difference: You hypothesize that Coach Pasqualoni is trying to replace current 1 star and 2 star players with 3 and 4 stars guys. I assume you also think that the 3s and 4s "get it." Here's my question...Shouldn't a coach at that point adjust his philosophy to take advantage of the 1s and 2s strengths, especially in the college game where the shelf life is a maximum of 4 years? That's what I mean by appropriate. Realize what you have and teach them what they need to know to succeed...period.

Albeit, mine is an untrained eye, but I just didn't see that at all on the offensive side of the ball. I.e. why a 7-step drop behind a weak pass blocking line? Why run a 160 lb back between the tackles ad naseum for short yardage? Why the "11" package...ever?

 

[HuskyDogArt]

13-0, National Champs and a B1G invite would make me happy!!

 

[HomeKing93]

Right now, I'd say 7-5 is my expectation. Assuming our defense and special teams are average, I have a feeling that Weist will run an offense ranked in the top half of FBS teams. He's been around good offenses at WKU and Cincy, so I think that should translate well here.

Of course, if PP and GDL run the same shuffle they did at their last year in Syracuse in 2004, all bets are off.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

You're gonna lecture me about arguing in a simplistic manner and then compare and contrast Edsall and P's first few years at UConn? Give me a break. Yes, Edsall's and Pasqualoni's first 2 years at UConn were under the exact same circumstances?

Are you not bright enough to add a little context to the different circumstances that each started under? Or are you just a jerk?

Haha I get it, you're using my own words against me. Very clever.

Anyway, I do understand the concept of context. I don't think Edsall should've been fired after two years. Obviously he was in a much different situation than Pasqualoni today.

But you seem totally oblivious to a few factors that seem uninteresting to you in terms of giving Pasqualoni the benefit of the doubt in terms of why we went from a decent 8-5 team to a middle 5-7 team:

1. Two straight years of QB's with no BCS experience whatsoever, including a QB who didn't even have a scholarship.
2. Losing some of our best and most talented Offensive Lineman in that time.
3. Losing one of our Top 3 best Running Backs in the history of our program (Jordan Todman)
4. Losing our super reliable kicker last year (no way Teggart loses that Temple game for us).
5. Demoralizing effect of having a coach who you thought was with you abandon you in one of the least classy ways possible.

Should we have expected more? Maybe. Has Pasqualoni been perfect? Absolutely not.

But even though it's a cliche, football absolutely is a game of inches. We were one Christen chip shot away from going bowling. We were five or six possible Sio Moore dropped picks away from gaining momentum. We were always one Nick Williams kickoff return away from making it happen.

Another 5-7 year, he absolutely deserves to be fired. But he hasn't been that bad. He's been a LOT better than Edsall's been at Maryland, and you could easily make the case that Maryland has more talent than us. Cry about the injury to Maryland's QB all you want, we started Johnny Trick Shot QB (no offense to the young man).

If you're running this program, you have to think long and hard about whether or not you want to start all over again with a new coach (And really, how many all-star coaches want to come here?). That's all I'm saying. You make it sound simple, and I don't think it is. It's easy to be an armchair AD. But as far as I know, you've never done the job, and neither have I. And yes, I expect people to express opinions on message boards.

But the way you act as if it's so black-and-white? Meh. I don't buy it. Our problems are complex. And simple solutions don't solve complex problems, imo. But you are, as always, entitled to your own opinion.

 

[whaler11]

It works both ways. They were one more big Maryland play from a loss and almost let Pitt come back in a game they were up 21-0 at home. Louisville had a dozen opportunities to win. 2-10 could have happened just like 7-5 or 8-4.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

Haha I get it, you're using my own words against me. Very clever.

Anyway, I do understand the concept of context. I don't think Edsall should've been fired after two years. Obviously he was in a much different situation than Pasqualoni today.

But you seem totally oblivious to a few factors that seem uninteresting to you in terms of giving Pasqualoni the benefit of the doubt in terms of why we went from a decent 8-5 team to a middle 5-7 team:

1. Two straight years of QB's with no BCS experience whatsoever, including a QB who didn't even have a scholarship.
2. Losing some of our best and most talented Offensive Lineman in that time.
3. Losing one of our Top 3 best Running Backs in the history of our program (Jordan Todman)
4. Losing our super reliable kicker last year (no way Teggart loses that Temple game for us).
5. Demoralizing effect of having a coach who you thought was with you abandon you in one of the least classy ways possible.

Should we have expected more? Maybe. Has Pasqualoni been perfect? Absolutely not.

But even though it's a cliche, football absolutely is a game of inches. We were one Christen chip shot away from going bowling. We were five or six possible Sio Moore dropped picks away from gaining momentum. We were always one Nick Williams kickoff return away from making it happen.

Another 5-7 year, he absolutely deserves to be fired. But he hasn't been that bad. He's been a LOT better than Edsall's been at Maryland, and you could easily make the case that Maryland has more talent than us. Cry about the injury to Maryland's QB all you want, we started Johnny Trick Shot QB (no offense to the young man).

If you're running this program, you have to think long and hard about whether or not you want to start all over again with a new coach (And really, how many all-star coaches want to come here?). That's all I'm saying. You make it sound simple, and I don't think it is. It's easy to be an armchair AD. But as far as I know, you've never done the job, and neither have I. And yes, I expect people to express opinions on message boards.

But the way you act as if it's so black-and-white? Meh. I don't buy it. Our problems are complex. And simple solutions don't solve complex problems, imo. But you are, as always, entitled to your own opinion.

Yeah thanks for pointing all of those things out to us Captain Obvious.

Sometimes, people who are as intelligent, or (gasp) more intelligent than you have the cognitive ability to gather and process many different variables and come to a different conclusion than you. Hard to believe, I know.

You've been hanging around too many smug Yalies lately.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Yeah thanks for pointing all of those things out to us Captain Obvious.

Sometimes, people who are as intelligent, or (gasp) more intelligent than you have the cognitive ability to gather and process many different variables and come to a different conclusion than you. Hard to believe, I know.

You've been hanging around too many smug Yalies lately.

The problem isn't that you've drawn a different conclusion than me. The problem is that you can't muster an ounce of respect for people with different opinions than you. It's not smug to treat people like adults, even on the Internet.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

The problem isn't that you've drawn a different conclusion than me. The problem is that you can't muster an ounce of respect for people with different opinions than you. It's not smug to treat people like adults, even on the Internet.

Ok.

 

[Marty Jackson]

Are you trying to defend Coach Pasqualoni, by saying he has no interest to performing the duties required to succeed in the position for which he was hired? If not, you need to pick your words a tad more carefully. The word is right there in his title (Coach)?

It is absolutely a major part of his job to ensure each and every player in his charge is coached to the appropriate level. If he doesn't do it, his assistant coaches should. If they don't, the whole lot should be relieved from their coaching obligations forthwith.

There is more to coaching than recruiting, there is more to coaching than play calling, and there is more to coaching than teaching. He's been around for decades. He should understand that.

a poster comes up with some theory that PP doesnt coach, only recruits and your response is to suggest PP knows better.
is it possible the poster's theory is wrong and PP actually coaches and recruits?

 

[Husky25]

That's not what I took issue with, nor is it what he said...and no. In my opinion, Coach Pasqualoni does not do an adequate job of coaching up players to an appropriate level.

 

[whaler11]

Maybe the best thing about the Boneyard is when posters compare PP at UConn to Edsall at Maryland.

I'd stick with that for sure because you don't want to compare PP to Edsall at I don't know.... Connecticut.

 

[Srqhusky]

It works both ways. They were one more big Maryland play from a loss and almost let Pitt come back in a game they were up 21-0 at home. Louisville had a dozen opportunities to win. 2-10 could have happened just like 7-5 or 8-4.

Can't you look at almost any team nfl or ncaa and make the same conclusion.

 

[whaler11]

Can't you look at almost any team nfl or ncaa and make the same conclusion.

Yeah that was sort of my point.

 

[Waquoit]

...But even though it's a cliche, football absolutely is a game of inches. We were one Christen chip shot away from going bowling. We were five or six possible Sio Moore dropped picks away from gaining momentum. We were always one Nick Williams kickoff return away from making it happen.
...

This is just baloney. Poor in-game coaching lost us 3 games (NCSt., Temple, USF), minimum. P had done less with more and is now in position to do less with less. He has not increased the recruiting to such a level that mitigates his deficiencies. I'm truly afraid of what a disaster of a year will do to our program as well as our athletic department.

 

[ZooCougar]

This is just baloney. Poor in-game coaching lost us 3 games (NCSt., Temple, USF), minimum. P had done less with more and is now in position to do less with less. He has not increased the recruiting to such a level that mitigates his deficiencies. I'm truly afraid of what a disaster of a year will do to our program as well as our athletic department.

Don't forget all of the coaching losses from the first season too. Vanderbilt sticks out in my mind.

 

[freescooter]

Nice response. Well, thought out, well supported, informative, and (best of all) rational...

However...I didn't said "highest level." I said "appropriate level," which dovetails nicely with putting together a winning football team. Fine line, maybe, but here's the difference: You hypothesize that Coach Pasqualoni is trying to replace current 1 star and 2 star players with 3 and 4 stars guys. I assume you also think that the 3s and 4s "get it." Here's my question...Shouldn't a coach at that point adjust his philosophy to take advantage of the 1s and 2s strengths, especially in the college game where the shelf life is a maximum of 4 years? That's what I mean by appropriate. Realize what you have and teach them what they need to know to succeed...period.

Albeit, mine is an untrained eye, but I just didn't see that at all on the offensive side of the ball. I.e. why a 7-step drop behind a weak pass blocking line? Why run a 160 lb back between the tackles ad naseum for short yardage? Why the "11" package...ever?

As for being rational, I guess even a stopped clock is right sometimes...on the rest of it, I'm not sure Pasquoloni is doing all that much different than what many coaches have done. You concentrate on the guys who are going to be there long term, your recruits for the most part, who were brought in to play in your system. It isn't like you ignore the guys who are there, but when there's a choice, you go with younger players. Sometimes there isn't really a choice. A frosh lineman who is only 250 pounds is going to get killed out there, and an all-conference linebacker isn't getting replaced. I don't think it is much different from what Schiano did at Rutgers or lots of coaches do. The problem at UConn was that unlike Schiano, P didn't come in and take over a trainwreck. If we had been 4-8, 3-9, 4-8 this type of transition would be expected and even probably welcomed. Problem is we were pretty good.

 

[Husky25]

As for being rational, I guess even a stopped clock is right sometimes...on the rest of it, I'm not sure Pasquoloni is doing all that much different than what many coaches have done. You concentrate on the guys who are going to be there long term, your recruits for the most part, who were brought in to play in your system. It isn't like you ignore the guys who are there, but when there's a choice, you go with younger players. Sometimes there isn't really a choice. A frosh lineman who is only 250 pounds is going to get killed out there, and an all-conference linebacker isn't getting replaced. I don't think it is much different from what Schiano did at Rutgers or lots of coaches do. The problem at UConn was that unlike Schiano, P didn't come in and take over a trainwreck. If we had been 4-8, 3-9, 4-8 this type of transition would be expected and even probably welcomed. Problem is we were pretty good.

Schiano was the text book definition of insane (i.e. do the same thing over and over expecting a differnt result). As a college coach, Pasqualoni and his system should be more flexible. Why am I surprised though? He came from a Professional organization (the Cowboys) that do the exact same thing.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

This is just baloney. Poor in-game coaching lost us 3 games (NCSt., Temple, USF), minimum. P had done less with more and is now in position to do less with less. He has not increased the recruiting to such a level that mitigates his deficiencies. I'm truly afraid of what a disaster of a year will do to our program as well as our athletic department.

I would love to hear the explanation about how he coached us into a Temple loss. I saw that game. If you don't have a kicker who can't make a kick, you ain't gonna win that many ball games.

 

[Husky25]

I would love to hear the explanation about how he coached us into a Temple loss. I saw that game. If you don't have a kicker who can't make a kick, you ain't gonna win that many ball games.

IIRC, UConn went into the fetal position on Offense and they couldn't recover. It should have never come down to the kicking game.

 

[Jimmy Serrano]

I would love to hear the explanation about how he coached us into a Temple loss. I saw that game. If you don't have a kicker who can't make a kick, you ain't gonna win that many ball games.

One team got off to a blazing start. The other team made adjustments and we nursed a lead for the entire second half.

This was only a few weeks removed from making the same mistake against Buffalo, who almost made a comeback on us.

You need to start looking at the different nuances and complexities that arise throughout the game.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

One team got off to a blazing start. The other team made adjustments and we nursed a lead for the entire second half.

This was only a few weeks removed from making the same mistake against Buffalo, who almost made a comeback on us.

You need to start looking at the different nuances and complexities that arise throughout the game.

You could just as easily say we were so untalented that we played our hearts out and used trickery to get ahead in the first half, but that using pure trickery and cleverness to win a whole 60 minute game is tough and our talent gap left us wide open for second half comebacks.

Or you could say better athletes sustain higher energy levels for longer periods of time and if we were less athletic than other teams, as the games go on, the talent gap would make it harder to compete.

Again, not saying I truly believe it. I just fail to see how you've proven that second half fades prove coaching responsibility.

The problem with complex systems is that there are no real answers. Just because you and Zoo parrot each other doesn't mean you've proven anything.

 

[ZooCougar]

You could just as easily say we were so untalented that we played our hearts out and used trickery to get ahead in the first half, but that using pure trickery and cleverness to win a whole 60 minute game is tough and our talent gap left us wide open for second half comebacks.

Or you could say better athletes sustain higher energy levels for longer periods of time and if we were less athletic than other teams, as the games go on, the talent gap would make it harder to compete.

Again, not saying I truly believe it. I just fail to see how you've proven that second half fades prove coaching responsibility.

The problem with complex systems is that there are no real answers. Just because you and Zoo parrot each other doesn't mean you've proven anything.

Then I would say that you definitely didn't watch the game. And there are plenty of real answers, including the score at the end of the game and the fact that Dummy DeLeone put our offense on permanent time out in the second half.

UConn completely dominated offensively in the first half of the Temple game. They played the type of offense that we would expect to play against what is basically a MAC team.

Our supposedly untalented offense had an All Big East Running Back and a Tight End that will be an NFL free agent. We also had a QB who passed for more yards in one season (his first season) than any other QB we have had since Dan Orlovsky.

So please. Tell us how our offense only had the 115th best talent in the nation. Or you can just STFU.

 

[EdgewoodNHV]

Then I would say that you definitely didn't watch the game. And there are plenty of real answers, including the score at the end of the game and the fact that Dummy DeLeone put our offense on permanent time out in the second half.

UConn completely dominated offensively in the first half of the Temple game. They played the type of offense that we would expect to play against what is basically a MAC team.

Our supposedly untalented offense had an All Big East Running Back and a Tight End that will be an NFL free agent. We also had a QB who passed for more yards in one season (his first season) than any other QB we have had since Dan Orlovsky.

So please. Tell us how our offense only had the 115th best talent in the nation. Or you can just STFU.

Wow, an all-BE running back and a Tight End who won't get drafted?! Sign us up for the Fiesta Bowl!

Dude. You need an O-line to run. Ours was TERRIBLE. Whether it was scheme or talent we may never know.

I can't help but notice that you conveniently left out the fact that our QB threw more picks than pretty much everybody. Cherry-picking stats again eh? I mean, I guess throwing more yards than Zach Frazer is super impressive, but, uh. Yeah.

I don't know why it's so hard to accept that reasonable people think there is plenty of blame to go around. I do think Pasqualoni and GDL made lots of mistakes and I think they should've done better. But I think they also got dealt a pretty terrible hand, too. Excuse me for not agreeing.

But you should know by now that me "STFU"ing is super unlikely.

Also, name calling? "Dummy Deleone?" I mean... eh. This is grade school stuff.