Where were you when

[coachRD]

you recognized the Coach P hire was a big mistake? Me? I was home, tonight. Some called it right off the bat. I realized it just now. I apologize to those of you I doubted who pointed out what a horrific hire this was. I wasn't "excited" for Coach P (I was a huge Edsall fan), but I admit-I thought he was a good replacement. Significant problems off the top of my head:

Specials:
1) We have gone from the #1 KR team in the country, to below average, in one season. All while still having the same player who led the country in KR yardage. That's not easy to do.

2) We have not had a single PR where we blocked gunners sufficiently to give our PR a clean release.

3) Our KR coverage was poor every week so far except for tonight.

Defense:
1) We have consistently allowed opposing QB's to have career days against us, or near career days. The "high"light? Allowing a MAC team to pass for just South of 500 yards against us WHILE THEY WERE MISSING 3 STARTING OL due to injuries.

2) We allowed Pitt to amass more yards between TV timeouts than they did for an entire game against a solid, but unspectacular Utah team. Again-Pitt QB with a career day.

3) Our schemes are so poor, that when driving and on our 15 yard line, Pitt still managed to have a WR so open, there was no one within 15 yards of him. Isn't that impossible?!

Offense:
1) We have doubled our amount of sacks allowed from last year, with 4 games still remaining.

2) We have managed to hand away, at a minimum, 1 game with offensive playcalling (Vandy). Say what you want about Edsall's offenses-at times they were inept, but at least they didnt' GIVE away games with playcalling.

*I understand UCONN wasn't operating with Top 25 talent-specifically we lost 2 of our best program LB's ever in one year, and we lost the nation's 2nd leading rusher. Many, myself included, overestimated our D's ability to overcome our personnel losses. I have been patient because of these things.

However, some issues jump out at me that are more program-wide/schematic concerns:
a) the lack of development in Special Teams, and the downturn in performance from last year in every facet of special teams,
b) the continued coverage scheme issues that allow opposing WR's to be so open that defenders don't even fit in the screen,
c) the way we have artfully created a "3-headed monster" at QB that has somehow created a scenario where NONE of the 3 QB's can feeel good about their place in the program....these are major red flags imo.

 

[willie99]

for me, it was at the Rent watching a Mac team destroy our defense

 

[coachRD]

for me, it was at the Rent watching a Mac team destroy our defense

Willie-would you mind editing your post please for accuracy? It should read "...a Mac's backup team..." since they were missing 3 starting OL that game.

 

[fortebleedsblue]

so are you saying that 5 of 13 isn't good enough for you?

 

[noeynox]

I'll add a couple. The Ryan Griffin stepping out of bounds. The offsides on defense on 3rd and 10, I wasn't a huge Randy fan but those types of mistakes were seldom seen under him. Driving, third and one the QB takes a sack.

Some of it is personnel. Agbor abhors contact it seems, which isn't a good trait to have as a safety. I assume he still plays defense because he is the best we have after the starters. On one third and long screen they converted for a first he had a clear shot at a tackle with a full head of steam and a slight nudge took him completely out of the play.

There are issues with this coaching staff, and if things don't look better by next year it is time to reconsider Ct native thing.

 

[1999.2004.2011]

at first i was a pasqualoni supporter, but the more I watch this team with the amount of mistakes they make on both sides of the ball, the awful qb play, this is just terrible....

 

[jdb50]

We have a number of players that don't tackle. Last year we had Sherman, Frey DJ Shoemate at the end of the year and our backup FB Manning? making tackles on coverage. I have seen #1 watching the play on multiple kickoff coverages. We have starters on D that drop their head, throw a shoulder and never hit and wrapup. Yet they are out there every game. We had plenty of time to prepare for this game and it was 14 zip in a heartbeat.

 

[UConnJim]

How can anyone compare the talent on last year's team to this year? Coach P didn't really recruit anyone on this current team. We lost top 3 RBs, top 2 LBs, starting QB, Best Olineman, some of our best WRs, our best KR, and our best DB to injury. If this was Coach P's 3rd year, we could blame him, but it's not. As for QB, we saw the 3 headed QB and McEntee appeared the best of an inexperienced bunch. What is Coach P supposed to do, turn McEntee into Donovan McNabb?

 

[coachRD]

How can anyone compare the talent on last year's team to this year? Coach P didn't really recruit anyone on this current team. We lost top 3 RBs, top 2 LBs, starting QB, Best Olineman, some of our best WRs, our best KR, and our best DB to injury. If this was Coach P's 3rd year, we could blame him, but it's not. As for QB, we saw the 3 headed QB and McEntee appeared the best of an inexperienced bunch. What is Coach P supposed to do, turn McEntee into Donovan McNabb?

I agree with your important point that we lost a lot of talent off last year's team. However, all teams lose talent EVERY year. I understand taking a step back in the W-L column to an extent this year because of the personnel losses you mention.

But what is scary about Coach P's team is the TREND we see with what he is putting on the field. EVERY facet of Special teams has gotten worse this year; our defense is just as lost after Game 8 as Game 1; etc....

If you are losing because of a talent deficit, but play smart, fundamentally sound football, you have teams string together methodical drives against you that chip away yards at a moderate rate to eventually score. Teams put together 80+ yard drives for TD's against us in 2:00 minutes like they are playing against a HS team. Teams are getting BETTER at picking apart our defense as the year goes on, not worse. Our players consistently lose the 1st quarter-a sign of poor coaching PREPARATION.

These are fundamental SCHEMATIC problems that Coach P is allowing on Defense and Special Teams. This has nothing to do with talent, or with him recruiting "his" type of players.

 

[Northbound]

We cannot trot out the "he didn't recruit these guys" refrain. It's not like we went from a pro style offense to the wishbone for gods sake and the skills sets/position needs are vastly different.

RE was ready to play with these guys (and no I'm not a RE guy - I respect what he accomplish, but thought he was a tool) because what bunch of freshman did he expect to come into UC and have an immediate impact?

Maybe we'd get lucky and get a couple of guys, but good god be realistic, we're not getting a slew of impact freshman, as much as I'd like us to be Bama, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. we are not at that level and therefore we're not exactly a destination for freshman that are going to make an immediate impact, not yet anyway, someday I hope we are.

There was also no way that RE knew he was getting a better gig than his UC gig so he might have been here. Do we really to believe that the kids that were left RE thought would tank a year after a BCS bid? So then he'd have been stuck at UC a place he didn't want to be. He had to have thought there was at least passable talent to be competitive on the field and give him a chance to jump to what he would have perceived as a more attractive program.

I never liked the P hire but he's here (I have actually been forced to defend him with my syracuse friends who say he wasn't successful at SU, he actually was) and I hope he succeeds (who the hell can route against these kids), but good god it's UGLY and I don't care what game you want to look at because all of it's a mess, some is just less messy than others.

JMac, I want the best for the kid, but sheesh you've got to give some of the other folks a real shot in game situations, we burned the redshirt on MN, let the kid get game experience, he'll get hit, it's part of DI football and I feel like channeling my inner Dan Hawkins "It's Division 1 football brother, it's not intramurals" and if we can't develop protection schemes to protect the kid or utilize his mobility to avoid hits it just showcases the staffs inability to adjust the game plan and schemes to fit the talent on hand......you don't need to do a seven step drop and sit the kid in the pocket if you're worried about a breakdown in protection, take a three or five step drop, utilize play action, move the QB out of the pocket on designed rolls, hit bubbles, etc......sheesh.

Clearly it's not that easy or they'd do it, but I'd love to feel like they are flexible and practicing some in game or personnel adjustments, and not Scott M for a play.....that isn't an adjustment, it's just happy high school crap.

Sorry, vent over.

 

[fortebleedsblue]

Vanderbilt ..... Then Western Michigan ...

But what really re-assured me was ESPN asking Pasqualoni after half time (paraphrasing): coach how are you going to adjust to Pitts screen passing your asses over and over and over again?" Pasqualoni: "we will be going more with the zone" First offensive play of the second half ... Uconn blitz's ... Pitt simply does a screen pass dump off. WTF coach WTF?

 

[Skiblets]

At the beginning of the season I started the 'time for a change' thread. Some agreed, most decided that it was best to give him more time, install his systems etc. Hell, even RE was struggling at Maryland.

I admit that that thread may have been a bit premature but I knew what I was seeing and it wasn't pretty.

USF gave me some hope that things were being worked out but last night's performance confirmed my fears. USF was the aberration. As the sample size grows, the warts are becoming more apparent.

Specials - worse - by far.
Defense - worse - we lost two NFL LBs so not surprising. What is surprising is the amount of space that there seems to be. Last night it looked like we were playing on a CFL field with all the room to run. I'm not sold on Don Brown. Solve you problems with aggression? Nice slogan but results are results.
Offense - putrid. The gimmicky three QB thing is a joke. I'm not sure how Mccummings would perform for 60 minutes but it's time to start pointing to the future and let him and Nebrich take their lumps. The O line has regressed terribly as well
In game adjustments - zero.

Coach P is a nice guy but not the right guy.

 

[uconNYC]

I had my doubts when I watched his introductory press conference. He came across as a very likable guy, but didn't seem to have the fire and intensity you look for in a college head coach. I still felt that he could guide us to the middle-of-the-pack of the Big East on a consistent basis and pave the way for an up-and-coming coach in 4-5 years time. But after the first few games I'm thinking this could turn into a GRob, Kragthorpe situation. Hope I'm wrong.

 

[TouchdownHusky]

I was smack in the middle of January, 2011 when I realized it was a bad hire. Never like it. Thought is was ridiculous to think that a 62 year old former college coach, former NFL assistance was gonna put together a long term plan for the program. Hire him as a steering committee consultant if you must, but not as the head coach.

Rich Rod? "We'll never get him", "We wouldn"t want someone like him".

Mike Leach? "We'll never get him" "We stop making alumni contributions if the university ever stooped so low". "We don't wanna become some SEC football factory" (No worries there, mate).

Addazio? He was only good cuz he was at Florida.

McGee (from Arkansas)?"He's not from New England", "He's more 'pass oriented' and we're UConn we run the ball" Blah, blah, blah.

So then it became a matter of "RETREADS": Whipple, Paul P,etc. And so Connecticut took the "safe route". Land of Steady Habits, don't do anything 'outside the box".

If UConn was gonna hire a "past-his-prime" coach, why not go for a Bobby Bowden - someone who could at least excite kids when he make a home visit. Someone who knows how to recruit. Heck he'd have probably love it since Teggart is pretty accurate (no more wide rights).

 

[zls44]

Land of Steady Habits, don't do anything 'outside the box".

This, this, a thousand times this. It was such a Hathaway type of hire. Gee shucks, well golly, I oughta tell ya, back in 1998 this guy was coaching one of the best teams and gosh golly etc.

 

[NutmegState]

Mr. Burton is chirping away...he has the University's ear, we know this much.

 

[CTMike]

You don't have the kind of career that Pasqualoni has had without having some serious football knowledge. You just don't. I think P was a good choice, given who was available at the time. I'm even willing to give him time to bring in a recruiting class or two.

.... but I'm saying all that much, MUCH more reluctantly these days.

 

[businesslawyer]

Never would have made that hire. He's an easy gentleman to root for, but I had no reason to think he was going to be a much better coach than his last few years at Syracuse.

Having said that, if I am allowed one move with the staff this offseason, I would fire Brown, push Hughes to an office job and either bring back Todd Orlando as Defensive Coordinator (this time without Hughes above him in the hierarchy) or go after Vernon Hargraves. I am not a Deleone fan, but being fair to him requires that he have time to get a QB that he has some confidence in on the field.

 

[fortebleedsblue]

Never would have made that hire. He's an easy gentleman to root for, but I had no reason to think he was going to be a much better coach than his last few years at Syracuse.

Having said that, if I am allowed one more with the staff this offseason, I would fire Brown, push Hughes to an office job and either bring back Todd Orlando as Defensive Coordinator (this time without Hughes above him in the hierarch) or go after Vernon Hargraves. I am not a Deleone fan, but being fair to him requires that he have time to get a QB that he has some confidence in on the field.

I agree with just about everything you said above ... but also I would take Clay White off of special teams and either move him to help with RB's or part ways. Getting Todd Orlando back would be a dream scenario IMO. Brown needs to go ... His style would be successful in the SEC with regards to speed.

 

[metsfan2323]

The lack of defensive adjustments is shocking. Pitt beat us the same way W Michigan beat us, with quick hits over the middle which for some reason is consistently vacated. P was the defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys last year so I can't imagine that Brown is running anything that P doesn't want run. They better figure it out before the next game because Marrone will no doubt go to school on how to attack this D. He need only watch two games.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Quick question - i know that P is ultimately responsible for everything, but do you really think he's the special teams coach?

 

[Husky68]

The lack of defensive adjustments is shocking. Pitt beat us the same way W Michigan beat us, with quick hits over the middle which for some reason is consistently vacated. P was the defensive coordinator for the Dallas Cowboys last year so I can't imagine that Brown is running anything that P doesn't want run. They better figure it out before the next game because Marrone will no doubt go to school on how to attack this D. He need only watch two games.

Unfortunately, what Pitt did to Uconn is exactly what Syracuse did to WV. Syracuse got swing passes to receivers with plenty of space and quick cuts up the middle by TE's were amazingly open. Pitt and Syracuse offenses looked like they were out scheming the same defense (WV and Uconn defensive weaknesses looked the same and both did not correct during the game).

 

[freescooter]

Never would have made that hire. He's an easy gentleman to root for, but I had no reason to think he was going to be a much better coach than his last few years at Syracuse.

Having said that, if I am allowed one move with the staff this offseason, I would fire Brown, push Hughes to an office job and either bring back Todd Orlando as Defensive Coordinator (this time without Hughes above him in the hierarchy) or go after Vernon Hargraves. I am not a Deleone fan, but being fair to him requires that he have time to get a QB that he has some confidence in on the field.

I think I agree, mostly but you lost me with the Hughes move. I think he has done a solid job witht he Dline which is the only positive element in this whole defensive mess.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Again - I'm not doing this from watching on film.

BUT: I AM 100% POSITIVE that the defense DID adjust. We went to a zone based system on defense in the second half to stop the slants and timing routes b/c we've shown time and again that we can't cover those in man coverages when we're putting pressure on the QB, and we were getting pressure.

on defense - WE BLEW SPACING AND ASSIGNMENTS AND MISSED TACKLES. How much more fundamental on the field can you get than that - missed tackles? You're in position to make the play, you make the ducking play or you don't.

This defense puts players in position to make plays and do good things, and they absolutely DID adjust. this idea that the defense did not adjust in this game is FALSE. The offense creates space all over the field, there was no need to change anythign on offense except find players that can actually make the plays.

The players need to get the job done. It's on the coaches to make sure they're not ducking up the details. That's where the coaches need to improve,a nd that comes down to adjusting the way they're running practices. I fully expect that these guys will be practicing a little different after this game.

I'm so tired of the argument that these coaches are not doing a bad job. There are open receivers all over the field on offense. They're creating holes to run the ball on offense. They're giving the QB enough time to throw. The defense is stopping the run among the best in teh country, and our backside of the defense, the supposed strength, is being exposed as not really being able to cover anybody in man coverage, or any scheme we're you know, you actually try to do something to stop the QB BEFORE he throws the ball.

On offense, they continue to build and have incorporated into the offense the ability to change things at the line of scrimmage that I haven't seen before this year.

Special teams? What was so bad about special teams last night?

ARGG.

This team lost last night becuase they failed to make plays when they were in position to make plays. That means all the little details about playing each position weren't right.

I expect practices to be harder than ever, and reduced down to the basics of blocking and tackling and positional skills.

The overall systems are working. ALong the way, the details fell apart last week.

 

[businesslawyer]

I think I agree, mostly but you lost me with the Hughes move. I think he has done a solid job witht he Dline which is the only positive element in this whole defensive mess.

I am not in any way blaming this on Hughes. But I don't think you're getting Orlando back to be the sort-of DC where he's reporting to Hughes again. I would just bit the bullet and go younger.

 

[Carl Spackler]

These are fundamental SCHEMATIC problems that Coach P is allowing on Defense and Special Teams. This has nothing to do with talent, or with him recruiting "his" type of players.

Please elaborate. What is the schematic problem you saw?

 

[mattp]

I'll add a couple. The Ryan Griffin stepping out of bounds. The offsides on defense on 3rd and 10, I wasn't a huge Randy fan but those types of mistakes were seldom seen under him. Driving, third and one the QB takes a sack.

the fact that you pin Griffin stepping out of bounds on Pasqualoni is all the proof i need that you're not looking at this rationally. the playcalling in the first quarter was good and if we operated with even moderate competence we'd have scored on our first two drives, which would have made the game quite a bit different. JMac had simple plays to convert a couple of third down conversions, and the players didn't convert them. the guys were open, so the play calling was fine.

my big peave with P is that he doesn't put McCummings in more. there's no excuse for that when all he does is move the ball. i also hate the down field attempts by JMac. he seems to handle the 5-15 yard plays pretty well, why not stick to those?

 

[mets1090]

I think that the playcalling has been fine. We have seen people on defense getting burnt in man coverage which is always possible when you play man. The players simply need to be better at sticking with receivers. We have also seen missed tackles that would have limited gains to 2 or 3 yards only to turn into huge gains. There is no excuse for players to be missing tackles as consistently as this defense has.

Having said that, at some point the coaches need to be better at coaching these fundamentals. Our players are athletic enough that they should be able to stick with the competition and make these plays. I don't know that you can put slow development on this staff just yet as they have needed to spend time on implementing a new system which is slowly starting to show signs of potential. Early in the game the screens were killing us for 10 yards every time. Late in the game I saw some adjustments and it seemed that we had two people meeting the receiver in the screen almost immediately and they just failed to make tackles. The DC's message is getting through they are just not tackling.

The biggest downfall in our defense is that it creates pressure and relies on man coverage. When one player makes a mistake it makes the entire defense look awful. It turns out that we have one corner who consistently gets beat like a rented mule and another who is young but shows a lot of potential. He makes some plays and doesn't make others. The end result is that on a few plays during a drive they will get beat and if the other more reliable players don't play to their ability (see: Sio Moore missing tackles, Reyes not getting pressure etc.) then the entire defense looks absolutely terrible which we saw last night.

I think it's probably a case of the player's having a lot on their tables. I'm not excited about this coaching staff but I think that next year we will see a lot less of these frustrating missed tackles. That kind of long term improvement is 100% on the coaches, especially once their system is fully in place. Game to game I don't know that you can put that strictly on them but if these problems aren't basically eliminated by the start of next season then this staff is probably gone after 2 seasons.

 

[noeynox]

I

the fact that you pin Griffin stepping out of bounds on Pasqualoni is all the proof i need that you're not looking at this rationally. the playcalling in the first quarter was good and if we operated with even moderate competence we'd have scored on our first two drives, which would have made the game quite a bit different. JMac had simple plays to convert a couple of third down conversions, and the players didn't convert them. the guys were open, so the play calling was fine.

my big peave with P is that he doesn't put McCummings in more. there's no excuse for that when all he does is move the ball. i also hate the down field attempts by JMac. he seems to handle the 5-15 yard plays pretty well, why not stick to those?

IT is not a playcalling thing. It is a focus and attention to detail thing. I like P. I'm rooting for him to succeed. Rooting hard. However, I have to call it like it I see it. I'm seeing a lack of attention to detail under P that we didn't see under Edsall and it is concerning. I'd add the late hit by Smallwood in that category as well. Dudes need to be held accountable for those types of things to make sure they don't happen in the future.

 

[freescooter]

I am not in any way blaming this on Hughes. But I don't think you're getting Orlando back to be the sort-of DC where he's reporting to Hughes again. I would just bit the bullet and go younger.

Got you. I think you just bring Orlando back ad DC, leave Hughes with the Dline. You want to call him Assitatnt head Coach, that's fine. Or maybe you promote Hughes to DC. I have no idea whether of if he could handle the job, but I like the guy and think he has been a very solid position coach.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'll try to explain the McCummings thing again. I don't see practices, but I'm making the assumption that he's not a reliable thrower of the ball 25+ times a game. Big assumption, but is it unreasonable? I don't think so.

In any given game, there are going to be about 60-65 plays plus minus a couple, over 4 quarters, and probably 12 offensive drives plus minus one or two.

If we try to run 65 plays a game with McCummings at QB, he's going to be forced to throw the ball, or pitch it out to somebody, probably 40-45 times.

Now let me ask you this, do you think that if McCummings is forced to throw, on the run, 20-25 times, and/or we're forced to pitch the ball to McCombs or Moore 20-25 times on a sweep, that we've got the ability to get around the corner and make people miss on te run, or complete passes more than 55-60% of the time? How many times has the sweep out of the option worked?

My answer is NO.

So until McCummings becomes a reliable passer, or we get another 2 or 3 backs in the backfield that provide te burst around the corner, or the ability to run over people, and break tackles in traffic, the 10-15 plays we get a game, with McCummingsin there, is the best we're getting out of that offense. We don't have the backfield options to run the ball on the pitch outs or inside handoffs on a run, McCummings isn't reliable enough to put in te position to throw 25+ times a game (assumption) and without those threats, it's not a great offense to run in close to the goal line, because there's less space on the field that the defense needs to cover.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I
IT is not a playcalling thing. It is a focus and attention to detail thing. I like P. I'm rooting for him to succeed. Rooting hard. However, I have to call it like it I see it. I'm seeing a lack of attention to detail under P that we didn't see under Edsall and it is concerning. I'd add the late hit by Smallwood in that category as well. Dudes need to be held accountable for those types of things to make sure they don't happen in the future.

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. The personal fouls, yes, that's an issue. Can't have that.

We had 4 penalties for 25 yards last night. I don't know - that says something about discipline to me. It's too many penalties, but it's not the 8 penalties that Pitt had.

 

[businesslawyer]

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. .

But that's the entire point, isn't it? We won a lot of games, and stopped a lot of people, where we didn't put so much pressure on individual defenders to have to make one on one plays all over the field.

 

[Excalibur]

I'm much more willing to be patient with Brown than I am with DeLeone. Brown has run successful defenses in a bunch of places. DeLeone hasn't run a successful offense in a very long time. My opinion is based on more than 8 games.

 

[noeynox]

Edsall's systems also didn't put a lot of pressure on players to make plays in isolation on the field. The personal fouls, yes, that's an issue. Can't have that.

We had 4 penalties for 25 yards last night. I don't know - that says something about discipline to me. It's too many penalties, but it's not the 8 penalties that Pitt had.

It is a radically different defensive system than these players have played. I get that. The late hit, some of the down and distance stuff. On third and short your QB can't take a sack.

I'm willing to chalk up this first year to transition, growing pains, but I really need to see an improvement in some of the mental stuff next year.

 

[BlueMAB]

I was smack in the middle of January, 2011 when I realized it was a bad hire. Never like it. Thought is was ridiculous to think that a 62 year old former college coach, former NFL assistance was gonna put together a long term plan for the program. Hire him as a steering committee consultant if you must, but not as the head coach.

Rich Rod? "We'll never get him", "We wouldn"t want someone like him".

Mike Leach? "We'll never get him" "We stop making alumni contributions if the university ever stooped so low". "We don't wanna become some SEC football factory" (No worries there, mate).

Addazio? He was only good cuz he was at Florida.

McGee (from Arkansas)?"He's not from New England", "He's more 'pass oriented' and we're UConn we run the ball" Blah, blah, blah.

Are these Hathaway's responses, or responses from the posters on the boneyard? Did Hathaway hire Coach P, or did the posters on the boneyard?

 

[BlueMAB]

I fully expect that these guys will be practicing a little different after this game.



I expect practices to be harder than ever, and reduced down to the basics of blocking and tackling and positional skills.

I appreciate your contributions to the board, but after every bad loss you say you expect practice will be different and expect things will change (improve?).

One of these weeks I sincerely hope you're finally right about that.

 

[Excalibur]

It is a radically different defensive system than these players have played. I get that. The late hit, some of the down and distance stuff. On third and short your QB can't take a sack.

I'm willing to chalk up this first year to transition, growing pains, but I really need to see an improvement in some of the mental stuff next year.

The problem is that the talent level next year is going to be behind where it is this year in a lot of places, particularly on the lines.

 

[businesslawyer]

We will be returning 9 starters on defense. I don't accept that the overall talent level will be lower next year.

 

[zls44]

I appreciate your contributions to the board, but after every bad loss you say you expect practice will be different and expect things will change (improve?).

One of these weeks I sincerely hope you're finally right about that.

It will be! You'll see! Because they're running stadium steps at 3 AM and because I use inspirational quotes with no bearing on anything! Yeah! We'll show 'em!

 

[coachRD]

Please elaborate. What is the schematic problem you saw?

EDIT: Carl, I don't "know you" yet, so I want to make sure my post comes across as intended. I'm not sure how deep your football knowledge is and I am not trying to be condescending, and I'm not saying I'm an expert...many posters here ask GENERAL "X and O" questions and I'm not sure if that is what you were looking for in a response from me, or if you wanted something more specific. In any event-this wasn't meant to be a "snide" response to your question or anything. EDIT OVER.

Carl-We don't get the camera angles that show many of the schemes "unfolding" so to speak as a play develops since the TV cameras just follow the ball, but the tail end we see of Kick Return for example shows the fact that the opponents ALWAYS have 3-4 players running free within about the 20 yard line to try and make a tackle. We don't get a camera angle that allows the viewer to follow the blocking scheme, but obviously, it isn't working. If it WERE working, there wouldn't be so many opponents running free when our ballcarrier hasn't even reached the 20 yard line yet. There are always blown assignments, that happens on occasion no matter how good a scheme is. The only way we ever get a good KR this year is if Williams has a GREAT individual effort. At some point ballcarriers need to make someone miss, but he has to do way too much work on his own just to reach the 30.

As for the defense and our blitzing....Basically, there are 2 approaches to blitzing. Bring LB/DB('s) in addition to your down linemen. If you do this, you have to play tight man-to-man coverage on WR's so they aren't open in the very short time the QB has before he will get sacked (like all the quick hitters out wide ["Bubble Screens"] to WR's teams get against us, or the quick slants to slot receivers, or the short 5-10 yard crossing patterns that have decimated us....all of these are quick hitting patterns that are available before a blitzer can reach a QB). Or, you can bring a Zone blitz where you bring a LB/DB on a blitz, but you replace their coverage responsibility with a DL who unexpectedly drops back into coverage, rather than rushing. Zone blitzing is safer in that you are still covering the defensive backfield, but obviously you are using a DL in coverage which isn't ideal, and you are relying on the element of SURPRISE to confuse the OL. When you do a "straight" blitz, you aren't necessarily trying to surprise the OL, you are just trying to overwhelm them with superior numbers.

I know blitzing is a risky process overall, but if you dont' have the personnel to play man-to-man behind the blitz, and/or you don't drop defenders into zones to help cover up the zones vacated by blitzers, you will have WR's with ACRES of open space like Pitt (and other teams) WR's had. If done schematically correct, called at the appropriate times, and with the right personnel, you should only get burned on occasion. The shear amount of times they had WR's WIDE open with short crossing patterns-over and over again- highlighted the fact that we either needed to stop blitzing since our DB's couldn't cover their WR's in Man, or we needed to do zone blitzing so there would have been defenders in the gaping holes 5-10 yards past the LOS-we blitzed LB's, and they proceeded to dump a pass to their WR's in the exact spot our LB's just left to go blitz. We didn't seem to adjust our blitzing strategy when they showed they had plays to effectively counter our blitzes.

 

[Carl Spackler]

I'd like x's and o's, and I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I completely understand the camera angles. I've advocated for years that coach's game film should be available to fans. Charge for it. People will buy it. what's so secret about it? If people understand what they're looking at, they're not going to be able to tell anybody that's actually game planning anything that they wouldn't already be able to figure out, and people who don't know what they're looking at? What's the need for secrecy there? anyway - I get it.

Practice film, totally different story. But game film that's already happened? I think it should be available to the public. Different topic.

I'm not going say much about kick returns and coverages, except that we've got a new coach, and since week 1 against Fordham, I've remarked that the energy on those units doesn't seem to be same, across the entire units, as it was in the past. Players, coaches? Don't know why. Some guys have it, but the entire units are not making bodies fly like they did in past years. I don't think it's that much a matter of scheme, b/c there's not much that really changes scheme wise, it's all about maintaining your lanes and spaces and either making the block, or shedding the block in your lane. I don't understand how that reflects so poorly on Pasqualoni, except that he hired the new coach, and more importantly, the kicking game is not what's hurting this team in being 3-5.

As for the blitzing, that's wehre I was looking for x's and o's. I understand every word you wrote, very nice explanation. But I don't understand wehre you see the problem in the scheme. Personnel fit to scheme? I can see that, I have no idea why were doing some of things we were doing with the players we had on the field last night.

It's nice to have espn3.com b/c you can look at the play calls. I see a defense that is showing piss poor recognitition skills from the backers and DB's on pass route runners coming out from scrimmage, and therefore are always 2 steps late and 5 yards off the hot read receivers.

I really don't see a problem with the scheme, I think we need to be really careful about what we try to do on defense based on who's on the field. I think that we're seeing linebackers, db's and safeties that simply aren't putting up very good film on the ability to understand offensive formations, apply whatever the defensive play call is, and pass defend. That's not scheme to me.

What ticks me off, is that I don't understand the personnel groupings were using. That's what makes no sense to me. And for te life of me, I can't understand why we've got multiple linebackers and safeties that are not even putting a hand on TE's and receivers releasing off the LOS through the middle of the field. I can't believe that they're being taught to do that.

Are there any specific plays you are looking at / thinking of? Love to talk x's and o's.

The entire game is right here.

http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/source/espn3/#type/replay/

 

[Husky68]

Hmm. Think maybe WM and WV games were enough to get the "defensive adjustments" figured out? Not like slants, passes to RB's and TE's is a new concept or new to Pitt. The D plays like they don't believe they have a chance. So much wandering around, not flying to the ball. Something is wrong with how the D is viewing schemes, their individual assignments, who should be on field, something is causing these guys to (not sure of the right word) "play like they are pissed off that stuff is going wrong and dwelling on that rather than just playing".

No scheme will work on offense if you have the wrong QB. I don't care if Nebrich throws 5 interceptions in a game, get him playing time and see how that helps and/or have McC run some "regular" plays along with his package.

This team looks really bad out there. Somewhere in that the head coach carries a lot of that weight.

 

[willie99]

we're 3-5, and looking inept on far too many plays

McEntee is scary bad, we know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. He's also not the QB of our future. Why are we wasting more time with him?

McCummings was very effective when he was in the game

We are regressing across the boards, and the coach walks the sidelines looking like a sad lost child, pouting for heaven's sake. Just a pathetic display of leadership

I can't even comprehend trying to defend the man at this point. I don't believe he will be successful, we'll just have to let time do it's thing.

 

[Northbound]

I'd like x's and o's, and I appreciate your thoughtful response.

I completely understand the camera angles. I've advocated for years that coach's game film should be available to fans. Charge for it. People will buy it. what's so secret about it? If people understand what they're looking at, they're not going to be able to tell anybody that's actually game planning anything that they wouldn't already be able to figure out, and people who don't know what they're looking at? What's the need for secrecy there? anyway - I get it.

Practice film, totally different story. But game film that's already happened? I think it should be available to the public. Different topic.

I'm not going say much about kick returns and coverages, except that we've got a new coach, and since week 1 against Fordham, I've remarked that the energy on those units doesn't seem to be same, across the entire units, as it was in the past. Players, coaches? Don't know why. Some guys have it, but the entire units are not making bodies fly like they did in past years. I don't think it's that much a matter of scheme, b/c there's not much that really changes scheme wise, it's all about maintaining your lanes and spaces and either making the block, or shedding the block in your lane. I don't understand how that reflects so poorly on Pasqualoni, except that he hired the new coach, and more importantly, the kicking game is not what's hurting this team in being 3-5.

As for the blitzing, that's wehre I was looking for x's and o's. I understand every word you wrote, very nice explanation. But I don't understand wehre you see the problem in the scheme. Personnel fit to scheme? I can see that, I have no idea why were doing some of things we were doing with the players we had on the field last night.

It's nice to have espn3.com b/c you can look at the play calls. I see a defense that is showing piss poor recognitition skills from the backers and DB's on pass route runners coming out from scrimmage, and therefore are always 2 steps late and 5 yards off the hot read receivers.

I really don't see a problem with the scheme, I think we need to be really careful about what we try to do on defense based on who's on the field. I think that we're seeing linebackers, db's and safeties that simply aren't putting up very good film on the ability to understand offensive formations, apply whatever the defensive play call is, and pass defend. That's not scheme to me.

What ticks me off, is that I don't understand the personnel groupings were using. That's what makes no sense to me. And for te life of me, I can't understand why we've got multiple linebackers and safeties that are not even putting a hand on TE's and receivers releasing off the LOS through the middle of the field. I can't believe that they're being taught to do that.

Are there any specific plays you are looking at / thinking of? Love to talk x's and o's.

The entire game is right here.

http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/source/espn3/#type/replay/

there isn't a right scheme if you don't have the right personnel for it.....That's like saying I'm jumping off the building and when I go splat, someone saying if I had wings he'd have flown a real far distance. If you are talking theoretical schemes, sure, but we're talking actually schemes in practice in live game action. Do you really say that scheme would work if we had the right guys and excuse the staff for employing the scheme when they must know that they don't have the personnel to be successful using that scheme?

I just don't give them that type of latitude.