Argentina are expected to overwhelm Iran as one of the tournament favorites gear up for their second game.
This is slide 2 description. Go to Edit HTML and find this content. Replace it your own description.
This is slide 3 description. Go to Edit HTML and find this content. Replace it your own description.
This is slide 4 description. Go to Edit HTML and find this content. Replace it your own description.
This is slide 5 description. Go to Edit HTML and find this content. Replace it your own description.
This is slide 6 description. Go to Edit HTML and find this content. Replace it your own description.
Looks can be deceiving. Sure, it appears that Bradley Beal yelled "Don't f*** with me, Kyle!" last night, but it could have been a lot more innocent than that.
Okay, he was probably saying "Don't f*** with me," especially given how he waved goodbye when Lowry fouled out the other day.
Jason Lieser of the Palm Beach Post has terrific conversations with Chris Andersen, and this season-ending one is special. Go read the whole thing, but here's a taste of what talking to Birdman is like:
How much do you have left at this point in your career?
"I've got about 12 dollars left in my pocket because of Chick-fil-A, but I can go to the ATM any time and withdraw a limit of $300."Ok, but you played at 36 or 37 years old (36, actually) this year. How much do you have left?
"Man, you are terrible with numbers. I can withdraw from the ATM $300. I don't know where you get 36, 37."
I'm not interested in your emotional feelings.
"Good, because I don't talk about my feelings at all."Right. Save that for therapy.
"I don't do therapy. I'm gonna go talk to somebody?"I mean that another person would. Not you, obviously.
"I wouldn't. I would hire someone to go talk for me."
There's also a long back-and-forth about trucks that pretty much devolves into Who's On First? Very good.
The 128-team countdown needs you to be patient.
Confused? Check out the advanced-stats glossary here.
Bob Diaco's first signing class, inked in February 2014, just weeks after he took the UConn head coaching job, consisted of just 16 players. It's just as well that your first class is small, as you haven't had time to get your bearings anyway. Instead of laying out a grand play -- this is where we're going to recruit, this is what we're going to sell, etc. -- you're just trying to secure previous commitments and figure out who's left.
A coach's abbreviated first class is often a space-filler before the real work. But for Diaco and the roster he inherited, it was a different story. Nine of the 16 played as true freshmen, even two offensive linemen.
Either Diaco wanted to make an imprint with "his" guys, or UConn was in desperate shape at running back, linebacker, cornerback, and offensive line, at least when it comes to filling out a two-deep. The former is optimistic, but the latter is more realistic.
The program Diaco inherited had been flagging. Too good defensively to bottom out, the Huskies had regressed for four years. Since peaking at 29th in the F/+ rankings in 2009 (the year before their unlikely Fiesta Bowl run), they sank to 62nd in 2010, then lost head coach Randy Edsall to Maryland. They replaced him with veteran Paul Pasqualoni and fell to 67th, then 75th, then 97th.
The hire of Diaco made sense. The New Jersey product had spent the previous five seasons as Brian Kelly's defensive coordinator, first at Cincinnati and then at Notre Dame. Most of his experience had come in the Midwest, but in a conference that spans from Connecticut to Houston, geography is a relative term. He is a charismatic speaker -- just look at those eyes -- and he won the Broyles Award, given to the nation's top assistant, for the job he had done with Notre Dame's defense in 2012. He was a hot commodity, and UConn got him.
If it turns out that Diaco knows what he's doing -- how to recruit, develop players, put them in position to succeed -- then we'll look back at 2014 as a necessary Year Zero, a reset for a program in need of one. UConn plummeted from 97th in F/+ to 119th, won two games (one by three points to FCS Stony Brook), lost five games by 17 or more points, and lost at home to a winless SMU in the finale. There was almost nothing redeeming, but if you are going to stink, you might as well stink with a young team. And if you turn things around, no one's going to care that you started 2-10.
Plenty of coaches have turned things around after a poor start -- my go-to examples: Lou Holtz going 0-11 in his first year at South Carolina, George O'Leary going 0-11 in his first year at UCF -- and a few second-year coaches led lovely surges just last season. But one has to just look at conference mate USF to know that a turnaround after a bad first year isn't a given.
There's no reason to write Diaco off yet, but we're still in wait-and-see mode.
"Look, the American Conference has got its name for a reason. It's a national footprint. You're playing teams in your conference in North Carolina, Louisiana, Florida, Ohio, Texas, Tennessee.
"If you don't recruit those states of those metro cities ... well, I guess it depends on resources, but we're definitely going into those cities. I researched direct flights from Hartford-Bradley to different cities. That's how we chose the cities we're going to go to the most. You're talking to kids about plane fare, accessibility."
According to the Rivals database, as of mid-July UConn had offered 32 2015 recruits from the state of New Jersey, 17 from Florida (the destination of many of those direct flights), 13 from Texas (hello, DFW), 11 from Illinois (hey there, Chicago), nine from Pennsylvania, and only seven from Connecticut.
When I spoke to Diaco for last year's Blueprint for a Rebuild piece, I was most curious about how he planned to reel in high-level talent in an area not known for having loads of high-level talent. His plan was to use Hartord-Bradley to his advantage.
It's a fool's errand to reach conclusions about a new coach's recruiting plan just one full class into his tenure, but I thought it would be interesting to see how Diaco performed in 2015 and where his signees came from.
It turned out to be local. Only one signee attended school in Connecticut, but four attended schools in New England, seven were from New Jersey, three were from New York, one was from Pennsylvania, and three were from the Maryland/Delaware/DC corridor. Within this group came some of the most-touted players: quarterback Tyler Davis, receivers Tyraiq Beals and Hergy Mayala, linebacker Nazir Williams, and five defensive linemen were given three-star designations by Rivals, the 247Sports Composite, or both.
In the end, only three came from outside: one from Illinois and two from Florida. If UConn begins to win in the coming years, it will be interesting to monitor if Diaco's national approach to recruiting begins to bear more fruit. But his immediate success will be determined by how well he can develop local talent.
| Record: 2-10 | Adj. Record: 2-10 | Final F/+ Rk: 119 | |||||||
| Date | Opponent | Opp. F/+ Rk | Score | W-L | Percentile Performance |
Adj. Scoring Margin |
Win Expectancy |
| 29-Aug | BYU | 46 | 10-35 | L | 13% | -26.5 | 0% |
| 6-Sep | Stony Brook | NR | 19-16 | W | 16% | -22.8 | 45% |
| 13-Sep | Boise State | 21 | 21-38 | L | 24% | -16.7 | 1% |
| 19-Sep | at South Florida | 123 | 14-17 | L | 14% | -25.3 | 11% |
| 27-Sep | Temple | 67 | 10-36 | L | 11% | -28.9 | 0% |
| 11-Oct | at Tulane | 93 | 3-12 | L | 9% | -31.5 | 4% |
| 23-Oct | at East Carolina | 61 | 21-31 | L | 54% | 2.6 | 35% |
| 1-Nov | Central Florida | 60 | 37-29 | W | 78% | 17.9 | 85% |
| 8-Nov | vs. Army | 121 | 21-35 | L | 17% | -22.2 | 16% |
| 22-Nov | Cincinnati | 47 | 0-41 | L | 2% | -48.9 | 0% |
| 29-Nov | at Memphis | 41 | 10-41 | L | 17% | -22.3 | 0% |
| 6-Dec | SMU | 127 | 20-27 | L | 9% | -31.8 | 27% |
| Category | Offense | Rk | Defense | Rk |
| S&P+ | 14.4 | 127 | 30.7 | 85 |
| Points Per Game | 15.5 | 125 | 29.8 | 86 |
This was likely to be a poor season no matter what; UConn faced seven teams that would end up ranking in the F/+ top 70, and even if the Huskies held steady, they weren't going to win more than four games even if they scored a decent upset somewhere along the line.
They got the upset, cashing in on four interceptions to take down defending AAC champion UCF on Homecoming. They also lost three games to teams ranked 121st or worse in F/+. A midseason peak that featured a sudden offensive breakout against ECU and the aforementioned havoc against UCF quickly fizzled.
Following a frustrating loss to Army at Yankee Stadium -- a game in which UConn completed as many passes to Army (two) as Army did, and in which Army returned an interception 99 yards for a score with under 30 seconds left -- the Huskies basically folded, getting drubbed by Cincinnati and Memphis, then falling to a desperate SMU.
| FIVE FACTORS -- OFFENSE | ||||||
| Raw Category | Rk | Opp. Adj. Category | Rk | |||
| EXPLOSIVENESS | IsoPPP | 0.78 | 102 | IsoPPP+ | 75.8 | 120 |
| EFFICIENCY | Succ. Rt. | 32.7% | 127 | Succ. Rt. + | 77.6 | 127 |
| FIELD POSITION | Def. Avg. FP | 32.4 | 115 | Def. FP+ | 97.0 | 101 |
| FINISHING DRIVES | Pts. Per Trip in 40 | 3.2 | 126 | Redzone S&P+ | 88.6 | 100 |
| TURNOVERS | EXPECTED | 17.3 | ACTUAL | 28 | +10.7 | |
| Category | Yards/ Game Rk |
S&P+ Rk | Success Rt. Rk |
PPP+ Rk |
| OVERALL | 126 | 122 | 127 | 120 |
| RUSHING | 119 | 121 | 122 | 116 |
| PASSING | 113 | 122 | 126 | 113 |
| Standard Downs | 123 | 126 | 122 | |
| Passing Downs | 115 | 125 | 99 |
| Q1 Rk | 128 | 1st Down Rk | 124 |
| Q2 Rk | 102 | 2nd Down Rk | 127 |
| Q3 Rk | 107 | 3rd Down Rk | 110 |
| Q4 Rk | 109 |
Note: players in bold below are 2015 returnees. Players in italics are questionable with injury/suspension.
| Player | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | Comp | Att | Yards | TD | INT | Comp Rate |
Sacks | Sack Rate | Yards/ Att. |
| Chandler Whitmer | 124 | 223 | 1522 | 11 | 8 | 55.6% | 25 | 10.1% | 5.5 | ||||
| Tim Boyle | 6'3, 220 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.7) | 0.8625 | 43 | 82 | 335 | 1 | 3 | 52.4% | 4 | 4.7% | 3.3 |
| Casey Cochran | 17 | 31 | 171 | 0 | 1 | 54.8% | 0 | 0.0% | 5.5 | ||||
| Bryant Shirreffs (NC State) |
6'1, 216 | So. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.7444 | |||||||||
| Garrett Anderson | 6'2, 225 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | NR | |||||||||
| Tyler Davis | 6'3, 214 | Fr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8005 |
There was a lot of shoddy quarterback play in the AAC, and by comparison, Chandler Whitmer wasn't too bad. The Illinois transfer provided a decent run threat, and his 56 percent completion rate was better than anybody else's on the team. When original starter Casey Cochran's career ended because of concussions, Whitmer oversaw an offense that was not any worse.
But when then-sophomore Tim Boyle began taking reps, UConn fans got a glimpse at the future, and the results weren't encouraging. Boyle looked decent against a solid Memphis but went 4-for-11 for 29 yards against SMU and finished the season with a paltry 83.5 passer rating.
With a new coordinator (Frank Verducci) and a new transfer (NC State's Bryant Shirreffs) in the mix, UConn will have an opportunity to reinvent both the offense and the requirements of the quarterback. The mobile Shirreffs was the leader for the job at the end of spring ball, but it appears Boyle, Tyler Davis, and recent JUCO commitment Garrett Anderson will have a chance to unseat him in August.
| Player | Pos. | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | Rushes | Yards | TD | Yards/ Carry |
Hlt Yds/ Opp. |
Opp. Rate |
Fumbles | Fum. Lost |
| Ron Johnson | RB | 5'11, 220 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8106 | 114 | 429 | 3 | 3.8 | 3.6 | 30.7% | 0 | 0 |
| Max DeLorenzo | RB | 5'11, 216 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7960 | 77 | 343 | 1 | 4.5 | 6.1 | 28.6% | 2 | 2 |
| Chandler Whitmer | QB | NR | 51 | 222 | 2 | 4.4 | 3.3 | 45.1% | 6 | 4 | |||
| Arkeel Newsome | RB | 5'7, 176 | So. | 3 stars (5.6) | 0.8519 | 47 | 188 | 0 | 4.0 | 4.1 | 38.3% | 4 | 4 |
| Josh Marriner | RB | 5'9, 196 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8148 | 36 | 110 | 1 | 3.1 | 2.3 | 30.6% | 1 | 1 |
| Deshon Foxx | WR | NR | 23 | 203 | 1 | 8.8 | 22.3 | 30.4% | 4 | 3 | |||
| Tim Boyle | QB | 6'3, 220 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.7) | 0.8625 | 12 | 7 | 0 | 0.6 | N/A | 0.0% | 2 | 2 |
| Player | Pos. | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | Targets | Catches | Yards | Catch Rate | Target Rate |
%SD | Yds/ Target |
NEY | Real Yds/ Target |
RYPR |
| Geremy Davis | WR | NR | 71 | 44 | 521 | 62.0% | 22.8% | 57.7% | 7.3 | -15 | 7.3 | 59.0 | |||
| Deshon Foxx | WR | NR | 54 | 30 | 384 | 55.6% | 17.3% | 72.2% | 7.1 | 11 | 7.5 | 43.4 | |||
| Noel Thomas | WR | 6'1, 193 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8414 | 47 | 26 | 305 | 55.3% | 15.1% | 46.8% | 6.5 | -19 | 6.4 | 34.5 |
| Dhameer Bradley | WR | 5'10, 173 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.7) | 0.8316 | 31 | 15 | 100 | 48.4% | 9.9% | 38.7% | 3.2 | -93 | 2.8 | 11.3 |
| Sean McQuillan | TE | 6'3, 247 | Sr. | 3 stars (5.6) | 0.8074 | 27 | 16 | 158 | 59.3% | 8.7% | 55.6% | 5.9 | -39 | 5.9 | 17.9 |
| Arkeel Newsome | RB | 5'7, 176 | So. | 3 stars (5.6) | 0.8519 | 15 | 11 | 155 | 73.3% | 4.8% | 40.0% | 10.3 | 25 | 8.5 | 17.5 |
| Thomas Lucas | WR | 6'2, 203 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7960 | 15 | 9 | 122 | 60.0% | 4.8% | 46.7% | 8.1 | 12 | 8.4 | 13.8 |
| Kamal Abrams | WR | NR | 13 | 5 | 43 | 38.5% | 4.2% | 61.5% | 3.3 | -25 | 3.5 | 4.9 | |||
| Josh Marriner | RB | 5'9, 196 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8148 | 8 | 6 | 73 | 75.0% | 2.6% | 25.0% | 9.1 | 2 | 10.2 | 8.3 |
| Jazzmar Clax | FB | 5'11, 249 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8496 | 8 | 5 | 34 | 62.5% | 2.6% | 50.0% | 4.3 | -27 | 4.6 | 3.8 |
| Max DeLorenzo | RB | 5'11, 216 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7960 | 6 | 5 | 42 | 83.3% | 1.9% | 66.7% | 7.0 | -16 | 6.7 | 4.8 |
| Brian Lemelle | WR | 5'10, 163 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.6) | 0.8522 | 6 | 5 | 27 | 83.3% | 1.9% | 33.3% | 4.5 | -31 | 6.3 | 3.1 |
| Alec Bloom | TE | 6'6, 257 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.8056 | 4 | 3 | 40 | 75.0% | 1.3% | 0.0% | 10.0 | 5 | NR | 4.5 |
| Ron Johnson | RB | 5'11, 220 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8106 | 4 | 3 | 20 | 75.0% | 1.3% | 25.0% | 5.0 | -15 | 7.6 | 2.3 |
| Tommy Myers | TE | 6'5, 250 | So. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7818 | 2 | 2 | 8 | 100.0% | 0.6% | 0.0% | 4.0 | -15 | NR | 0.9 |
| Tyraiq Beals | WR | 6'0, 180 | Fr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.7933 | ||||||||||
| Hergy Mayala | WR | 6'1, 200 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8126 | ||||||||||
| Frank Battle | WR | 6'5, 190 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8076 |
The hire of Verducci is an interesting one, both because of Verducci's unique résumé -- 35 years of coaching experience, with everyone from the Iowa Hawkeyes (he was a graduate assistant when Diaco was a defensive back) to the Buffalo Bills to the Montreal Alouettes, and with no coordinator experience -- and because of what he said about the offense.
His goal in spring ball was to introduce basic components, then let the talent on hand determine what his system will become. In a lot of ways, this makes sense. When building an offense from scratch, it's sensible to figure out what your personnel can do. But identity is important, and while it appears that Diaco prefers a mobile quarterback, saying "We'll see" doesn't lend a ton of confidence.
One assumes there will be quite a bit of running involved, however. Not only is Shirreffs a mobile option -- in limited action at NC State in 2013, he rushed 34 times and attempted just five passes -- but it seems UConn has more at running back than receiver.
Four backs return after carrying at least 36 times. Ron Johnson showed feature-back potential as a freshman, rushing 45 times in the final two games and going for 101 yards on 23 carries against SMU. Max DeLorenzo is a big option with nice open-field capabilities (when he gets to the open field). Arkeel Newsome showed efficiency potential as a freshman (and managed to fumble four times in just 58 touches). And while Josh Marirner didn't do much with his opportunities, he was still a three-star prospect.
Meanwhile, the only returnee who a) caught at least 10 passes last year and b) averaged at least 6.6 yards per target was Newsome. Noel Thomas had a nice late run of games, snaring 18 passes for 208 yards against UCF, Army, Cincinnati, and Memphis; he is almost by default the most proven receiver. Opportunity awaits any of the three-star freshmen.
Of all the players I just mentioned, by the way, everybody but DeLorenzo is scheduled to return in 2016. This unit could develop into something, but it's going to take a while.
| Category | Adj. Line Yds |
Std. Downs LY/carry |
Pass. Downs LY/carry |
Opp. Rate |
Power Success Rate |
Stuff Rate |
Adj. Sack Rate |
Std. Downs Sack Rt. |
Pass. Downs Sack Rt. |
| Team | 85.5 | 2.32 | 2.7 | 32.6% | 53.6% | 27.6% | 67.7 | 5.6% | 11.5% |
| Rank | 115 | 123 | 109 | 118 | 120 | 126 | 120 | 83 | 117 |
| Player | Pos. | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | Career Starts | Honors/Notes |
| Alex Mateas | C | 28 | |||||
| Gus Cruz | LG | 19 | |||||
| Tyler Samra | RG | 6'2, 290 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8305 | 13 | |
| Richard Levy | LT | 6'6, 308 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.7519 | 12 | |
| Dalton Gifford | RT | 6'4, 307 | Sr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8100 | 11 | |
| Andreas Knappe | RT | 6'8, 310 | Jr. | NR | NR | 7 | |
| Ryan Crozier | C | 6'4, 294 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7811 | 3 | |
| Paul Nwokeji | LT | 6'6, 301 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8115 | 0 | |
| Kyle Bockeloh | C | 6'3, 298 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7000 | 0 | |
| Trey Rutherford | LG | 6'5, 296 | So. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.7808 | 0 | |
| Tommy Hopkins | LG | 6'6, 308 | So. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.7995 | 0 | |
| Kyle Schafenacker | OL | 6'3, 280 | So. | 3 stars (5.6) | 0.8425 | 0 | |
| Brendan Vechery | OL | 6'6, 299 | So. | NR | NR | 0 |
Your line stats aren't going to be good when you're blocking for freshmen and a variety of quarterbacks, but UConn's were particularly poor: the Huskies ranked 109th or worse in all but one of the stats above, and the "strength" (83rd in standard downs sack rate) wasn't much of one.
That's a shame because it seems like there might be potential. Five players return with starting experience (46 career starts), and of the 11 players listed above, five were three-stars. And size isn't an impediment, with 10 of the 11 going at least 290. Plus, as is the running theme, eight of the 11 are scheduled to return in 2016.
I would assume this big line ends up doing a lot of work in blocking for Shirreffs, Johnson, and company, and protecting Shirreffs in a lot of play-action situations. But really, the goal for every unit on this offense has to be figuring out what it's going to be and who's going to become a reliable contributor in 2016.
| FIVE FACTORS -- DEFENSE | ||||||
| Raw Category | Rk | Opp. Adj. Category | Rk | |||
| EXPLOSIVENESS | IsoPPP | 0.78 | 26 | IsoPPP+ | 104.4 | 55 |
| EFFICIENCY | Succ. Rt. | 41.8% | 74 | Succ. Rt. + | 94.4 | 91 |
| FIELD POSITION | Off. Avg. FP | 28.7 | 99 | Off. FP+ | 95.0 | 119 |
| FINISHING DRIVES | Pts. Per Trip in 40 | 4.6 | 87 | Redzone S&P+ | 101.6 | 57 |
| TURNOVERS | EXPECTED | 16.8 | ACTUAL | 15.0 | -1.8 | |
| Category | Yards/ Game Rk |
S&P+ Rk | Success Rt. Rk |
PPP+ Rk |
| OVERALL | 50 | 67 | 96 | 55 |
| RUSHING | 71 | 58 | 88 | 29 |
| PASSING | 37 | 93 | 95 | 84 |
| Standard Downs | 72 | 106 | 47 | |
| Passing Downs | 71 | 61 | 85 |
| Q1 Rk | 83 | 1st Down Rk | 70 |
| Q2 Rk | 44 | 2nd Down Rk | 22 |
| Q3 Rk | 110 | 3rd Down Rk | 94 |
| Q4 Rk | 47 |
| Category | Adj. Line Yds |
Std. Downs LY/carry |
Pass. Downs LY/carry |
Opp. Rate |
Power Success Rate |
Stuff Rate |
Adj. Sack Rate |
Std. Downs Sack Rt. |
Pass. Downs Sack Rt. |
| Team | 91.1 | 2.80 | 3.65 | 39.3% | 66.0% | 21.0% | 51.9 | 2.7% | 3.2% |
| Rank | 100 | 44 | 96 | 70 | 58 | 42 | 124 | 110 | 121 |
| Name | Pos | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | GP | Tackles | % of Team | TFL | Sacks | Int | PBU | FF | FR |
| Julian Campenni | NG | 6'0, 302 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.7780 | 12 | 26.5 | 3.9% | 5.5 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Folorunso Fatukasi | DT | 6'4, 298 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7961 | 12 | 24.5 | 3.7% | 3.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Mikal Myers | NG | 6'1, 326 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8139 | 12 | 24.0 | 3.6% | 6.0 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Kenton Adeyemi | DE | 6'4, 287 | Sr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8167 | 12 | 20.0 | 3.0% | 5.0 | 1.0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Reuben Frank | DE | 12 | 19.0 | 2.8% | 4.0 | 1.0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| B.J. McBryde | DT | 12 | 17.5 | 2.6% | 1.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Cole Ormsby | DE | 6'3, 257 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7900 | 10 | 12.5 | 1.9% | 5.0 | 3.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Cameron Stapleton | DE | 6'4, 246 | So. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.7956 | 9 | 6.5 | 1.0% | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| David Ryslik | DE | 6'3, 292 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8292 | |||||||||
| Kevin Murphy | DT | 6'2, 270 | Fr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8150 | |||||||||
| Philippe Okounam | DE | 6'5, 265 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.8118 | |||||||||
| Connor Freebom | DE | 6'6, 225 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.7973 |
Size? Check. The top four tacklers on the line averaged 6'3, 303, and each of the top five linebackers was at least 225.
Play-making ability? Certainly. Six linemen recorded at least three tackles for loss, as did four linebackers, and UConn ranked 42nd in Stuff Rate (run stops at or behind the line).
Depth? I think so -- seven linemen and five linebackers made at least 12.5 tackles.
In theory, there was a lot to like about UConn's run defense. But the Huskies ranked 88th in Rushing Success Rate+, meaning opponents were able to stay ahead of the chains. UConn kept big plays in check, allowing only 10 rushes of 20-plus yards (ninth in FBS), but the efficiency wasn't what it seemed it should be.
Of course, the run defense was still leaps and bounds ahead of the pass, which featured one of the nation's worst pass rushes and scant play-makers in the secondary.
The defense wasn't the problem, but it was still one of UConn's worst in recent years. It will be interesting to see what experience can do on the ground, though. Five of last year's seven linemen and four of five linebackers return, while the second string could feature more young upside than in any other area of the UConn defense.
I like the linebackers and the defensive tackles, even if there's a lot of work to be done at end, and I figure UConn's run defense will improve.
| Name | Pos | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | GP | Tackles | % of Team | TFL | Sacks | Int | PBU | FF | FR |
| Marquise Vann | LB | 6'0, 226 | Sr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8104 | 12 | 82.5 | 12.3% | 7.0 | 0.5 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| Graham Stewart | LB | 6'1, 228 | Sr. | 4 stars (5.8) | 0.8913 | 12 | 67.5 | 10.1% | 10.5 | 2.0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| Jefferson Ashiru | LB | NR | 9 | 33.5 | 5.0% | 3.5 | 0.5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||
| Junior Joseph | LB | 6'1, 242 | So. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.8306 | 11 | 32.5 | 4.8% | 4.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Jon Hicks | LB | 6'2, 238 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8124 | 12 | 13.5 | 2.0% | 0.5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Vontae Diggs | LB | 6'2, 215 | So. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8322 | 12 | 6.5 | 1.0% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Luke Carrezola | LB | 6'3, 248 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | NR | 6 | 5.5 | 0.8% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Brandon Steg | LB | 10 | 3.5 | 0.5% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Omaine Stephens | LB | 6'3, 227 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7000 | 9 | 2.5 | 0.4% | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Matthew Walsh | LB | 6'1, 235 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7860 | |||||||||
| Jalen Stevens | LB | 6'3, 225 | So. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8309 | |||||||||
| Nazir Williams | LB | 6'3, 225 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.3) | 0.8190 | |||||||||
| William Richardson | LB | 6'3, 220 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7988 |
| Name | Pos | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Rivals | 247 Comp. | GP | Tackles | % of Team | TFL | Sacks | Int | PBU | FF | FR |
| Andrew Adams | S | 6'0, 197 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7694 | 12 | 80.5 | 12.0% | 0.5 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 |
| Obi Melifonwu | S | 6'3, 214 | Jr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8189 | 11 | 63.5 | 9.5% | 3.5 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| Jhavon Williams | CB | 5'10, 194 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7988 | 12 | 33.0 | 4.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 2 | 0 |
| Byron Jones | CB | 7 | 20.0 | 3.0% | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 0 | 0 | ||||
| Jamar Summers | CB | 6'0, 177 | So. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.7981 | 12 | 19.0 | 2.8% | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Junior Lee | S | 6'0, 209 | Sr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8148 | 12 | 18.5 | 2.8% | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| John Green | CB | 5'10, 180 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8069 | 12 | 8.5 | 1.3% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 |
| Brice McAllister | CB | 5'11, 193 | So. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7865 | 5 | 6.0 | 0.9% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Javon Hadley | CB | 5'10, 165 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8248 | 5 | 5.0 | 0.7% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Jeremy Claflin | S | 6'1, 212 | Sr. | NR | NR | 8 | 3.5 | 0.5% | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ellis Marder | S | 6'1, 191 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.7913 | 5 | 2.5 | 0.4% | 0.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jordan Floyd | S | 6'0, 214 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8186 | |||||||||
| John Green | CB | 5'10, 180 | Jr. | 2 stars (5.4) | 0.8069 | |||||||||
| Aaron Garland | DB | 5'11, 190 | Fr. | 3 stars (5.5) | 0.8141 | |||||||||
| Marshe Terry | DB | 6'4, 190 | Fr. | 2 stars (5.2) | 0.7983 |
Safeties Andrew Adams and Obi Melifonwu combined for four tackles for loss, four picks, and seven breakups, and returning corners Jhavon Williams, Jamar Summers, and John Green combined for 14 breakups and one interception. That's really not bad considering how long quarterbacks had to find open receivers, but UConn's iffy pass defense went beyond the pass rush. There were a few too many big plays along the way, as well.
That Adams and backup safety Junior Lee are the only seniors, though, is a good thing. If Diaco and coordinator Anthony Poindexter can figure out how to get pressure on passers, this should be one hell of an active unit in 2016.
| Punter | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Punts | Avg | TB | FC | I20 | FC/I20 Ratio |
| Justin Wain | 6'3, 209 | Jr. | 74 | 38.8 | 4 | 30 | 17 | 63.5% |
| Bobby Puyol | 5'10, 173 | Jr. | 6 | 35.0 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 83.3% |
| Kicker | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Kickoffs | Avg | TB | OOB | TB% |
| Bobby Puyol | 5'10, 173 | Jr. | 44 | 56.8 | 5 | 2 | 11.4% |
| Place-Kicker | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
PAT | FG (0-39) |
Pct | FG (40+) |
Pct |
| Bobby Puyol | 5'10, 173 | Jr. | 19-22 | 5-8 | 62.5% | 4-6 | 66.7% |
| Returner | Pos. | Ht, Wt | 2015 Year |
Returns | Avg. | TD |
| Arkeel Newsome | KR | 5'7, 176 | So. | 36 | 20.3 | 0 |
| Brian Lemelle | KR | 5'10, 163 | Jr. | 5 | 23.2 | 0 |
| Deshon Foxx | PR | 10 | 8.1 | 1 |
| Category | Rk |
| Special Teams F/+ | 101 |
| Field Goal Efficiency | 83 |
| Punt Return Efficiency | 105 |
| Kick Return Efficiency | 107 |
| Punt Efficiency | 78 |
| Kickoff Efficiency | 35 |
| Opponents' Field Goal Efficiency | 78 |
UConn's kick coverage unit performed well, leading the Huskies to a No. 35 kickoff efficiency ranking despite Bobby Puyol only booting a touchback on one of every nine kicks.
That's the entire list of strengths. Puyol was better on longer field goals than shorter ones -- he was 4-for-6 over 40 yards but only 5-for-8 under 40 and 19-for-22 on PATs -- and while punts from Justin Wain were high, they weren't far. And aside from one Deshon Foxx punt return touchdown, returns were pretty much non-existent.
| 2015 Schedule | ||
| Date | Opponent | 2014 F/+ Rk |
| 3-Sep | Villanova | NR |
| 12-Sep | Army | 121 |
| 19-Sep | at Missouri | 20 |
| 26-Sep | Navy | 44 |
| 2-Oct | at BYU | 46 |
| 10-Oct | at Central Florida | 60 |
| 17-Oct | South Florida | 123 |
| 24-Oct | at Cincinnati | 47 |
| 30-Oct | East Carolina | 61 |
| 7-Nov | at Tulane | 93 |
| 21-Nov | Houston | 73 |
| 28-Nov | at Temple | 67 |
| Five-Year F/+ Rk | -15.2% (90) |
| 2- and 5-Year Recruiting Rk | 90 / 77 |
| 2014 TO Margin / Adj. TO Margin* | -13 / -0.4 |
| 2014 TO Luck/Game | -5.2 |
| Approx. Ret. Starters (Off. / Def.) | 14 (6, 8) |
| 2014 Second-order wins (difference) | 2.2 (-0.2) |
There were second-year surges last year -- Sonny Dykes at California, Bret Bielema at Arkansas, Dave Doeren at NC State, Skip Holtz at Louisiana Tech, Sean Kugler at UTEP. On average, these five went from three wins and an F/+ ranking of 103rd in 2013 to seven wins and 51st in 2014. None of the five was expected to do as well as he did. That's the Year Zero effect.
Is there potential for a similar rise at UConn? Probably not. If the running game catches hold, then there's possible for improvement into the 90s or so on offense, and if the run defense improves as I expect, then maybe the defense will creep back into the 50s or 60s in Def. S&P+. Average that out, and maybe this becomes a top-80 team.
But that's too big a leap to count on, especially considering how bad the offense has been for going on five years now. The odds are much better than UConn improves to around 100th, and while that's something you can build off of, it won't result in many 2015 wins, not with only four opponents who ranked worse than 73rd last year.
I like Diaco, and I think he could still get UConn back to a bowl-level team, but this is a multi-year rebuilding project.
Teams interested in trading for Adrian Peterson should exercise caution because there are plenty of red flags.
Adrian Peterson will likely go down as the best running back of his generation and looks to be Hall of Fame bound after racking up more than 10,000 rushing yards and six trips to the Pro Bowl in his first seven NFL seasons. He already ranks 28th all-time in rushing yards and 14th in rushing touchdowns, and he'll look to continue to add to both totals.
Still, there are reasons for any interested team to take caution when considering a trade with the Minnesota Vikings to acquire Peterson.
There's one really good reason why it would be exciting for any team to trade for Peterson: He's Adrian Peterson. He has six seasons with more than 1,200 rushing yards, seven seasons with double-digit touchdowns and after a year away from football, he should instantly improve any team's running game.
The long-term affects of trading for Peterson might not make it the smartest move, though.
Peterson played in just one game during the 2014 season, so his year away from the wear and tear of the game likely tacked a little longevity on his career. Even still, he's a running back who is now 30 and, historically, that's when the downhill slide begins.
The best season ever by a running back 32 or older came from John Riggins, who had 1,347 yards in 1983 at age 34. That's the 163rd best single-season rushing total. Of the 162 seasons that best that mark, only nine came from 30 or 31 year old running backs. The other 153 marks were set by players 29 or younger.
Peterson is a freak athlete who hasn't showed signs of slowing and his year off surely helped, but he's still someone with more than 2,000 career rushing attempts, a number only 37 players have ever reached. He's also someone with ACL, MCL and LCL tears all in his past.
When the Philadelphia Eagles signed DeMarco Murray to a five-year, $40 million deal, they got a steal compared to the numbers headed Peterson's way. While Murray will count no more than $9 million against the salary cap in any year during his five years with the Eagles, Peterson is set to count $15.4 million against the Vikings' cap in 2015, $15 million in 2016 and $17 million in 2017.
No other running back in the NFL is slated to count more than $10 million in 2015.
Perhaps, Peterson will be generous enough to restructure his contract after a trade is made, but there's no reason why he should. If he refuses to restructure, a team that just acquired Peterson via trade isn't going to release him.
Most of the teams that are in need of a running back chose not to pursue Murray in free agency. If they had, those teams could have acquired a running back without giving up a draft pick or player in a trade to do so.
It's tough to gauge what the cost of trading with the Vikings would be, but there is a price and that price is more than free. Teams would be sacrificing the opportunity to add young talent in the NFL Draft and instead add a 30-year-old running back, who could hit a significant decline soon.
Child abuse scandals aren't the best thing for a team's public relations, and any team signing Peterson will have to take on responsibility for the running back's previous actions. He is no longer suspended and pleaded no contest to misdemeanor reckless assault, so his legal issues and the punishment for them are in the past.
Even so, the baggage is still there and there could be some backlash headed to any team willing to trade for a player with that kind of scandal in his rear view mirror.
Even with all those concerns, Peterson is still one of the NFL's best players and his availability will pique some interest around the league. A report from the Pioneer Press in Minnesota listed six teams as candidates for a trade: The Arizona Cardinals, Atlanta Falcons, Dallas Cowboys, Jacksonville Jaguars, San Diego Chargers and Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Other reports have listed the Oakland Raiders as a possibility.
There are plenty of reasons to point to the Cowboys as a perfect destination for Peterson. If any team is looking to add the Texas native, it should probably be a postseason contender and, as Andrew Brandt of Sports Illustrated points out, the stars look to be aligning:
There are plenty of rumored suitors, including the Cardinals and Raiders, but the actions of the Cowboys lately seem almost too obvious to connect the dots. The team 1) created $12.8 million of cap room with the latest Tony Romo contract restructure, and Peterson would cost $12.75 million; 2) watched DeMarco Murray sign with their biggest rival while barely lifting a finger; and 3) discussed the potential of Peterson as a Cowboy on their website (there was a competing viewpoint, but approval had to come from above to allow this video). Adding the report of Peterson talking to Jerry Jones on the phone last year about his interest in playing for the team, the link seems apparent.
But even with those signs seemingly indicating a high level of interest between the two parties, Cowboys executive Stephen Jones is adamant that the team isn't interested in trading picks for veteran players. With Greg Hardy already on the team, the Cowboys might also be hesitant to bring in another player who was part of a high-profile abuse scandal in 2014.
Of the seven candidates that have been mentioned as possibilities, the Cardinals are the only other team that earned a spot in the postseason. They managed to do so with the NFL's second-worst rushing attack and just six rushing touchdowns all year.
The Cardinals have a solid amount of cap room and draft picks in all seven rounds. The team has a compensatory pick in the seventh-round pick as well that can't be traded, but with eight picks, the money to keep Peterson and the need to add a top rusher, Arizona is a very logical landing spot.
Given all the Philip Rivers drama, the Chargers have more on their mind than just adding a running back and being ready for the postseason. If San Diego elects to keep Rivers, bolstering its 30th-ranked rushing attack would likely be a priority and if the team goes with Marcus Mariota instead, giving the rookie some help in the backfield would make sense as well.
Five years after taking Ryan Mathews in the first round of the 2010 NFL Draft, the Chargers allowed him to walk in free agency, so the team's options in the backfield are Donald Brown, Branden Oliver and Danny Woodhead, who is returning from a serious ankle injury.
The team has plenty of cap space and would have even more if Rivers is dealt, but could be on the verge of a more patient and long-term rebuild due to its quarterback situation.
The Falcons have an exciting, young running back in Devonta Freeman, but could create a dynamic rushing attack by pairing him with a bigger veteran like Peterson. In Seattle, Dan Quinn had the aid of a grinding rushing attack on offense to help his suffocating defense and the Falcons could attempt to immediately recreate that in Atlanta.
While the Falcons have plenty of cap room, it was one of the more quiet teams in free agency, so the room to add a player like Peterson is still there.
That said, the Falcons experienced first-hand the dangers of adding an elite running back on the tail end of his career. The team signed Steven Jackson a few months before his 30th birthday and just released him after two disappointing seasons.
Toby Gerhart was a disappointment for the Jaguars in 2014, so what better way to fix the problem than to add the player that Gerhart sat behind in Minnesota? Pairing Peterson with Denard Robinson would take even more pressure off Blake Bortles, who already received Julius Thomas as a new toy in the offseason.
Even after the big splurge in free agency, the Jaguars are among the teams with the best salary cap situation and adding Peterson wouldn't break the bank at all. The team is two years into a very patient rebuild though, and adding Peterson would be a strange left turn from adding youth to attempting to swing for the fences.
Jaguars head coach Gus Bradley said on Tuesday that there is no truth to the reports of the team being interested in Peterson and said it's not a direction the team would go.
It would be shocking if the Buccaneers don't use the No. 1 pick in the 2015 NFL Draft to add a quarterback and the first step to helping out a new passer is to add tools around him. Tampa Bay already has some pass catching weapons with Vincent Jackson and Mike Evans, so using the team's copious cap space to address the running back position would make sense.
Neither Doug Martin nor Bobby Rainey was even able to eclipse 500 yards rushing in 2014 and the Bucs finished with the 29th-ranked rushing attack. Adding Peterson would likely help the team fix that problem in a hurry and provide a rookie quarterback with a safe option in the backfield.
Like the Jaguars, the spending in free agency didn't change the fact that the Raiders still have plenty of money to spend. No team was worse than the Raiders at running the ball in 2014 and they elected to allow Darren McFadden to walk after seven seasons with the team.
The Raiders have a promising, young back in Latavius Murray, but he doesn't have much experience of being a workhorse back in the team's offense and struggled when he had to take over as a starter late in the year. Coupling him with Peterson could help Murray return to the form that shredded the Chiefs for 112 yards and two touchdowns on four carries just before he became the full-time starter.
However, like the Falcons, the Raiders saw the dangers of adding a running back with wear and tear when they signed Maurice Jones-Drew. In his only season with the team, Jones-Drew finished with 96 rushing yards and retired after the season at age 29.
The playoffs are here, but Rajon Rondo and the Mavericks still haven't figured out how to make things work on the court.
The playoffs were always the silver lining with the Dallas Mavericks' acquisition of Rajon Rondo. Maybe the first few months wouldn't go great. Maybe the offense would struggle to find a role for his ball-dominating style. Mybe the team would stumble into the playoffs in the process. But Rondo has shined in the postseason before. He would surely step up on the big stage.
Nope.
Rondo played just 10 minutes in the Mavericks' 111-99 Game 2 loss to the Houston Rockets on Tuesday night. He was benched early in the third quarter in favor of J.J. Barea and Raymond Felton and didn't see the court again as the Mavericks fell to a 2-0 deficit in their first-round series.
Dallas is in trouble, yet it doesn't seem to be turning to Rondo. Instead, a coaching staff that clashed with the veteran point guard during the regular season seems to be moving on from him already, even though the offseason and free agency don't start until the team is eliminated.
Rondo's time with the Mavericks was always going to be defined by what happened in the playoffs, not the regular season, but we're quickly seeing that little has changed. A partnership that didn't work in January still hasn't coalesced in late April, and now it seems like both Rondo and the team are simply waiting to be rid of each other. "Around Rondo, the energy is toxic," Yahoo! Sports' Adrian Wojnarowski wrote after Game 2.
The playoffs aren't over for the Mavericks this year, but their commitment to Rondo as a key cog seems to be. This didn't just happen in a flash, though. Here's how we got here.
When Dallas acquired Rondo from the Boston Celtics in mid-December, the team was near the top of the standings and owned one of the league's best offenses. It was a fun, exciting team to watch, but not one necessarily built to handle the rigor of a championship run.
So the Mavericks traded for Rondo, a former All-Star and champion with the Celtics, and hoped he would eventually become the final piece to the puzzle. At the time, we praised the Mavericks' leadership for being willing to take a chance and add a potential game-changer to their roster.
It turns out Rondo changed Dallas for the worse, however. Since the Mavericks made the deal, their defense slightly improved, but their offense took a massive step backwards. The net difference was a firm negative for the team, which went 19-8 before the deal and 31-24 afterwards.
Rondo's numbers also took a huge dip, from a borderline double-double in Boston to just nine points and under seven assists per game with Dallas.
One of the challenges with Rondo was fitting him into the Mavericks' system. A veteran player known for being stubborn and liking to dominate possessions, he was never going to the kind of player you could easily plug into what the team was already doing.
Mavericks coach Rick Carlisle learned that the hard way as he struggled to figure out what to do with Rondo. The point guard often found himself benched in fourth quarters as the team went to guys who could actually shoot. Things boiled over in late February when the two could be seen arguing on the sideline during a game.
According to Wojnarowski, Rondo asked, "Why the [bleep] did you bring me here?" to Carlisle during the argument, underscoring the struggles in the relationship between the two. Carlisle and the Mavericks seemed to have a good thing going before Rondo arrived, and it's possible the past few months have cost Rondo a lot of money on the open market, which he'll hit this summer.
So a lot of this stuff has been simmering below the surface for a while. Carlisle may have wanted to go to Barea and Felton earlier, but felt committed to keep trying to get Rondo minutes considering his pedigree and what the team gave up to acquire him. With no more time to wait in the playoffs, however, Carlisle is going with his guys, even if it means giving up on Rondo.
It all leads to the question of what's next for Rondo and the Mavericks, not just in the playoffs, but beyond. Rondo seems likely to play a minor role in the team's playoff run from here on out. He might play more than 10 minutes, but it's clear he's not getting the starring role envisioned a few months back.
The team will have to decide what to do after that, and according to Wojnarowski, it's either going to be Carlisle or Rondo. The two sides have all but given up on working together, so Dallas will have to choose between one of the league's brightest coaches and a veteran point guard who's struggled in his time with the team.
It seems hard to picture the Mavericks letting Carlisle go, which puts the long-term picture for Rondo and the team on shaky ground. Most likely, Rondo will do what he planned before the trade and seek out a lucrative deal as an unrestricted free agent. The Mavericks presumably won't offer him a chance to return, or at least won't give him the money he would've previously expected.
What's certain is that everyone involved should be disappointed it got to this point, because Rondo is a talented player and the Mavericks are a smart organization. Sometimes things just don't work out, though, and this seems to be one of those cases.
There are many factors to consider, including that crab legs are good and that not spending money is good.
Jameis Winston has given his side of the story re: that time he boosted crab legs from a Publix. He told Jim Harbaugh, a professional life counselor, that the crabs weren't stolen, but were gifted.
Here's Winston, while Harbaugh makes a face that indicates he thinks crabs are moon rocks:
A week before was my buddy's birthday. We had got a cake, and we met a dude that was inside Publix. And he said, 'Any time you come in here, I got you.' So that day, we just walked out. He hooked us up with that. When I came in to get crab legs, did the same thing. He just gave 'em to me.
The event had legal consequences. Winston had to pay $30 and complete 20 hours of community service. The FSU baseball team suspended him, because it was baseball season.
Many have noted his Harbaugh confession raises NCAA issues.
While accepting free birthday cakes and crab legs are not against NCAA rules, if the NCAA were to investigate and conclude that Winston received the celebratory dessert or the animal's legs due to his status as an amateur athlete, it could punish the likely No. 1 NFL Draft pick by barring him from playing football for free (or by making him pay for them, uh, again)!
If it could establish FSU was in on the snacks scheme, the Noles might have to vacate their many spine-tingling victories from the 2014 season, which would make it look as if they did nothing all year but goof around in the Rose Bowl!
However, let this be a learning experience for all of us. There is a single lesson I want to impart to you young people.
If someone offers you crab legs for free, you should accept them. Why?
Because crab legs are delicious to eat, and being given them for free means you do not have to give any of your money for them.
Money is good to keep, just as crab legs are good to eat.
I've brought my daughter into the room as I explain this. This is good info for everybody.
See, I'm a former Publix employee. (Which means I have personnel questions, seeing as I've never met anyone cross-trained in both bakery and seafood, but that's neither my problem nor Jameis'.) I can tell you the real story of how these transactions usually work. In my experience, when people want crab legs (which they always do; crab legs are good), they have to pay money for them.
I've seen it happen and have even paid my own money for crab legs.
PRO: They get crab legs.
CON: They have less money.
Some say Winston should have declined those crab legs that were free. I fail to see the logic in turning down free crab legs, an act that means either not eating crab legs or not keeping money.
It would also be rude.
Few people have ever offered me crab legs for free. This has happened at parties and what have you, sure, and not in a grocery story and not due to me being the most popular person on campus. But every single time that someone has offered me crab legs for free, I have taken them and eaten them.
I recommend you do the same.
The Oregon offense may have made things easier for the Heisman Trophy winner, but he has the skills to be an NFL success.
Selecting quarterback Marcus Mariota in the 2015 NFL Draft is a dangerous proposition. He's a mobile quarterback with a thin frame. He played in a gimmicky offense at Oregon which gave him plenty of wide open throwing windows.
All of that is mostly true, but not totally true. Oregon’s offense set Mariota up to succeed, and he did. He won the Heisman Trophy last season by throwing for 4,454 yards and 42 touchdowns while completing 68.3 percent of his passes. It allowed him to take advantage of his mobility, evidenced in his more than 2,200 yards and 29 touchdowns running the ball in three seasons with the Ducks.
"This offense leads itself to good decisions because you have clear and defined reads that are determined before the snap," NFL Network's Daniel Jeremiah recently said on an episode of his Move the Sticks podcast. "You have a lot of space to work and a lot of options."
However, Mariota isn't the next Dennis Dixon or Darron Thomas coming out of Oregon. His game is much more complete. Take the running for instance. Mariota's rushing stats lead some to incorrectly say he is a running quarterback. The key difference is eye level. On plays where he runs around, Mariota keeps his eyes up the field and will throw it to a receiver when possible. Other quarterbacks who run drop their eyes quickly and take off.
Take this play, for instance (and try to ignore the penalty on the offensive lineman). The pocket in front of Mariota becomes a complete mess and he’s left with the option to either pull the ball and just run or pull the ball and locate a receiver. From an NFL standpoint, also note the ball placement:
Moving forward, Mariota will have to get used to an offense in the NFL that requires him to play from under center considerably more. At Oregon last season, Mariota was under center on just a handful of plays. It's an issue of which he's fully aware.
"For us it's going to be huddling, I haven't huddled in a while," Mariota said at the NFL Scouting Combine in February. "That will be one thing. It seems like a little detail, but that is kind of a big thing. There's other things as well. Three-, five-, seven-step drops under center."
The NFL game will also require him to read defenses before the snap and make adjustments. He’ll have to locate the middle linebacker. He’ll have to call hot reads based on coverage. Those aren't things he typically did at Oregon.
"Those will be operational things he’ll have to get used to," Stanford head coach David Shaw said on the Rich Eisen Show this week. "What I saw with (Mariota), granted, out from under center, I saw him play action pass. I saw him go from the first to second to third read and dump the ball off to the running back."
Shaw said he spotted some principles of the West Coast offense in Oregon’s play calling, and he’s right. Most pigeonhole the Oregon offense by saying it functions to get the receiver open and make it easier for a quarterback. To do that, a lot of underneath routes are run early – bubbles, screens, slants and short passes over the middle. That opens up the deeper passing game, which is staple of the West Coast offense. The twist is that the Ducks’ offense is faster-paced and features more designed option and run plays from the quarterback.
Still, boiled down, a lot of Oregon’s passing offense is a modified and sped up West Coast. It’s a system created by legendary coach Bill Walsh, perfected by his star quarterback Joe Montana and modified to the current NFL by Mike McCarthy and Aaron Rodgers of the Green Bay Packers.
"A lot of ‘spread offense guys,’ you don’t see that," Shaw said about Oregon using a lot of West Coast principles. "You see them find No. 1, get the ball out or maybe find No. 2. But you don’t see them find the third option or check the ball down."
Still, many NFL teams remain wary of the spread offense. They're especially uncomfortable with quarterbacks who come out of offenses with odd play call cards where the offense looks over to sidelines to get a play. This takes simplification to another level. To a large degree it removes play calling duties from the quarterback and simplifies the game.
"There’s a transition for any college player coming to the NFL. And in Marcus’ case, they run an offense that most teams in the league don’t run," Tampa Bay Buccaneers head coach Lovie Smith said at the combine. "But I’ve seen him scrambling around, making decisions and for the most part making the throws that we’re making in the league. It probably helps a little bit if you’ve been doing more of the same thing you’ll be doing in an NFL game. But a lot of this is about adjustment to the league.’’
At the combine, New York Jets general manager Mike Maccagnan wouldn’t speak specifically about Mariota as a player. But he did voice some concern about spread quarterbacks in general because it’s harder to figure out how they translate to the NFL.
"There are more unknowns with (spread quarterbacks). It’s like anything in life. There’s more uncertainty on how he’s going to be able to develop because you don’t see if happen very often," Maccagnan said. "It’s not anything, per se, with the offense. It’s just you look at him and you don’t see a lot of things on the college tape you put a value on, so you have to speculate about it a little bit."
What teams will put value on with Mariota is how well he continues to manage the pocket. Jeremiah was impressed by how much Mariota improved his pocket awareness.
"It’s going to be a leap for him from Oregon to the next level," Jeremiah said. "But I have seen him do it in small doses, just have to see him do more of it."
From his sophomore to junior seasons, Mariota got more comfortable moving up in the pocket, an area where Florida State’s Jameis Winston clearly has the advantage. Here is Mariota in the national title game against Ohio State showing the type of pocket presence he just didn't have early in his career:
The other big adjustment Mariota will have to make in the NFL is consistently putting the ball in a tight window. For most quarterbacks, that can be the biggest adjustment they face. This is another area where Winston is the superior quarterback prospect right now. But here's a play against Winston's Seminoles last season that shows Mariota can place the ball in a difficult spot. Mariota puts it over linebacker Matthew Thomas but uses enough arm strength to zip the ball in fast enough to not allow future star Jalen Ramsey break on it and make a play on the ball.
Singularly, the largest issue with Mariota is ball security. In three seasons, Mariota had an alarming 27 fumbles. Although not all of them were lost, it's an issue that will have to be corrected straight away.
"One thing, though, that can work against someone like a Marcus Mariota is the fact that he never gives up on football plays. That is something he needs to work on at the next level," Jeremiah said. "He’s trying to make things happen when they aren’t there. A lot of times that can lead to him not only trying to make extra yardage on the ground as a runner, it also can lead to him holding the ball a little bit long at times in the pocket. Because of that, he’s got an issue fumbling."
Look at how loose Mariota carries the ball when the play breaks down. This can unfortunately be seen on several occasions in Oregon's games.
Mariota is far from the perfect quarterback prospect. If he didn't have issues, there wouldn't be such a strong consensus about Winston going first overall in the draft. The thing is, though, many of the issues with Mariota are misconceptions. He's more advanced at this stage as a pocket passer than Colin Kaepernick was coming out of Nevada. He's not as fast to pull the ball and run like Robert Griffin III was coming out of Baylor. His offense at Oregon may not look like an NFL offense with its option plays and fast tempo. But it features so many staples of the West Coast offense – one of the classic schemes of the NFL. If a team that drafts Mariota is willing to employ those principles, they'll get a quarterback who could be ready to play at the next level quicker than people think.
"For any rookie quarterback it's going to be an adjustment stepping up to this new level," Mariota said. "I'm going to continue to absorb as much as I can, learn from all the people I can and do my best in whatever situation I get into."