Hope you weren't searching for closure on the unfair catch (I just love calling it that). Randy Edsall wasn't going to talk about it. Any thoughts on whether the officials blew the call, or made the right call, or whether Taylor faked the play or just went when he didn't hear the whistle is going to have to wait.
Edsall didn't want to talk about that, or the possible muff punt off the arm of Carter that was called downed at the 16 instead of a turnover at the Cardinals' 1.
Here is what Randy Edsall said. He also said he hasn't talked to Larry about it.
Citing league process for complaints about officials, Edsall said he would go to the Big East and let them take care of any official reactions.
Is it a fair or unfair play? I haven't heard anyone official say is it or not. That doesn't inspire confidence in the veracity of the result.
That stonewall actually clouded what I believe, and Edsall does, the real story. The Huskies rally from 17-7 down to win a game and get bowl eligible.
But you can't get to that point however until you take care of the fair/unfair catch. There are still questions. I'll try Tuesday.
Edit: Just edited out some opinion and extraneous venting.
Almost forgot: Some other nuggets.
Lawrence Green played for LaMagdelaine who left with an injury. As per new rules, there will be no injury reports. LaMegdelaine could play this week, or he could not.
6 comments:
John...I enjoy reading your blog but I have one question? Is this a surprise that RE responded this way?
Does it really matter what he thinks? Haven't we had enough of it already? Everyone saw what happened. LT took advantage of the rule, even though the ref should have called an invalid fair catch, and got away with it.
The refs blew the muffed punt call.
What more needs to be said. Badly officiated game. UConn won with a great 4th quarter comeback.
If all you reporters get in a peeing match with RE you're going to lose. Why bother?
USF is all that's important right now.
You are right to some extent. I was here to edit the blog post, and will do so.
But, the Sunday teleconference is designed to give a day after perspective on the game. It is backwards looking not forward looking by nature. That is for Tuesday.
When you say after the game that I haven't see the play so I can't comment, then on Sunday say no comment, it produces friction.
In many ways you can't get past it for that reason.
I was looking for his opinion and take on a controversial play that had a big impact on the second half. It was such an unusual and controversial play, it begs some more closure.
I don't think his take on the play is too much to ask.
john,
why vent to the world about what you think about the program and then edit your comments afterward when the rest of us at the boneyard point them out?
you've got to stick to your guns, no matter what they say. we enjoy teh way you write and the way you enlighten us from what HCRE says, and while you may be mistaken on trying to pull him out of his shell and try to get him to talk about stuff he doesnt want to talk about, thats fine too.
of course, i hope to see quite a bit this week about sherman's play. that kid got stuck in an unfortunate situation with davis down and played really, really well for a freshman!
Fair response John on the nature of Sundays vs Tuesday's calls.
But I say again...you guys seems shocked at how RE responds in situations like this. Do you guys expect him to say "LT was wrong and I'm going to make sure he never does it again" or "LT should know better...we got away with one...such is life"?
As fans we have accepted RE's way in terms of his responses to difficult situations. We just wish the state reporters would.
By the way...give me the name of a head coach who would respond any different and what could that reponse possibly be.
Maybe Lou Saben?....Charlie Weiss?....doubt it.
I appreciate your honest response and look forward to more from you.
I am very guarded about my opinions generally. I am a writer, and I try to stick to finding the truth and having an informed opinion if it is needed.
If it is game related or even UConn football related, I think I have been around enough to give at least a coherent take on the team.
The blog was created to try and give an inside look at the beat. It is a mixture of opinion, tidbts, and general flavor of the beat.
I want to bring the beat to the computer screen. At least that is the corny noble goal.
I don't like being injected into the story. Once my name gets into the story, or become part of the story, I lose standing and credibility. I like to be a little more anonymous (which is why I dragged the feet on the blog).
I just want to be overly careful of that. I wish Randy was more candid, but it is his right to not talk. IN this case, I'll let readers make their own assumptions from there.
UConn was dead in the water in the game until that play happened. On the flipside, Louisville lost its cool..which short term added to its agressiveness, but long term wore them down and cost them in the end. To say that this play didn't change the complection of the game is ignorant for anyone who is a fan of college football. College football is a game of momentum. This play woke up UConn in a way few other plays could have.
BTW, I have yet to see a replay of the ball hitting Pat Carter's arm on that punt that would lead me to say it 100% conclusively hit him, and that is what it would have taken to overturn that call on the field.
Post a Comment