It's officially time to panic......

Who knew Temple had the 85 Chicago Bear defense?

It is hard to muster up a lot to say about this absolute stain of a game. All I know is, I have never been embarrassed by the football team. I have been disappointed, like I was against Michigan, but never embarrased. Well, there's a first time for everything.
Temple? You lose to Temple by 14 points? You let Temple dictate the game? There is no excuse. You can say Temple is better than people think, but, since people think they are putrid, that really isn't all that hard to accomplish. It still doesn't make them good.
What I think we have to accept at this point is that Uconn just isn't good. All the hype, all the talk of winning the Big East, doesn't mean anything on the field. Simply put, Uconn looked bad against a very mediocre team and they have problems that don't seem to be going away anytime soon.
There's plenty of blame to go around. Uconn's defense allowed Temple to rip them for 364 yards, 201 of which came on the ground. The tackling, again, was shaky. There were too many times where runners gained extra yards after first and second contact. Also, there were no adjustments made to try and adapt to what Temple was doing on offense. How many screen passes did The Owls throw? All their passes were screen passes, it seemed, yet Uconn was always caught off guard. For all of the accolades thrown at Randy Edsall, the most frustrating thing about the veteran coach is that his teams rarely modify what they are doing, even when the game dictates they should. Uconn got beat time and again on essentially the same type of plays.
Then, you have the special teams play, which remained erratic at best.
But, to me, the major failing of this team is under center.
Zach Frazier isn't good. He might have a strong arm but he throws an ugly, ugly ball that flutters like someone shot it mid-air and has little idea of where it might end up once he releases it. He misses wide-open receivers, makes terrible decisions (with 10 second left in the first half and the ball on the 8-yard line, how do you dump the ball down to a running back, 6-yards away from the end zone?), and just simply doesn't seem to have a feel for the game. The Huskies have a great runner in Jordan Todman and a good running game, but you have to be able to throw the ball a little, and Frazier is incapable of doing anything other than dump down and, occassionally, throw a 20-yarder to a receiver who finds an opening in the defense's zone. In a sport where offensive plays always seem elaborate and creative, Uconn runs a scheme that would bore Frank Gifford to death.
That's the other problem: play calling.
I have no idea if Randy Edsall refuses to change things up or he simply can't because of his quarterback but something has to change because, sitting at home miles and miles away from the game, I can all but predict what Uconn will run, play in and play out, at about an 85% clip. That's just not good.
Edsall has been a golden boy now for a while, justly given credit for helping build this Uconn program into something resembling respectable. His work, and the credit he has earned, even had him on a short list of finalists for the Notre Dame job last year and rumors have been circulating that, if the Rich Rod experiment in Michigan died after this year, Edsall would be getting a call from Ann Arbor.
Well, if you're going to get the accolades, you have to take the slams as well.
Simply put, Uconn isn't playing at a high enough level. Not for where they should be. Not for a program that is supposedly growing. Losing to Temple four or five years ago would be no big deal, but losing now, that's unacceptable. Edsall created this atmosphere and has welcomed it. But, much like Greg Schiano a few years ago at Rutgers, when you ask for expectations, you have to deliver.
Edsall needs to instill something in this team or all that good will, all those expectations, will be dead and gone if the Huskies continue to play at this pathetic level.