Our first two plays are our best indication of the strategy of the offensive game plan. They attacked the edges with the pass game.

What is the strength of the UMass defesnse?  Their CB.  What is their weakness?  The run game. 

So, 2nd and 10 is a standard run down to make a manageable third down.  We come out with an obvious pass formation - two recievers stacked to either side, no blocking back, and no TE.  We throw it to the outside - hard to tell if it was the deep man or the short man because the throw was bad, but the designed play call was to the outside either way.  No motion to read the defense.

Given the second down formation and call, how can anyone legitimately say that the gameplan was to run the ball?  It was clearly to throw the ball to the outside.  Given that we were attacking the strength of their defense and ignoring how successful Squally was the last two games, how can anyone conclude anything other than it was a bad offensive strategy from the get-go?

The players were clearly lacking in execution, but the loss came in the first half when we didn't run it down their throats, and force the strategic advantage.  That is purely on the coaches, who once again had a really, really bad strategy. Bad QB play doesn't matter as much if we are running for 300 yards.

Go Cougs!!!!!