Yale Daily News

Updated: Friday, July 4, 2008 at 8:35am

The News will resume publication in August. Check back for online updates.

All told, Siedlecki has been solid

  • Print
  • Write the Editor
Published Wednesday, November 28, 2007
I’m going to be honest with you: When I first started writing this story, it wasn’t going to be pretty. The gist of it was going to be a full criticism of Yale football coach Jack Siedlecki’s failure during the 124th edition of The Game, much like Tuesday’s News’ View (“The Game leaves Elis embarrassed”).
#1 By (Anonymous) 6:20am on November 28, 2007

Seriously?!! Out for the season with a broken toe? Seriously?!!!

#2 By (Anonymous) 3:57pm on November 28, 2007

Thoughtful article. My position on ALL coaches is that it takes TALENT to be a winner. I believe Murphy & Bagnoli get the best talent in the Ivy League. It's a tight race between Brown, Yale & Princeton who pick up the rest.

Jack has shown an annoying history of not being a winner of the "big ones". 4 & 12 against Penn; we all know the failures against Harvard; he could never beat Williams when at Amherst.

He's not perfect, but I think he's done as well at Yale as anyone could do. Coaches don't play the game, the kids do. And when they fail, it isn't always the coaching. Most honest players will admit that's true.

John Ricks, Fan

#3 By (Anonymous) 3:01pm on November 30, 2007

Talent is most certainly not the issue here. Over the last eight years Yale has arguably had some of the most talented players in the league, especially on the offensive side of the football (Eric Johnson, Joe Walland, Alvin Cowan, Nate Lawrie, Rob Carr, Jeff Mroz, Mike Mcleod, Rory Hennessey, Ed McCarthy). There is a slight disparity in the talent between the top schools in the league (Harvard, Penn, Yale, Princeton and perhaps Brown) and those at the bottom (Cornell, Columbia and Dartmouth)but lack of talent is not an excuse for Siedlecki's inability to be competitive with the likes of Penn and Harvard.

The play calling against Harvard, as has been the case in most big games, was conservative and lacked creativity. Additionally, since Siedlecki refused to throw the ball all season, the Eli's were ill prepared to mount any sort of come back against the Crimson once they fell behind early.

The bottom line is that losing 5 of the last 6 to Harvard and compiling a record that is equally unimpressive against Penn is unacceptable when Yale clearly has the talent to compete.

The hope of completing an undefeated 10-0 season and capturing and Ivy Title created an electric atmostphere heading into the H/Y weekend. It is incomprehensible that Siedlecki was unable to prepare his team for a game of this magnitude. Consequently, many of those who made the journey back to New Haven with high hopes left in disappointment and humiliation.

Brian '02

#4 By (Anonymous) 3:10pm on November 30, 2007

Anybody is going to lose big games over the course of their career as a coach. However, it is the fashion in which Yale lost that was most disconcerting to me. Coming into the game with a superior record and I believe, a more talented team, one would expect a competitive game at the very least not a 37-6 blowout.

#5 By (Anonymous) 12:31am on December 1, 2007

I don't know what game everyone was watching, but I obviously saw a completely different game from everyone. The team was a very talented team. Yes, Siedlecki adjusting his play-calling style and being more flexible would have been a big boost to our offense, but I do not know if we realistically had a chance in this game. This was a faster, more physical team than us. Their defense was incredible. Yes it was an electrifying atmosphere heading into The Game, but there was no doubt who the better team was. It was unfortunate considering how much success our team had this season that it all had to end this way. But the truth is that Harvard's team was more physical and had speed unlike any the team had seen on their defensive side. But the offense's inability to score or produce was not the reason the team lost. Coach Siedlecki's playcalling was not the reason we lost. The defense, which had been our strength all season, and in fact all of last season too, was the reason we lost. Harvard's offense outplayed us in every facet of the game. Much like last year's game vs. Princeton, Harvard had an offensive strategy that we did not know how to combat. The zone defense was poorly designed maybe, but Harvard was able to exploit a defense that no other team had been able to up to this point. In fact, Harvard's QB looked more like Tom Brady than an Ivy League QB as he picked apart the Yale defense by taking what was given to him. The protection up front was unbelievable as Harvard's QB had all day to find someone open. Yes, it is disappointing the season ended this way, but a superior Harvard team, not Coach Siedlecki cost Yale it. Maybe next year...

Add Comment

You are not logged in. We do allow posting without registration, but we encourage you to register or log in to enjoy full access to our comments features!