What's new
By:

BYU Football 2012

Who would have thought that Oregon St. with a backup QB and Riley Nelson with fracture vertebrae would equal the most high scoring game this season?

I know I certainly was expecting a shootout... Not a 9-3 game... Dominated by defense....
 
No question any offense led by Riley will be lucky to score 3 TDs. Truth be told I'm surprised OSU didn't score more given how much Riley was trying to help them. He is such a weak-armed egotistical punk. He is basically Heaps without a cannon-arm.

I love Bronco and his defense but his Max Coverage was exposed by a strong-armed QB with time hitting those crossing routes. It actually might've worked with more athletic LBs. Maybe a dime package there or something. But clearly the LBs couldn't run with OSU's TEs let alone their WRs. Of course, some of that might be discipline issues. They are good at run defense because they like looking in the backfield and it burned them repeatedly.
 
Oregon State's QB can be example A right now for why you should always see what you have in your QB depth chart in game situations if you're only getting mediocre QB play. Dude was lights out. The coverage wasn't terrific, but from my vantage point there were maybe 2 or 3 completions that wouldn't have happened had the coverage been better, all the rest of the throws were just spot on and he hasn't seen game action in two years.
 
CONAN said:
I don't think I've ever seen a QB at BYU this bad. It's weird.
Click to expand...

Bret Engemann running the option was pretty bad.

But that was more of a problem with the play calling than Bret. Bret was a pocket passer not a runner. I think he could have been a pretty good QB had he been used right.

I can't think of anyone worse than Riley...
 
BYU is going to remain average until they get a superstar passing quarterback. I would say a new coach might help too.
 
CONAN said:
I also noticed Doman has been on the sidelines the last few games instead of in the booth.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I thought that might have been because they were starting Hill. But then I noticed he was there vs. Oregon State as well. Why would that be?
 
bigb said:
Yeah, I thought that might have been because they were starting Hill. But then I noticed he was there vs. Oregon State as well. Why would that be?
Click to expand...

I think he's trying to be like Bronco and be there to fire up the offense a bit. Tough to fire them up from up in the booth.

my 2 cents
 
CONAN said:
I don't think I've ever seen a QB at BYU this bad. It's weird.
Click to expand...
After Bosco, BYU had Lindsley, Jensen and Covey, all so bad that us Cougar fans have selective memory loss until Detmer came along. After Detmer, there were some good QB's, but also several bad ones.
 
There are pros/cons in coaching from the booth versus sideline. I think the booth is where you will see veteran OCs. Doman aint that.
 
The Thriller said:
Bret Engemann running the option was pretty bad.

But that was more of a problem with the play calling than Bret. Bret was a pocket passer not a runner. I think he could have been a pretty good QB had he been used right.

I can't think of anyone worse than Riley...
Click to expand...

Proved by the fact that he was on NFL practice squads and was looked at for a possible starter for the Raiders for a couple years.
 
Read an interesting stat on a BYU message board -

Bronco Mendenhall 4-11 against ranked teams, Lavel Edwards 21-21.

Now if that doesn't give you confidence that we are on the brink of ruining Notre Dame's perfect season, I don't know what will.
 
It's an interesting debate I think. Do you judge a guy by what he does against the best teams or his overall body of work? Because BYU has finished most seasons ranked recently despite that stat, but in a perfect world you want a guy that will lead you to meaningful wins too. Being ranked, but having lost your 2 or 3 big games seems kind of hollow. And what if it was reversed? I'm sure there have been numerous coaches whose teams play up to their level of competition and win big games but also play down to their competition that have been canned.

Personally, I like the extremes. I want my team to be very good or very bad so that whatever changes need to be made can be made easily. When you're in that upper middle ground area you might be stuck there for awhile.
 
When it comes down to it, is there any real difference in being 10-3 and ranked in the 20-25 range or being 8-5 and unranked? Personally, I don't see a big difference. Sure, getting that ranking means you're more likely to be ranked at the start of the next season, but that don't mean crap. 10-3 against crap teams doesn't mean anything. If you're 10-3 in the SEC, that's another story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top