What do you think the coaches are doing wrong wrt to QB situation?

[jay santos]

poll to follow

[All-American]

Wow, i disagree with each of these.

[jay santos]

Wow, i disagree with each of these.

Oh geez, I thought I put in enough to cover everyone. What would you put?

[TripletDaddy]

Basically all your choices seem to be ex post facto observations that do little to identify a future solution.

I thought the choices were going to be more like "hire a QB coach ASAP," or "stop having jake through out routes and focus more on short screens" or stuff like that.

[All-American]

Oh geez, I thought I put in enough to cover everyone. What would you put?

I'm closest to agreeing with the "heaps is the better QB but is being poorly coached" option, but I'm not certain that Heaps comes out on top after an analysis of the assets and liabilities of both QBs which coaching may not be able to fundamentally change.

[jay santos]

Basically all your choices seem to be ex post facto observations that do little to identify a future solution.

I thought the choices were going to be more like "hire a QB coach ASAP," or "stop having jake through out routes and focus more on short screens" or stuff like that.

Yes, so in this case you would choose between choice 7 and 8, depending on which QB you think is better or would be better right now given better coaching.

[jay santos]

Coaching can always be better. But I generally don't think the coaches are primarily to blame for anything, so I put the first option.

I also put the last option because I think if you have four guys in the program, and two of them (Larks and Munns) appear to be completely worthless, one of them (Heaps) is a bust, and one of them (Nelson) maybe should never have been recruited in the first place, there's at least a little blame on the coaches for not getting the right QB's in the program.

[TripletDaddy]

Yes, so in this case you would choose between choice 7 and 8, depending on which QB you think is better or would be better right now given better coaching.

Right, but the question asks what the coaches are doing wrong. The choices seem to be geared toward which QB may be better or worse.

[jay santos]

Right, but the question asks what the coaches are doing wrong. The choices seem to be geared toward which QB may be better or worse.

Just vote for 7 or 8.

[TripletDaddy]

Coaching can always be better. But I generally don't think the coaches are primarily to blame for anything, so I put the first option.

I also put the last option because I think if you have four guys in the program, and two of them (Larks and Munns) appear to be completely worthless, one of them (Heaps) is a bust, and one of them (Nelson) maybe should never have been recruited in the first place, there's at least a little blame on the coaches for not getting the right QB's in the program.

You can't fault the coaches for bringing Heaps into the program. You choose the next Jake Heaps every time. No question. he looked great in HS. I agree on Lark and Munns. You bring in 2 guys that aren't good enough to literally take one snap in a real game? Something is up with that.

Nelson is interesting. You pass on him originally yet go back to him later...and he proves to have great utility in certain areas. So how did the coaches not see that the first time?

[jay santos]

You can't fault the coaches for bringing Heaps into the program. You choose the next Jake Heaps every time. No question. he looked great in HS. I agree on Lark and Munns. You bring in 2 guys that aren't good enough to literally take one snap in a real game? Something is up with that.

Nelson is interesting. You pass on him originally yet go back to him later...and he proves to have great utility in certain areas. So how did the coaches not see that the first time?

On Nelson: I think a legitimate point could be the following:

We know what Nelson is. He has no arm. He can run around make things happen. He's a leader. He's a great QB for Utah State. But he's capped at a certain level. He'll never be a great BYU QB.

So why even put him in the program? And why invest so much into him?

Basically the issue is we had no contingency plan for Heaps.

[lambdacoug]

I think Heaps has the *potential* to be the better QB, but right now Nelson is the better QB. With better QB coaching Heaps, Lark and Munns would be better off. Nelson could be an asset pretty much anywhere on the field, he's the kind of guy that is recruited as a QB because he wants to be QB, but then is moved to the defense where his athletic ability and knowledge of offenses can be a great asset.

[jay santos]

I'm expecting to see a lot of #2 or #3 options eventually. I'm curious to see which gets more.

[smokymountainrain]

I'd like to see Lark get a chance, but that doesn't mean I think Nelson should have been benched in favor of him in the TCU game.

After watching a lot of college football this year and this past week in particular, each week it's becoming painfully obvious what the major issue is with BYU's QB play and I'm thinking it's not Heaps or Nelson. Sure they are part of the issue, but I think there are bigger issues at hand...

BYU's running game stinks. This makes it extremely hard to play QB. You watch Kellen Moore, Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson and almost every other successful QB, their job is made so much easier because they play for teams with exellent running games. When the defense has to worry so much about the run, it makes throwing the ball a piece of cake. To compare Heaps or Nelson to these guys is apples to oranges. BYU can't consistently recruit top level talent at RB and their O-line is subpar in run blocking.

BYU's receivers don't get open like other teams receivers do. I think there are a couple reasons for this. Generally, they simply aren't as athletic as they are at places like USC, Stanford, Baylor, Ok St, Oklahoma and even Boise. Watching Case Keenum on Thursday, that guy is throwing to open receivers all game. Second, the running game - again, when the defense has to focus on the run, it makes life easier on the WRs.

Run after catch at BYU is virtually non-existant. This is another problem when your receivers don't get open and don't have elite athletes at that position. I think I heard Sammy Watkins had something like 600+ YAC going into week 9. That has to be more than the entire BYU team. I wish there were a reliable stat on YAC, because BYU has to be dismal. In OT last night, Barkley throws a little 6-7 yard crossing route from the 25, to the freshman - #9 - and he damn near turns the thing into a TD, if not for stepping out of bounds at the 4. That doesn't happen at BYU.

Doman doesn't call a good game (yet???). This is where schools like Boise and Houston stand out against BYU as well. Based on the play calling, those teams are so much tougher to defend than BYU. Not only are the receivers able to get open better and in Boise's case, the running game so much better, but it's crazy how many times against those teams the defense gets confused and guys are running uncovered to the endzone. You just underthrow the guy to be sure he can get it and it turns into a TD. BYU's scheme is easy to defend.

I'll echo the sentiment that was mentioned in another thread. If you are a top QB with options, don't touch BYU with a ten foot pole. If you want PT right away, go to Boise or Houston where you have a running game to help out and you will be throwing to open receivers who will make things happen after the catch.

[Surfah]

On Nelson: I think a legitimate point could be the following:

We know what Nelson is. He has no arm. He can run around make things happen. He's a leader. He's a great QB for Utah State. But he's capped at a certain level. He'll never be a great BYU QB.

So why even put him in the program? And why invest so much into him?

Basically the issue is we had no contingency plan for Heaps.

This is the drum I have been beating for awhile now WRT Nelson. I don't understand why the investment in him now. We have a unique opportunity to get a supremely talented QB games reps in games that are little more than a scrimmage and we're wasting it on medical redshirt junior who has shown us everything he can do IMO.

What the coaches have done poorly is not give Jake (and the other guys) more support in the form of a QB coach who can work just with them. As a first time playcaller, Doman has way too much on his plate to assume both roles. I think that has hurt not just the QB situation, but the offense in general.

I think they're investing too much in Nelson who is going to win us the same amount of games that Jake would going forward. I mean that's why the coaches put Nelson in to begin with, right? To win? Is Jake going to lose to Idaho? New Mexico? I thought Hawaii would play more difficult, but they are pretty terrible. And I now think that's a win no matter who starts at QB. Riley has feasted against terrible competition. Anyone propping up Oregon State as any barometer for this BYU team, only needed to watch John Hays defeat them soundly with 62 yards passing.

I think that they could have used Riley more effectively when Heaps was starting. For example against Texas when Jake was moving the ball but struggling once we got close to the redzone I think Riley could have been more effective. Maybe run a Chris Leak/Tim Tebow scheme. The way they used him in the mildcat was useless. As a running threat he's best when a play breaks down, not on designed QB draws when the defense knows you're running that.