Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why does BYU struggle on the big stage?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why does BYU struggle on the big stage?

    Serious question: Why is BYU sports so provincial? This is not a troll. It's a serious question.

    BYU has had stretches of domination or dynasty in both the big DI team sports. You could make a case that BYU's basketball tradition is slightly better than utah's if you ignored post-season play. Utah's rising to BCS heights and stellar bowl and vs. top 25 record gives BYU's football tradition a run.

    BYU's football team is 1-20 agaisnt ranked teams, last 21 games. Lavelle Edwards had, to be blunt, a terrible bowl record. In this century BYU has a losing bowl record; BYU underperformed against UCLA last year in the Vegas bowl. BYU's basketball team hasn't won an NCAA playoff game since the early 90's.

    What's the matter with BYU? What are the physiological, psycoligical and societal factors that make for BYU's chronic failures on the big stage?
    When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

    --Jonathan Swift

  • #2
    It's an excellent question and one that I wish I had an answer for.

    In regards to BYU struggling with BCS teams or in big games since Bronco took over, I lay a lot of that at the feet of Robert Anae.

    In most of the big games he has been completely outschemed and outcoached by his counterparts, with a stubborn refusal to adjust when it's called for.

    That's part of it.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think a lot of it in bowl games was that Edwards seemed to treat the game as a reward for a good season and didn't treat the bowl game like any other game.

      Under McBride, Meyer and now Whittingham, the Utes look at a bowl game as another game that is to be played to win. The reward comes after the win.
      "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." - Winston Churchill


      "I only know what I hear on the news." - Dear Leader

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
        Serious question: Why is BYU sports so provincial? This is not a troll. It's a serious question.

        BYU has had stretches of domination or dynasty in both the big DI team sports. You could make a case that BYU's basketball tradition is slightly better than utah's if you ignored post-season play. Utah's rising to BCS heights and stellar bowl and vs. top 25 record gives BYU's football tradition a run.

        BYU's football team is 1-20 agaisnt ranked teams, last 21 games. Lavelle Edwards had, to be blunt, a terrible bowl record. In this century BYU has a losing bowl record; BYU underperformed against UCLA last year in the Vegas bowl. BYU's basketball team hasn't won an NCAA playoff game since the early 90's.

        What's the matter with BYU? What are the physiological, psycoligical and societal factors that make for BYU's chronic failures on the big stage?
        You are so predictable in your sexy trolling. And in your plagiarism.

        http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...4&postcount=11
        Fitter. Happier. More Productive.

        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          LaVell wasn't too concerned about winning bowl games at first. But really, I think his struggles may have just come down to talent. If you look at BYU during the dominant period (79-85) they did alright in their bowl games. Even so, they always seemed to struggle against top teams, and I think that came down to talent. As such, LaVell was always focused on recruiting "speed".

          And frankly, talent, speed, depth, is still a problem for Bronco, particularly on the defensive side. That and like Rocky said, BYU has been flat-out outcoached in big games, which I don't think was often the case during the LaVell years. Case in point: Chow in the 96 Utah game v. Anae in the 08 Utah game.
          "Remember to double tap"

          Comment


          • #6
            Because the Lord is challenging me. The Jazz have that same problem. It seems to be a trend among my favorite sports teams.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by venkman View Post
              LaVell wasn't too concerned about winning bowl games at first. But really, I think his struggles may have just come down to talent. If you look at BYU during the dominant period (79-85) they did alright in their bowl games. Even so, they always seemed to struggle against top teams, and I think that came down to talent. As such, LaVell was always focused on recruiting "speed".
              The data are pretty clear in this regard. LaVell actually didn't do much worse in Bowl Games once you account for schedule strength. BYU had about the same winning percentage for opponents of a similar quality. I posted something similar a long time ago but its probably new to SU. Here is s look at Bowl games during the Lavel glory years and non Bowl games against opponents with year end computer rank in the top 40.

              First the bowl sample: 1980 - 1991

              Code:
                  Variable |       Obs        Mean    Std. Dev.       Min        Max
              -------------+--------------------------------------------------------
                       win |        12    .4583333    .4981025          0          1
                      rank |        12    21.91667    9.189503          8         44
              Comparision: 1980 - 1991
              And now a comparisom sample of opponents with year end massey computer rank of less than 40:

              Code:
                  Variable |       Obs        Mean    Std. Dev.       Min        Max
              -------------+--------------------------------------------------------
                       win |        28    .5178571    .4996692          0          1
                      rank |        28    22.82143    10.87319          3         37
              The average ranking across the groups is very similar, but BYU did win a little bit more frequently in the regular season than for bowl games. However, the difference between the two samples is *not* statistically significant (t-stat = -0.35 so we are not even close to significance). Thus it appears that the best explanation for a relative low bowl game winning perecentage is still that BYU played relative high quality opponents and Bowl games were not unique.

              Also, given the opponent quality the record actually looks pretty good to me on average for both bowl games and the regular season.
              Last edited by pelagius; 12-03-2008, 05:33 PM.

              Comment


              • #8
                Pelagius, I don't really understand your post. I do know this. I lived through much of LaVelle's career in Utah and I recall year after year of bowl losses. Jim McMahon's hail mary broke an embarrassing string of set backs. One year Marc Wilson led an undefeated team into a bowl against some fourth place team and BYU lost on a chip shot doink as time ran out. Even the storied 1984 Michigan game wasn't impressive.

                I agree with you that BYU's record is partially because when it plays in bowls it plays better teams. This coincides with 1-20 against ranked teams. Hence, my original question because other MWC teams have better records against BCS and ranked teams.

                Can you figure out what BYU's BCS ranking would have been in 1984?
                When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                --Jonathan Swift

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                  Pelagius, I don't really understand your post. I do know this. I lived through much of LaVelle's career in Utah and I recall year after year of bowl losses. Jim McMahon's hail mary broke an embarrassing string of set backs. One year Marc Wilson led an undefeated team into a bowl against some fourth place team and BYU lost on a chip shot doink as time ran out. Even the storied 1984 Michigan game wasn't impressive.

                  I agree with you that BYU's record is partially because when it plays in bowls it plays better teams. This coincides with 1-20 against ranked teams. Hence, my original question because other MWC teams have better records against BCS and ranked teams.

                  Can you figure out what BYU's BCS ranking would have been in 1984?
                  Gather round kids, this is a textbook example of how lawyers work. First, he admits he has no clue what Pelagius said. Second, he proceeds to reassert his own argument, suggesting that whatever the hoo-hah pelagius just burped up meant, it wasn't enough to affect his position. Third, he then actually refers to pelagisu' positon as thought he understood it and suggests it merely feeds into his own claim.

                  Bravo. Very nice.


                  For the record, I didn't understadn it either, and I still think I'm right about everything, too.
                  PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                    Pelagius, I don't really understand your post. I do know this. I lived through much of LaVelle's career in Utah and I recall year after year of bowl losses. Jim McMahon's hail mary broke an embarrassing string of set backs. One year Marc Wilson led an undefeated team into a bowl against some fourth place team and BYU lost on a chip shot doink as time ran out. Even the storied 1984 Michigan game wasn't impressive.

                    I agree with you that BYU's record is partially because when it plays in bowls it plays better teams. This coincides with 1-20 against ranked teams. Hence, my original question because other MWC teams have better records against BCS and ranked teams.

                    Can you figure out what BYU's BCS ranking would have been in 1984?
                    I think he means BYU lost when they faced superior opponents. I think BYU rarely beats themselves or has let down games. When they lose it's usually because the other team is better. (At least during the LaVell years. I think they had better coaching back then.)

                    The Utes, OTOH are usually better than their record indicates. But they have a couple of brain fart games and lose to chumps, thus having a lower conference ranking, thus getting an easier bowl opponent. When they're back on top of their game for the bowl they cruise past a weaker opponent.
                    "Remember to double tap"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                      Can you figure out what BYU's BCS ranking would have been in 1984?
                      I don't know for sure but I think I can do a back of the envelope guess (once again I have basically done this before). They would have mostly likely been either 2nd in the BCS or third before the Bowl game. The final 1984 AP poll before bowl games (12/4/84) can actually be found at the following:

                      http://www.soonerstats.com/fb/polls/...m?APPollID=587

                      Oklahoma was #2 in the AP and I believe #2 in the coaches but I don't have a link for that. Let's just assume Oklahoma would get an invite for sure. Therefore we just need to figure out if BYU would beat out #3 Florida, #4 Washington, and #5 Nebraska for the last spot. BYU would get the invite over Florida because Florida was on probation. Let's Consider whether they would get the nod over Washington. Since there is no Harris Poll I will use the AP in place of it.

                      BYU AP Score = 1091.5/1140 = 0.957
                      Washington AP Score = 963/1140 = 0.845

                      This is based on the total number of votes possible (you can figure it out from the number of first place votes) and the votes BYU or Washington received.

                      BYU Coaches Score = 0.957
                      Washington Coached Score = 18/20 = 0.90

                      I don't have the coaches poll so I will just assume BYU got the same fraction of votes as in the AP poll. Washington probably did better in the coaches poll since Florida would be excluded by the coaches. I'll just assume they got all 3rd place votes behind BYU and Oklahoma.

                      Suppose Washington ended up 3rd on average in the computer polls (behind Florida and Oklahoma) then their BCS rating would be:

                      Washington Rating = (0.845 + 0.9 + 0.9)/3 = 0.882

                      BYU would have needed an average computer ranking better than about 5.36 to beat Washington for the slot. Pretty good chance they would have made it. Its possible they would have ended up 3rd and not second but the computer rankings liked BYU that year. For example, the massey W/L ranking for that year was 3rd after taking out the ineligible Florida (at the end of the year but the Michigan wouldn't have helped much). Computers like BYU in 84 because almost all the teams with tough schedule lost a lot. Wahington, for example, had about the same SOS as BYU.
                      Last edited by pelagius; 12-03-2008, 05:29 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                        Pelagius, I don't really understand your post. I do know this. I lived through much of LaVelle's career in Utah and I recall year after year of bowl losses. Jim McMahon's hail mary broke an embarrassing string of set backs. One year Marc Wilson led an undefeated team into a bowl against some fourth place team and BYU lost on a chip shot doink as time ran out. Even the storied 1984 Michigan game wasn't impressive.
                        The post aint that complicated ... I am sure you can figure it out. Also, I'm glad you think your memory of a team you disliked is superior to objective measures like actual winning percentage and opponent quality as measured by MOV based computer rankings.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by pelagius View Post
                          The post aint that complicated ... I am sure you can figure it out. Also, I'm glad you think your memory of a team you disliked is superior to objective measures like actual winning percentage and opponent quality as measured by MOV based computer rankings.
                          PIt bulls bite. SU pontificates. It is in their nature and cannot be denied.
                          PLesa excuse the tpyos.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by creekster View Post
                            PIt bulls bite. SU pontificates. It is in their nature and cannot be denied.
                            Some of the problem is the time period. Its BYU best bowl game time period. Its BYU's best time period for everyhing, however. The point isn't that BYU was great from 80-91. The point is that LaVell's teams didn't perform anomalous in Bowl games. They lost at about the same frequency in Bowl games as they did in regular season games once one controls for opponent quality. Changing the time period lowers the overall winning percentage of both sample groups but the relative winning percentage ratio actually shrinks.

                            I have no desire to argue with SU about the greatness of BYU.
                            Last edited by pelagius; 12-03-2008, 05:46 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by pelagius View Post
                              I have no desire to argue with SU about the greatness of BYU.
                              Kind of like arguing about religion, we'd run out of things to say.
                              When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.

                              --Jonathan Swift

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X