Why Wynn now?

[Fiyero]

Yesterday Jordan Wynn's former high school beat San Jose Bellarmine Prep in the finals of the statewide Division 1 championship. Second state title in three years.

See this is why he retracted his soft verbal to Colorado and chose Utah instead: he's used to winning.

[LA Ute]

So nothing. Just a compliment to the U of U program. If I could convince BYU to go that way I would. Eliminate the Honor Code, firesides, missions etc. and fill the staff with Edwards coaching progeny and BYU starts winning National Championships again.

Norm Chow is a Ute. Did LaVell learn from Norm, or did Norm learn from LaVelle? And did LaVelle learn his football at USU in the glory years of that program? If so, and since we are looking at coaching genealogies, does BYU thus owe its success to the great coaches who were at USU back in the day? Or did all football brilliance spring up ex nihilo at BYU, as you seem to be suggesting? Now there's a thread looking for a place to happen!

[EDIT:] There's no doubt BYU in LaVelle's era was an incubator of coaching talent. I'm just pushing back on the idea that it's the place to go for great coaches. Think Doug Scoville and Ted Tollner.)

[All-American]

More to the original point, I wonder how wise it was to put Wynn in.

I guess the decision should be to put in the guy who will give you the wins down the road, provided there is not a huge tradeoff in wins now. Looking at Utah's season, I don't think Cain would have lost any of the games that Wynn won. Neither do I think that Cain could have won against TCU.

I do think that Cain could have beaten BYU. Wynn's number one advantage over Cain was better accuracy and deeper throws, and after that hit he took, he was off on all of them. I think BYU fans were more nervous when Wynn was down than Utah fans were.

If giving Wynn the job over Cain cost Utah the BYU game (and it is arguable that it did), then you have to wonder if it was the right call to put him in. Next year, there may be other games that Wynn lost that Cain might have won, or vice versa. It will all depend upon hindsight and variables, but especially when you consider the lost year of eligibility, there's plenty of reason to believe that this was a bad decision.

[LA Ute]

. . . I think BYU fans were more nervous when Wynn was down than Utah fans were. . . .

If giving Wynn the job over Cain cost Utah the BYU game (and it is arguable that it did). . . .

AA, you are always a reasonable poster but I think the above comments are borderline preposterous (assuming you are making them seriously). BYU fans are much better at analyzing the decisions of their own coaching staff, I think. I may be wrong but I don't think you'll find a single independent and recognized football analyst who thinks that playing Wynn instead of Cain cost Utah that game.

As for your first comment above, it's just rivalry smack, unless BYU fans really were dumb enough to fear Cain's entry into the game. If you'd been following Utah football this season like Ute fans have you'd have plenty of reason to worry more about Cain than Wynn. Now get back to Torts!

[All-American]

AA, you are always a reasonable poster but I think the above comments are borderline preposterous (assuming you are making them seriously). BYU fans are much better at analyzing the decisions of their own coaching staff, I think. I may be wrong but I don't think you'll find a single independent and recognized football analyst who thinks that playing Wynn instead of Cain cost Utah that game.

As for your first comment above, it's just rivalry smack, unless BYU fans really were dumb enough to fear Cain's entry into the game. If you'd been following Utah football this season like Ute fans have you'd have plenty of reason to worry more about Cain than Wynn. Now get back to Torts!

It's winter break. Class is out until January. Chill.

I didn't spend an inordinate amount of time following Utah's season, but what I saw from Cain was an accurate short-range ball with little long-range capabilities, but elusive running skills. Wynn had more accuracy on longer passes, but less running ability. Against BYU, a team that often struggles against mobile quarterbacks, Wynn offered neither accuracy nor a running threat. He threw for less than 200 yards and no touchdowns, with one pick. In a game which was lost by the narrowest of margins, and in which Utah kicked five field goals, is it really "borderline preposterous" to think that Cain's running threat might have been the difference?

[SeattleUte]

I think there is a good chance that if Wynn had not started those last few games he wouldn't have been back. The kid's in a hurry. If Cain had finished as starter, and the Utes had gone 9-3, Wynn would have had four years left but he'd be looking at having to beat our Cain (the incumbant) and Griff Robles for the starting position. Moreover, in this year's recruiting class the Utes have one qb (Blechen) rated more highly than Wynn was, and another one comprably rated (Walker)(he also decomitted at a Big 12 school, one that when he committed had more going for it right now than Colorado, Kansas).

The upshot is that the Utes are well positioned with a talented sophomore incumbant, an experienced rival (Cain), and three strong freshmen, any one of which could wind up the starter 1-2 years hence (even over Wynn). Cain may leave, but as you see, it won't be the end of the world. So Wynn has three instead of four years left. Coaches don't think four years down the road. They don't have the luxery. Here, it's better to have Wynn with some experience as the incumbant. Maybe this even makes it more likely Robles stays. I like the way the future looks better with Wynn having started a few games and showed talent and promise.

Guess what, I doubt Kyle would alter quarterbacking long range plans in order to enhance the odds of beating BYU once in a year where a BCS bowl and conference championship are already out of the question. I really wouldn't want him to. Really, victories over BYU without more don't mean THAT much, at least anymore.

[All-American]

I think there is a good chance that if Wynn had not started those last few games he wouldn't have been back. The kid's in a hurry. If Cain had finished as starter, and the Utes had gone 9-3, Wynn would have had four years left but he'd be looking at having to beat our Cain (the incumbant) and Griff Robles for the starting position. Moreover, in this year's recruiting class the Utes have one qb (Blechen) rated more highly than Wynn was, and another one comprably rated (Walker)(he also decomitted at a Big 12 school, one that when he committed had more going for it right now than Colorado, Kansas).

The upshot is that the Utes are well positioned with a talented sophomore incumbant, an experienced rival (Cain), and three upstarts, any one of which could wind up the starter 1-2 years hence (even over Wynn). Cain may leave, but as you see, it won't be the end of the world. So Wynn has three instead of four years left. Coaches don't think four years down the road. They don't have the luxery. Here, it's better to have Wynn with some experience as the incumbant. Maybe this even makes it more likely Robles stays. I like the way the future looks better with Wynn having started a few games and showed talent and promise.

Guess what, I doubt Kyle would alter quarterbacking long range plans in order to enhance the odds of beating BYU once in a year where a BCS bowl and conference championship are already out of the question. I really wouldn't want him to. Really, victories over BYU without more don't mean THAT much, at least anymore.

So you're saying that Whittingham accepted greater odds of losing a game to his rival to accommodate a kid who is afraid to compete with other recruits and for whom three years as a starting quarterback isn't enough?

If the incoming recruits are better than Wynn, then it was foolish to field a team that was more likely to lose than was the team before the change to placate him. If Wynn IS the future, then it may not have been such a good idea to waste a year of eligibility just to give the kid four more games of experience if he doesn't enhance your chances of winning in those games (unless that experience is enough to be a decisive factor down the road-- another questionable proposition). And if refusing to play him as a true freshman means he doesn't stick around . . . ask us how much we missed Ben Olsen.

[SeattleUte]

So you're saying that Whittingham accepted greater odds of losing a game to his rival to accommodate a kid who is afraid to compete with other recruits and for whom three years as a starting quarterback isn't enough?

If the incoming recruits are better than Wynn, then it was foolish to field a team that was more likely to lose than was the team before the change to placate him. If Wynn IS the future, then it may not have been such a good idea to waste a year of eligibility just to give the kid four more games of experience if he doesn't enhance your chances of winning in those games (unless that experience is enough to be a decisive factor down the road-- another questionable proposition). And if refusing to play him as a true freshman means he doesn't stick around . . . ask us how much we missed Ben Olsen.

First, you don't know squat, by your own admission.

I'm sure Whit had a lot of things in mind when considering whether to start Wynn, and you have no idea what they were. At the end of the day beating BYU come what may was not what it was all about.

Who knows if the recruits are better? I'm saying the future looks brighter, Wynn is better prepared for next year, with a few games under his belt. The rest is just context.

[All-American]

First, you don't know squat, by your own admission.

I'm sure Whit had a lot of things in mind when considering whether to start Wynn, and you have no idea what they were. At the end of the day beating BYU come what may was not what it was all about.

Who knows if the recruits are better? I'm saying the future looks brighter, Wynn is better prepared for next year, with a few games under his belt. The rest is just context.

Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα.

No, I know squat. A very little squat, but enough squat, I believe, to suggest that the question of whether the decision was right or not has not been decisively resolved one way or the other. The effect on THIS season was zero or a net loss. The net gain for the next three seasons must be great enough to outweigh the lost eligibility, and that may or may not turn out to be the case.

In other words, who knows. But certainly the question remains.

I find it odd, parenthetically, that LA Ute would object so strongly to the notion that Cain gave Utah a better shot at beating BYU, which point SU generally concedes.

[SeattleUte]

Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα.

No, I know squat. A very little squat, but enough squat, I believe, to suggest that the question of whether the decision was right or not has not been decisively resolved one way or the other. The effect on THIS season was zero or a net loss. The net gain for the next three seasons must be great enough to outweigh the lost eligibility, and that may or may not turn out to be the case.

In other words, who knows. But certainly the question remains.

I find it odd, parenthetically, that LA Ute would object so strongly to the notion that Cain gave Utah a better shot at beating BYU, which point SU generally concedes.

Someday you will learn that in weighing risks and rewards or cost/benefit conjecturing about four years down the road can't possibly be given much weight regardless of the field. Success requires a kind of a chess game but once you're more than a year out you're speculating. You certainly don't make long range decisions based on something like Wynn's status 3-4 years from now.

I don't concede anything to you. I am ignoring the point for sake of argument. Further, you have very little company in taking the position that Utah was better with Cain. So besides the fact that it's rank speculation from someone who knows next to nothing about the subject, it's also outside the consensus.

About everyone but you agrees Wynn has more promise and the team was more animated and productive with him in there. Statistically, he had a better game than Hall under very trying circumstances. Creekster and HFN among other BYU fans said they were impressed with Wynn. He was a true freshman; of course he made mistakes. But he showed true promise. Really, no one is anxious or concerned about Cain. THAT is closer to the truth than your statement.

[All-American]

Someday you will learn that in weighing risks and rewards or cost/benefit conjecturing about four years down the road can't possibly be given much weight regardless of the field. Success requires a kind of a chess game but once you're more than a year out you're speculating. You certainly don't make long range decisions based on something like Wynn's status 3-4 years from now.

I don't concede anything to you. I am ignoring the point for sake of argument. Further, you have very little company in taking the position that Utah was better with Cain. So besides the fact that it's rank speculation from someone who knows next to nothing about the subject, it's also outside the consensus.

About everyone but you agrees Wynn has more promise and the team was more animated and productive with him in there. Statistically, he had a better game than Hall under very trying circumstances. Creekster and HFN among other BYU fans both said they were impressed with Wynn. He was a true freshman; of course he made mistakes. But he showed true promise. Really, no one is anxious or concerned about Cain. THAT is closer to the truth than your statement.

Seems to me a lot of BYU fans here preferred to face Wynn to Cain:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=13825

It would be a 2 to 1 margin, though this doesn't account for whatever Utah fans who couldn't read the instructions and voted for Wynn. So it's not "rank speculation from someone who knows next to nothing about the subject."

I agree that Wynn shows more promise. All the more reason why it is curious to give up his redshirt.

[DU Ute]

Seems to me a lot of BYU fans here preferred to face Wynn to Cain:

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showthread.php?t=13825

It would be a 2 to 1 margin, though this doesn't account for whatever Utah fans who couldn't read the instructions and voted for Wynn. So it's not "rank speculation from someone who knows next to nothing about the subject."

I agree that Wynn shows more promise. All the more reason why it is curious to give up his redshirt.

So its rank speculation from a whole group of people who knows next to nothing about the subject.

[All-American]

So its rank speculation from a whole group of people who knows next to nothing about the subject.

Frankly, yes. But I would only be suspicious of the person who knows next to nothing about the subject but claims to know the correct answer and that the matter is closed.

Hint: the previous sentence may or may not be referring to Solon.

[SeattleUte]

Frankly, yes. But I would only be suspicious of the person who knows next to nothing about the subject but claims to know the correct answer and that the matter is closed.

Hint: the previous sentence may or may not be referring to Solon.

It can't be referring to me. My modus operandi is to trust the expert we've hired to run the team and not second guess him.

I admit my weakness in analyzing the Utes is that my faith in Wittingham is 100%, and he's a lot better than any other MWC coach except Patterson. I'll remain of that view until the empirical data supports another conclusion.

As an aside, you admit Wynn is better. I'm glad Whit started the better qb who is two years younger.

[All-American]

As an aside, you admit Wynn is better. I'm glad Whit started the better qb who is two years younger.

I did not admit that Wynn is better. I agreed that he shows more promise. There's a difference between what a quarterback gives you now and what he may give you later. Furthermore, it is worth wondering whether the conjecture of what may come years down the road should outweigh deficiencies in what a quarterback brings to the table on the next Saturday. Someday, when you've learned a little about weighing risks and rewards, you may realize that.