What were you thinking.....honestly...

[YOhio]

Rule # 1: Never apologize for anything that is funny.

You've probably never been put in that situation.

[U-Ute]

Wrong fucking thread.

http://www.style.org/unladenswallow/

Sorry. I forgot to add: I picked BYU to be 7-5.

That should make it relevant.

[Goatnapper'96]

You've probably never been put in that situation.

Wrong fucking thread!

[woot]

Most of my sentiments have been well-expressed by others here and myself elsewhere, but I do have a question for those who have been to games:

Given the pretty good offensive line that quite often has allowed Heaps to sit forever in the pocket, are our receivers really not getting open? Unless the secondary is incredibly talented, it's just not possible to cover even a bad receiver for longer than a few seconds. The MTN style of maintaining a tight zoom on the ball (or at least who the stupid camera operator thinks has the ball) makes it hard to make such determinations, but has anyone noticed what is going on? Surely the receivers can't be so terrible as to not get open even after 5+ seconds?

Maybe the receivers really are that bad, but surely some of it has to be on Heaps for not finding the open guys, in addition to so often missing them when he does see them.

[LA Ute]

Hey, the thread is great but if those two want to play irrelevant grab-ass they can do it through boardmail. It's a BYU thread and yet you were the first to respond to DDD's bump and then these two jump in. (If you can't tell my team is in the midst of a complete colon cleansing of which for some reason I feel a part.)

I apologize for being Curt. He's a jerk.

I am 100% for a rule that anyone who takes a BYU or a Utah thread and starts talking about the "other" school should be severely chastized, mocked, ridiculed, mortified, and so on. I also think you should be in charge of enforcing that rule.

[Blueintheface]

I am 100% for a rule that anyone who takes a BYU or a Utah thread and starts talking about the "other" school should be severely chastized, mocked, ridiculed, mortified, and so on. I also think you should be in charge of enforcing that rule.

I thought I already was. Thanks for the endorsement. Warthog faced buffoon, etc, etc.

[LA Ute]

I thought I already was. Thanks for the endorsement. Warthog faced buffoon, etc, etc.

Maybe it's just an expectations problem. I thought you would be able to perform better at this level. Maybe you're just not ready yet, or it could be the coaching you've had.

[Coach McGuirk]

Most of my sentiments have been well-expressed by others here and myself elsewhere, but I do have a question for those who have been to games:

Given the pretty good offensive line that quite often has allowed Heaps to sit forever in the pocket, are our receivers really not getting open? Unless the secondary is incredibly talented, it's just not possible to cover even a bad receiver for longer than a few seconds. The MTN style of maintaining a tight zoom on the ball (or at least who the stupid camera operator thinks has the ball) makes it hard to make such determinations, but has anyone noticed what is going on? Surely the receivers can't be so terrible as to not get open even after 5+ seconds?

Maybe the receivers really are that bad, but surely some of it has to be on Heaps for not finding the open guys, in addition to so often missing them when he does see them.

Couple things.

1. The receivers are not getting AS open. The window they are giving him is small in both time and target. I certainly haven't seen guys open like years past. Everyone is playing the receivers tight and not one guy is beating his man at the line.

2. When Heaps does have someone open, he is taking too long to make the throw. Case in point, in I believe the second qtr Ashworth ran a drag route and was open. Had heaps thrown it as Ashworth passed our tackle, Ashworth would have had time to maneuver and the play would have gone for 8-10 yards with just one move. Heaps waited 2 seconds too long and fed Ashworth with just enough time to turn up field and get met with the linebacker sitting in zone. The play went for 1 yard IIRC.

[beelzebabette]

Most of my sentiments have been well-expressed by others here and myself elsewhere, but I do have a question for those who have been to games:

Given the pretty good offensive line that quite often has allowed Heaps to sit forever in the pocket, are our receivers really not getting open? Unless the secondary is incredibly talented, it's just not possible to cover even a bad receiver for longer than a few seconds. The MTN style of maintaining a tight zoom on the ball (or at least who the stupid camera operator thinks has the ball) makes it hard to make such determinations, but has anyone noticed what is going on? Surely the receivers can't be so terrible as to not get open even after 5+ seconds?

Maybe the receivers really are that bad, but surely some of it has to be on Heaps for not finding the open guys, in addition to so often missing them when he does see them.

I don't know. I tried to watch in person Saturday, but they kept handing the friggin' ball off. As I recall, he connected on at least half of his passes, had more tight-end drops, and was only sacked the one time.

EDIT: I agreed with handing the friggin' ball off for clock-management purposes. The above was merely a commentary on the limited opportunities to evaluate his performance in the pocket.

[Goatnapper'96]

Couple things.

1. The receivers are not getting AS open. The window they are giving him is small in both time and target. I certainly haven't seen guys open like years past. Everyone is playing the receivers tight and not one guy is beating his man at the line.

2. When Heaps does have someone open, he is taking too long to make the throw. Case in point, in I believe the second qtr Ashworth ran a drag route and was open. Had heaps thrown it as Ashworth passed our tackle, Ashworth would have had time to maneuver and the play would have gone for 8-10 yards with just one move. Heaps waited 2 seconds too long and fed Ashworth with just enough time to turn up field and get met with the linebacker sitting in zone. The play went for 1 yard IIRC.

I am with this, from what I have seen. BYU's receivers are not getting glaringly open. They are not real athletic, but they are adequate IF a few other aspects would come into play:

1.) Safeties having to respect a tight end in the middle of the field.

2.) Significantly improved timing between the qb and recievers. John Beck's receivers were not always real wide open, but he knew when to deliver the ball because he understood when his window of opportunity would come. I don't think Heaps has mastered that yet.

I am not saying the wr are playing well, but I really think the biggest impediment to a solid passing game this year is Heaps not knowing when and to where he should throw the ball. I can only imagine how confused he would be if BYU had a complex-more-than-4-route offense.

I think this crew will be really good in 2012 and could be good next year if BYU could find one playmaker to stretch the field.

[SeattleUte]

I have been reading, listening to, and participating in various discussions re: the state of BYU football right now and I was wondering how the pulse of CUF would answer....

Many seem to be in either panic mode or, at the very least, despair/shock over the team's current record. Admittedly, the outlook for this season looks dim at best.

I referenced before that SC fans are having a difficult time with the fact that the team is not competing for a national championship in the coming seasons, yet the writing was clearly on the wall.

I am seeing some similarities now amongst BYU fans. Everyone knew this was going to be a rebuilding year. Everyone knew BYU had lost the core and heart of the team....over the past couple of seasons, Max, Collie, Pitta, Unga et al... Everyone knew that Riley can't throw a deep ball and everyone knew that Jake Heaps was going to be a true Freshman.

So what were your honest expectations going into this season? Does the shock/panic indicate that many ignored the writing on the wall? Is 1-4 really that shocking? Is a 6 win season that unbelievable?

For my part, I knew we would not compete for a conference championship, let alone anything more glamorous than that. I hoped, yes...but I knew hope would be futile. I guess I did buy into the Kool-Aid a bit in that I assumed that we would NOT lose to teams like Utah State. Losing to FSU on the road I can understand, but I thought we would handle schools like Reno and USU. Granted, UNR is having a great and unexpected season, but that is not an excuse.

Having gone through the Matt Barkley drama, I can honestly say that I never expected Heaps to go undefeated, but I did expect him to lay a foundation for a solid future. True freshman generally can't win all your games for you. Thus far, I am actually really pleased with Heaps. He has a lot of work to do, but he has the tools.

I was thinking we would win approx 7 games. I was obviously off on that. I am thinking we will likely win around 5 games now. Interestingly, that may be enough to go a bowl this year...a sad commentary on the state of the college football bowl system.

Okay, I will be honest. I've been saying for years that Bronco is a lucky charlatan. Apparently he's not a crappy coach. He can deploy in a reasonably competent way elite skill players and a bunch of less talented players with huge hearts and more self discipline and maturity than your average testosterone engorged college football player. But he's not special, and he's been very blessed with some really special skill players mostly if not wholly recruited by his predecessor. Never has a football coach owed so much to a few football players. But eventually the Peter Principle kicks in and that is what is happening here. I also think his wont for tolerating or promoting scandalous leaks about his assistants is reprehensible. The guy likes to pass the buck.

I was with a rabid BYU fan recently, and, in my halting unschooled way I explained my theory of how Whit takes these two star players, increasingly three and four star players, keeps them around for five years or so, and after 2-3 years of hearing not boo about them they emerge as stars, often in positions different than for which they were recruited. To his credit, this BYU fan, who is much more knowleadgable in this field than I, and who is normally pretty blue eyed, agreed that Whit's record of "coaching up the talent" is much more impressive than Bronco's. At BYU, players tend to come in, and they make a big splash early, or too often they just never attain their original promise. But BYU needs to coach up its talent more than Utah, with the narrow recruiting base and not being a BCS school. Barring another string of fantastic luck I give Bronco two years max. I bet he retires; no one will have to push him out the door, he's so loaded with false pride.

[Coach McGuirk]

Okay, I will be honest. I've been saying for years that Bronco is a lucky charlatan. Apparently he's not a crappy coach. He can deploy in a reasonably competent way elite skill players and a bunch of less talented players with huge hearts and more self discipline and maturity than your average testosterone engorged college football player. But he's not special, and he's been very blessed with some really special skill players mostly if not wholly recruited by his predecessor. Never has a football coach owed so much to a few football players. But eventually the Peter Principle kicks in and that is what is happening here. I also think his wont for tolerating or promoting scandalous leaks about his assistants is reprehensible. The guy likes to pass the buck.

I was with a rabid BYU fan recently, and, in my halting unschooled way I explained my theory of how Whit takes these two star players, increasingly three and four star players, keeps them around for five years or so, and after 2-3 years of hearing not boo about them they emerge as stars, often in positions different than for which they were recruited. To his credit, this BYU fan, who is much more knowleadgable in this field than I, and who is normally pretty blue eyed, agreed that Whit's record of "coaching up the talent" is much more impressive than Bronco's. At BYU, players tend to come in, and they make a big splash early, or too often they just never attain their original promise. But BYU needs to coach up its talent more than Utah, with the narrow recruiting base and not being a BCS school. Barring another string of fantastic luck I give Bronco two years max. I bet he retires; no one will have to push him out the door, he's so loaded with false pride.

What question are you honestly answering?

[SeattleUte]

What question are you honestly answering?

As I understood the call of the question (granted the post was kind of unfocused), it was what were our respective expectations for BYU this year. I have expected a year like this one for a while. Actually, I expected it in Mad Max's sophomore year. But hey, Mad Max is a one of of a kind guy. A very special quarterback. Just ask Mike Holmgren how important that is. Some coaches can only do special things with special quarterbacks. Apparently Bronco is one of them.

[LA Ute]

Okay, I will be honest. I've been saying for years that Bronco is a lucky charlatan. Apparently he's not a crappy coach. He can deploy in a reasonably competent way elite skill players and a bunch of less talented players with huge hearts and more self discipline and maturity than your average testosterone engorged college football player. But he's not special, and he's been very blessed with some really special skill players mostly if not wholly recruited by his predecessor. Never has a football coach owed so much to a few football players. But eventually the Peter Principle kicks in and that is what is happening here. I also think his wont for tolerating or promoting scandalous leaks about his assistants is reprehensible. The guy likes to pass the buck.

I was with a rabid BYU fan recently, and, in my halting unschooled way I explained my theory of how Whit takes these two star players, increasingly three and four star players, keeps them around for five years or so, and after 2-3 years of hearing not boo about them they emerge as stars, often in positions different than for which they were recruited. To his credit, this BYU fan, who is much more knowleadgable in this field than I, and who is normally pretty blue eyed, agreed that Whit's record of "coaching up the talent" is much more impressive than Bronco's. At BYU, players tend to come in, and they make a big splash early, or too often they just never attain their original promise. But BYU needs to coach up its talent more than Utah, with the narrow recruiting base and not being a BCS school. Barring another string of fantastic luck I give Bronco two years max. I bet he retires; no one will have to push him out the door, he's so loaded with false pride.

As interesting as your post is, SU, and as much as I love you, I think "lucky charlatan" is a bit over the top. The guy is in his first HC gig and had 4 straight 10-win seasons. His personal idiosyncrasies aside, my impression is that he is a good man doing pretty doggone well in a difficult and truly unique head coaching situation.

Then again, maybe I've been sipping the blue Kool-Aid around here a bit too much.

[SeattleUte]

As interesting as your post is, SU, and as much as I love you, I think "lucky charlatan" is a bit over the top. The guy is in his first HC gig and had 4 straight 10-win seasons. His personal idiosyncrasies aside, my impression is that he is a good man doing pretty doggone well in a difficult and truly unique head coaching situation.

Then again, maybe I've been sipping the blue Kool-Aid around here a bit too much.

I forgot to mention that he has beaten a whole lot of crappy teams.