Statistics: Posted by BroncoBot — Thu Oct 12, 2017 5:28 pm
Statistics: Posted by snoscythe — Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:34 pm
Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. They are looking at the long game, and it will take some time. I can be patient. I think we will still be bowl elgible...drop Miss. State, but then win at East Carolina. We should easily win San Jose State at home, and by then, hopefully have developed some confidence and go on a roll to finish 7-6, maybe 8-6 after the bowl game if the QBs (Mangum or Critchlow) really start to figure things out. And a non-BCS bowl/playoff bowl was exactly where I expected we would be this year. Now, if we don't go bowling, that will be disappointing, but I fully expect that by next year we will go bowling, and keep building from there. The year after that has a great home slate which would be an opportune time for our pro-style offense led by Critchlow, presumably, to be clicking on all cylinders.Lavell was 7-4 then 5-6. Everyone seems to think is was the other way around. Kalani and Ty are trying to create a program not just win now and pay in the long run (see GC 2001-2004). We need to support our coaches and give them the time and opportunity to build up the program. In another Lavell way, Kalani and Ty are following in his footsteps by trying to implement a unique offense. I read a whole bunch of posts calling for us to go back to the spread. Most college teams have gone to it Okay, so lets run the same offense that nearly all the other teams are running with less talented players. This was exactly the opposite of what made Lavell successful and following Lavell's example is what can make Kalani successful. Every team out there now faces a spread O so most defenses have tons of experience with the schemes. Good luck becoming a dominant program running virtually the same schemes with lesser talented players.
Statistics: Posted by McY — Thu Oct 12, 2017 2:18 pm
Statistics: Posted by Cougarfan87 — Thu Oct 12, 2017 9:01 am
Statistics: Posted by BroncoBot — Wed Oct 11, 2017 10:03 pm
I'll agree that "downward trend" is an understatement if you'll agree that "Killing BYU football" is an overstatement. Then we can meet somewhere in the happy middle.I would -- but failing to diagnose the severity of the problem by calling it a "downward trend" likewise prevents us from correcting the problem.I can generally agree with that (a bit overstated in my opinion, but for the sake of this discussion - let's go with it) We still don't get to blame the "chase for money" or the schedule on the incredible badness that we're seeing on the field. And blaming the wrong thing keeps us from correcting the right thing - wouldn't you agree?Not literally every team experiences a historically bad season following a winning season.Or - more accurately- the article should have the headline "BYU is experiencing a downward trend, like literally every other college football team experiences, even those in conferences."Better, more accurate title: "Independence is Killing BYU Football".
You have to go back to pre-Sheide/Wilson days to find a streak of 13 games without 300 yards passing by BYU or a 5-game losing streak.
This isn't a "downward trend", this is a "elevator cables snapped and the emergency brakes fell off" descent.
ESPN could become BYU's best friend. They want good games with good viewership ... they can put some pressure on conferences/AD's to help work on the schedule ...I think it's a valid point that BYU doesn't have the opportunity to grow in the early season, with some breathing room for mistakes. Would this team be 1-5 if we had played SJSU instead of Utah or Wisconsin?
Also, an extremely valid point that interest in BYU's season tanks drastically after a couple of losses in September, even if to great teams. Not much exciting competition down the stretch and little to play for.
Statistics: Posted by mtnradio — Wed Oct 11, 2017 5:31 pm