Was Taysom Hill the reason we didn't have a 100 yard receiver this year?

[frdbtr]

I was curious to see how many times a receiver had a 100 yard game with Taysom Hill as QB so I went back and looked.

2012:
Utah state game: Cody Hoffman 114yards (that was a pretty good defense by the way)

2013: 5out of 13 games 1 99 yard game
Utah:Cody Hoffman 108
Utah State: Mitch Matthews 112
Georgia Tech: Cody Hoffman had 99 (not 100 but really close)
Houston: 2 receivers; Skyler Ridley 106 Cody Hoffman 156
Wisconsin: Cody Hoffman 113
Washington: Cody Hoffman 167

2014: no 100 yard games in the 1st 4 but the ball was spread all over the place with a couple receivers close to 100 in a couple of the games.

2015:
Nebraska: Nick Kurtz 123

2013 was the first year Taysom was a full time starter and his efficiency rating was pretty low but he had a guy who was a good tough receiver who went out and caught the ball in Hoffman. in 2014 I believe that if Taysom had remained healthy we would have seen a few 100 yard games even though we were breaking in some new guys. Tanner threw a bunch of them in 15 which is why I'm excited about him but he had 3 sr's that are better receivers than anything we have this year. Kurtz has been a disappointment to say the least with his soft play (which is probably why he was in the dog house last year for a bunch of games).

[Yzzazz]

It's an excellent observation. The answer is an unqualified YES for 2016, but it might not mean what most people would think: that Hill was somehow a bad passer. I think it is quite possible that between Hill and Williams and the offensive line, the opportunities were there for more productive run games, so that's what Ty called. In the end maybe it also means that Hill just wasn't as good with the long ball, since many of those 100+ yard games likely featured a deep throw or two, something lacking for most of 2016.

In hindsight I do wonder whether the coaches wished they had picked Mangum. While it is tempting to think that he might have done better, I actually don't believe it would have made a difference in the game against Utah, UCLA or West Virginia. MAYBE against Boise. I'm super excited that he gets the entire game against Wyoming. Here's hoping Jamal can have a great run game to keep the Cowboy defense honest. If not, it could be a long night for Tanner.

[SpiffCoug]

It's an excellent observation. The answer is an unqualified YES for 2016, but it might not mean what most people would think: that Hill was somehow a bad passer.

Correct. People think Taysom is a bad passer, not because of his dearth of 100-yard receivers this year, but because he was indeed a poor passer.

Consider: Six quarterbacks have attempted 1,000 passes in their BYU careers. Taysom Hill ranks 6th in the following categories: Passing Yards, Completion Percentage, Touchdowns and Passer Efficiency Rating. And with just two fewer completions he would have been 6th in that category as well.

Fans think of Taysom as a bad passer because he WAS a bad passer.

Further food for thought. Among those 6 QBs there were 227 games (33 belong to Taysom 14.5%). 144 of those had a QB with a passer rating above 135. But just 13 of them belong to Taysom (9.02%).

[a1247]

It's hard to have a receiver get 100 yards when your only averaging 6.2 yards a completion. There was a lot of 4-5 yard throws this year and he looked extremely uncomfortable when he did try to throw the 10-15 yard throws. There was several time against USU where the crowd would react to a wide open receiver and he wouldn't throw it or he almost waited to long before he would finally throw the ball.

[frdbtr]

Taysom Hill was a poor passer and somehow he still had 5 games in 2013 (when he was a poorer passer) where receivers had 100 yards per game (one of those had 2 100 yard receivers) and 1 game where a receiver had 99 yards. This year we had no 100 yard receivers. This reflects on receiver play far more than QB play. There were long balls to be caught that weren't, balls that were caught last year by guys who wanted the ball more than they do this year. I have been so disappointed with the soft receiver play this year. I watch the Washington Huskies and how tough their receivers are and it is shocking to come back and watch BYU's. Our guys are marshmallows. Taysom Hill's hesitancy to throw to guys until they were wide open is a testament to how many times well thrown balls bounced off guys hands into the defenses this year.

[Gunk]

Hill wasn't a good passer.

It will be night and day next season when Mangum plays.

[scott715]

You mean the bowl game.

[Gunk]

You mean the bowl game.

I was referring to an entire season, but yes, I suspect the passing will be better in the bowl game too. Passing is what Mangum does.

[frdbtr]

the receivers have to get open and catch the ball for our passing game to improve.

[Mingjai]

the receivers have to get open and catch the ball for our passing game to improve.

I guess we'll get to test the theories that (1) Tanner makes better reads, (1) Tanner throws a more accurate ball, and (3) Tanner's more accurate throws are more catchable.

With luck, the bowl game will provide ample observations of the offense operating under the direction of a different QB such that we can apportion responsibility for this year's lack of passing productivity across the constituent elements of QB, receivers, offensive coordinator, QB coach, and receivers coach. Having reached a consensus on distribution of responsibility, we will then be better positioned not only to identify possible solutions but also to debate these solutions, allowing this competition of ideas to determine which of these potential solutions is best. Should these solutions be found satisfactory by board members, we will then respectfully submit to the relevant parties these fully-developed solutions along with a plea for implementation into future game plans. Maybe then we will all feel that we have done our part as stakeholders to advance this glorious enterprise called BYU football and can finally be at peace.

At least until letter of intent day and spring football... isn't fandom great!