[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4148: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/config.php:24)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4148: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/config.php:24)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4148: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/config.php:24)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4148: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/config.php:24)
CougarCorner • Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!! - Page 2
Page 2 of 2

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 10:10 am
by mtnradio


[edit: On the "Coordinators Corner" radio show Monday, offensive coordinator Ty Detmer addressed the quarterback situation.

"We are pretty set with (Mangum) as the starter, with Joe getting reps behind him,” he said.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865 ... -woes.html]

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:28 pm
by Mars
So Mangum is still the starter?

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:30 pm
by hawkwing
Mars wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 12:28 pm So Mangum is still the starter?
Yes.

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Tue Oct 10, 2017 2:20 pm
by snoscythe
In another demonstration of cluelessness, today for media availability the coaches paraded Joe Critchlow out there as one of the two or three players for the media to pepper.

....the backup quarterback.....when your starter is struggling and injured...but still starting on Saturday...

Image

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:41 pm
by cougarnerd
mtnradio wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:27 am
hawkwing wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:09 pm
mtnradio wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:35 pm My understanding is the Detmer looked as bad as he did because he isn't and hasn't been getting reps. Pull a guy in cold who hasn't run a single snap with the first team, put him in and you'll usually get what Detmer gave ... a great effort with significant mistakes. Detmer probably isn't as good as Critchlow, but burn a red-shirt ... it bothered me too. I will default to the fact that I don't know as much as many of you, and certainly less than the coaches ... but for me it was a head scratcher.
This is actually one of my frustrations with the coaching, BYU had a bye week, and they knew that their concussion prone kid had already suffered a concussion, instead of using the bye week to get the 3rd string QB any reps they decided to take the entire week off of football.
I agree, Hawk. I understand taking an easy week on a bye week to heal up, when injuries and getting banged up are an issue. But when your team has just lost badly and has no team ID, and no offensive ID, and are looking lost on the field ... that doesn't seem to me to be a great time to take a week off. Another head scratcher.
I think that maybe one of the best things to do would have been have no-contact, route-running practice where Critchlow would have been able to practice with reads and throws. No need to risk injury, and the O-line/D-line don't need to be that aggressive, just stand up and push a little bit.

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:43 pm
by Jarhead
cougarnerd wrote: Thu Oct 12, 2017 7:41 pm
mtnradio wrote: Tue Oct 10, 2017 7:27 am
hawkwing wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2017 9:09 pm
mtnradio wrote: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:35 pm My understanding is the Detmer looked as bad as he did because he isn't and hasn't been getting reps. Pull a guy in cold who hasn't run a single snap with the first team, put him in and you'll usually get what Detmer gave ... a great effort with significant mistakes. Detmer probably isn't as good as Critchlow, but burn a red-shirt ... it bothered me too. I will default to the fact that I don't know as much as many of you, and certainly less than the coaches ... but for me it was a head scratcher.
This is actually one of my frustrations with the coaching, BYU had a bye week, and they knew that their concussion prone kid had already suffered a concussion, instead of using the bye week to get the 3rd string QB any reps they decided to take the entire week off of football.
I agree, Hawk. I understand taking an easy week on a bye week to heal up, when injuries and getting banged up are an issue. But when your team has just lost badly and has no team ID, and no offensive ID, and are looking lost on the field ... that doesn't seem to me to be a great time to take a week off. Another head scratcher.
I think that maybe one of the best things to do would have been have no-contact, route-running practice where Critchlow would have been able to practice with reads and throws. No need to risk injury, and the O-line/D-line don't need to be that aggressive, just stand up and push a little bit.
I like that idea.

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:54 pm
by imuakahuku
Just an FYI, the red shirt rule may be changed this summer allowing kids to play in up to four games. I imagine it would allow underclassmen at least to get back a lost year.

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:35 pm
by byufan4ever
imuakahuku wrote: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:54 pm Just an FYI, the red shirt rule may be changed this summer allowing kids to play in up to four games. I imagine it would allow underclassmen at least to get back a lost year.
Yeah I heard that too. I think it's a good think. Are there any drawbacks to it?

Re: Critchlow shows coaches have no plan!!

Posted: Sat Oct 14, 2017 8:38 am
by cougarnerd
byufan4ever wrote: Fri Oct 13, 2017 1:35 pm
imuakahuku wrote: Fri Oct 13, 2017 12:54 pm Just an FYI, the red shirt rule may be changed this summer allowing kids to play in up to four games. I imagine it would allow underclassmen at least to get back a lost year.
Yeah I heard that too. I think it's a good think. Are there any drawbacks to it?
Wait, meaning a non-injury redshirt?

Suppose this rule is instated and Critchlow only plays 3 games. Does that mean that he would then qualify for a redshirt, or am I reading this wrong?