Observations From the IS Game

I do no like our passing schemes, too many out patterns, nothing much deep (except when Nelson scrambles), did a TE catch a pass today?



How many times did the defense jump offsides? good grief guys, you didn't figure out that Yost has a little stutter on his cadence?



I'll bet Yost is sore tomorrow, boy did we beat him up, I did like that.



I didn't like how IS just drove the length of the field in the first Q, if not for a dropped pass, they'd gotten a TD instead of a field goal. Why could we not put pressure on the QB in the first quarter, but did the rest of the game?



Three turnovers against the little sister of the poor is a disgrace; granted one was by a third string runningback, and one by a second string QB. And what was Johnson doing running parallel to the field? head up field my boy.



I have to say, I sure like what happens when Nelson is out there. Heaps didn't help himself today, he looked lost, dropped the handoff, threw a pick, missed receivers again.

Austin Holt had a 19 yard reception (pretty sure).

Friel had one from Heaps as well.

Yes and No.



Nelson had completions of 57, 30, 20, 19, and 18 yards and a total of 215 yards. Even if you take the 57 away by claiming it was all YAC, that still leaves 87 yards out of 158 (more than half) coming on 18-yard+ passes.

Holt and Friel both had catches. (18 and 10 yards respectively)

I also agree that Heaps did himself no favors today. If you look at the quickly-becoming-gospel of PER.



Nelson had 229.7 against the "best" ISU could muster.

Heaps had 116.3 against a beat-down ISU team just looking to save face.



I'm not saying Nelson had a great day. But Heaps had a horrible one especially when you consider that Yost had a 103.1.

Yeah, missing a lot of receivers when you go 8 for 10... :roll:



He didn't play lights out, but he certainly didn't look "lost."



And on the INT, he didn't "miss" the receiver. What he did "miss" was the cornerback creeping up on the out play (since they had already thrown like 5 of those).



That throw was right on the money for the wr too. So, barring a great play from a dback coupled with handcuffed playcalling (a good, unshackled OC will see that DB creeping up play after play and run an out and up, or at least go deep) he is 9/10.



Again, bad decision to throw, but not a bad performance. Not at all. Not a GREAT performance either. Just okay. Just what you expect to see that late in the game with the lead. I am pretty sure they were under strict instructions to not throw downfield, with that lead.

Heaps was still poor. Better than where he was when he was benched. I'm not sure he's a viable option right now. I came away unimppressed.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Heaps was still poor. Better than where he was when he was benched. I'm not sure he's a viable option right now. I came away unimppressed.

I'm pretty sure you started out unimpressed.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

A 116 PER against our worst opponent is unimpressive. I was very high on Heaps coming into the season. His play changed my mind. His play today did not show me he is any better than he was a month ago.



I was disappointed Lark didn't get a series.



I was pleased to see the coaches let Jake throw and run the offense. I don't know what the reason is though, but for whatever reason, the offensive pace slows down when Jake is in.

BYULV wrote:

Heaps was still poor. Better than where he was when he was benched. I'm not sure he's a viable option right now. I came away unimppressed.

I'm pretty sure you started out unimpressed.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Heaps hit receivers. He was 8 of 10. It wasn't overly impressive. Still didn't look off safety's. It was as good has he's been since very early in the season (Texas first half, Utah first half).

SpiffCoug wrote:
I don't know what the reason is though, but for whatever reason, the offensive pace slows down when Jake is in.

Obviously that's all on Doman. :D

Why would Lark get reps? He's not the backup. He's the third QB. Since when does the #3 QB get live reps in a game just for fun?

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
Why would Lark get reps? He's not the backup. He's the third QB. Since when does the #3 QB get live reps in a game just for fun?

Because it's clear our #2 QB isn't right. He's got issues. I want to see what someone else can do.

How "right" do you need your #2 QB to be? I remember OU having a pretty shaky #2 back in 2009.

I think our #2 QB played just like a #2 QB would be expected to play.

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
I think our #2 QB played just like a #2 QB would be expected to play.

Actually our current #2 played exactly like our #1 was earlier in the year.

CAFB_04-12 wrote:
How "right" do you need your #2 QB to be? I remember OU having a pretty shaky #2 back in 2009.

The difference being that OU's #2 QB didn't have 2 years in the program and a full season as a starter under his belt at the time. When you've got the kind of experience that Heaps has, more is expected of you. Let's say Lark comes in, looks exactly like Heaps did today. Would you not choose Lark over Heaps?

I think Heaps did everything he was asked to do. However, he had 2 mistakes that essentially gave the opponent the ball. 1 was the interception and the other was the fumble on 3rd and 1. There were not alot of opportunities to stretch the field with the longball, so you can't really fault him for lack of long receptions. For the most part, the running game was functioning, so there were not alot of 3rd and long receptions available. His PER is bound to go down because we aren't going to pass for touchdowns with a 40+ point lead. All in all, it wasn't a perfect game. However, we are not expecting perfect games from our second string quarterback. He didn't play awesome and he played better than against Utah State. If we can get him some more playing time against Idaho and NM State, I think he might be calmed down enough that we will see great improvement. Bottom line, you can't take horrible and make it awesome just by sitting him on the bench for a few games. You need to get him into games. This was improvement. Hopefully, we can see enough improvement before he is needed. Right now Riley is doing just fine.

If Lark plays ahead of Heaps, Heaps will transfer. Most don't care.

stuckinbig10country wrote:
If Lark plays ahead of Heaps, Heaps will transfer. Most don't care.

If Lark plays better in games than Heaps does, he should be playing. If Heaps transfers because of that then his worst detractors are correct in calling him a quitter, lacks fire, feels entitled, and needs constant coddling. I don't think BYU needs to keep Lark 3rd string just to keep a struggling QB happy. If Heaps is bigger than the team, I'm ok with him packing his bags. That said, I still believe Heaps is better than all of that and would not transfer if he didn't get mop up duty vs ISU. Stuckinbig10country, where are you getting your "Heaps will transfer" information that you throw out there as if it's fact?



I'm really hoping that 2012 Heaps redshirts, Lark is backup, and Nelson leads BYU at QB. It'd be a Win, Win, Win situation.



Stuckinbig, Another Question for you. If Lark left because he was never given a shot and because he felt he was better than Heaps and Nelson would you care? Would you hope he gets a shot to play just so he would stick around?