CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Execution

by mcgregor · 10/25/2009

Advertisement
M
mcgregor
After thinking about last night's game a bit more, I've decided that, like Bronco has stressed, this game was about execution. TCU executed. BYU didn't.



Bronco failed to execute by mentally preparing his team to play an athletically superior opponent



Robert Anae failed to execute by failing to properly utilize our strengths at the appropriate times



Max Hall failed to execute because he couldn't keep his offense on the field





TCU, on the other hand, executed



TCU's defense knew Max gets flustered, so they applied just the right amount of pressure without having to commit extra bodies



TCU's offense knew they needed to incorporate plays that had not been seen on film before



Gary Patterson knew that playing BYU is a 9-month ordeal
M
mizzoucoug
Can we officially ban this meaningless word, please? It's coachspeak and it's a mockery of anyone who knows sports to think that is all there is: Just execute the game plan and you'll win. Bogus. If a team is better than you, execution of your inferiority is not going to get it done. This is where emotion and letting game-breakers loose comes into the picture. BYU has been taught to be behave and play like robots, which is why they never get up for big games.
K
kiwibacon
I thought this was as good a thread as any to post thoughts left by someone else regarding last nights game. Great thoughts and points and wanted to share.


ammoncougar1 wrote:
Okay, I'm back home in Idaho Falls wondering why I spent most of the day and quite a bit of money to go watch the beat down tonight. This thread seemed as good as any to share my thoughts. Here they are, in no particular order:



We lack leadership on the field. At least on the offensive side of the ball. The 'moxie' that Max used to have only shows up once in awhile (like the TD to end 1st half v. SDSU) and it seems he plays a little scared of Bronco as for showing too much on the field leadership regarding emotion and pumping up his guys (you remember how Doman was right? And even Beck under Bronco played with a swagger that could be seem easily. Max, at one point, had that (ie. 4th and 18) but it seems to be gone now and nobody on offense seems to want to take that role. I think Chambers could but do any of you remember when Chambers had his first exciting return v. NIU and cam off the field jumping and pulling on his jersey and Bronco immediately went over to him to "remind him" that this was a team game and he should draw attention to himself but rather celebrate with the team? Well, he doesn't do that much anymore. Very business-like and not sufficient energy imo!



Our defense seems to recognize how much the crowd is needed and Denny and Jan seemed to try and fire us up but outside of that I felt like we didn't matter. Even the offense once (JJ I think) was waving his arms for us to be quiet. I know we should be educated but do we have to be so business-like too and not show emotion? My emotion tonight was to leave instead of Booing. I wonder which would have made Bronco happier?



I would have loved to see BYU throw in a wrinkle or two. This whole season I thought we were 'holding something back' just for TCU. BOy was I sure mistaken. We have a pretty decent scrambling backup QB. Why not put him AND Max on the field at the same time to give TCU something to think about when it comes to running and passing? Run a little something funky to keep them from keying on our very vanilla plays.



Speaking of vanilla, did we forget we have All-American tight-endS? Yes I mean TWO of them. Why not run the 6-7 yard slant over the middle to one of them until TCU proves they can stop it! Mix that in with Unga and see what opens up!



When the team is excited and jumping around and chest bumping you can feel the excitement. From the get-go it just wasn't there. (It has been there this season..a la OK) Even after good to almost great plays they reacted very humho about what happened. I do think the "D" reacted more lively after sacks and hits and stuff but the "O" doesn't seem to have the emotion. And I worry that if they do Bronco will squelch it like he did Chambers and make 'em gunshy.



Finally, if a really bad play is made why does the player get a 'pass' to stay in there? I thought Bronco coached accountability. ie. When TCU defender made stupid PI on Chambers he was yanked immediately! When Logan made stupider PI call he stayed in to get beat on the very next play!



Oh, one more thing (slightly unrelated) The three postgame boys are yukking it up way to much and I'm getting very tired of their antics! During the game Nate, Mark and Greg do a great job IMO. But their call-in show is getting worse each week! They even totally ignored a callers question tonight. Maybe it was an inside joke with the caller but I didn't 'get it'. It's almost like they are becoming Bronco's little pawns just like the team is with very Bronco-like answers. (Harvey's interview made me want to spew!!!)



In the meantime...Go Cougs!!! And if TCU doesn't absolutely throttle Utah I will likely have some tickets to sell to the highest bidder because I have no desire to witness another debacle this season!



J. Child

Ammon, ID
C
CAFB_04-12
I for one was frustrated to see Chambers returning punts after muffing the one. His punt return duties should have been ceded to someone else for the rest of the game. As well as his receiving duties for that matter.



Was Pitta double teamed during the game? I can't figure out why he didn't get more passes. It seemed like Unga was the only one playing football last night.



If TCU loses a game this season I'm going to lose my mind.
M
mcgregor
mizzoucoug wrote:
Can we officially ban this meaningless word, please? It's coachspeak and it's a mockery of anyone who knows sports to think that is all there is: Just execute the game plan and you'll win. Bogus. If a team is better than you, execution of your inferiority is not going to get it done. This is where emotion and letting game-breakers loose comes into the picture. BYU has been taught to be behave and play like robots, which is why they never get up for big games.


I humbly disagree. It's ALL about execution.



Execution is why the BYU's of the world has been beating more athletically superior teams for decades. It's a lot easier to execute a 3 and 8 when the defense doesn't know what's coming. Last night, they knew what was coming. In fact, we ALL knew what was coming. In that scenario, their execution beat out our execution. Execution applies to the players on the field, and the coaches on the sidelines.
Advertisement
G
Gunk
I think it's both.



I do get the sense at times our game is being reduced to methodical execution, or at least production and execution out weigh fire and passion. A factory worker can come in everyday and meet their quota just fine, but it takes a passionate, properly motivated factory worker to push the quota and work a little harder so they can get that Christmas bonus; to tap into their potential. If only the quota is stressed, then the passionate workers lose the will to push harder. The Christmas bonus needs to pushed by the staff, not the quota.



The team focus seems to me to be a bit too tilted towards just meeting the quota. Now, I understand before getting too ambitious the coaches want to make sure the team is executing at a certain standard, meeting their quota, but what I don't think they understand is if you want to raise the level of an overall program the passion and fire needs to be tapped into and allowed to manifest itself. The quota will then be met by default.
M
Mars
mcgregor wrote:
After thinking about last night's game a bit more, I've decided that, like Bronco has stressed, this game was about execution. TCU executed. BYU didn't. Bronco failed to execute by mentally preparing his team to play an athletically superior opponent. Robert Anae failed to execute by failing to properly utilize our strengths at the appropriate times. Max Hall failed to execute because he couldn't keep his offense on the field.

Perfectly executing crappy offensive and defensive gameplans doesn't win anyone anything. Take away our turnovers, take away our penalties, and TCU still beats us. "Execution" is a false idea too often when it comes out of Bronco's mouth. He thought that would be the key in this game, and he couldn't have been more wrong. That was the least of our worries.
I
Italics
Our players executed fairly well. They seemed to be playing really hard... this was one of those games where I CAN'T say that "our players weren't playing with passion." I thought they were.

I put a lot of it on coaching, and on speed. You can't blame players for not having speed, because speed can't be taught.

If Bronco and Co. just keep recruiting "executors," we are in for year after year of 10 win seasons. Sure, it looks nice on paper, but we'll never be anything special, and the gap between us and TCU/Utah will just keep growing and growing...
M
mizzoucoug
mcgregor wrote:
Can we officially ban this meaningless word, please? It's coachspeak and it's a mockery of anyone who knows sports to think that is all there is: Just execute the game plan and you'll win. Bogus. If a team is better than you, execution of your inferiority is not going to get it done. This is where emotion and letting game-breakers loose comes into the picture. BYU has been taught to be behave and play like robots, which is why they never get up for big games.


I humbly disagree. It's ALL about execution.



Execution is why the BYU's of the world has been beating more athletically superior teams for decades. It's a lot easier to execute a 3 and 8 when the defense doesn't know what's coming. Last night, they knew what was coming. In fact, we ALL knew what was coming. In that scenario, their execution beat out our execution. Execution applies to the players on the field, and the coaches on the sidelines.


I'm sorry but the word "execution" is Bronco's coachspeak word and it doesn't mean a freaking thing! We didn't execute. We got out-executed. Blah, blah, blah. And the word does not apply to every aspect of the game for heaven's sake. There is scheming, adjustments, emotion, and determination that carry just as much weight as execution. I say again, executing inferior plays with inferior players does not do anything for you. For all we know, BYU executed as well as they possibly could, 100% on Saturday. Is that enough though? Of course not. That's why it's not all about execution. Never has been, never will be.
C
cougsnspurs4life
Unlike McDonalds, I am "loving this" site... I am pretty sure that I just read "I humbly disagree..." AND "I'm sorry, but..."



you mean that you can disagree and NOT ATTACK THE POSTER? What a novel idea! Two thumbs up, laddies, and keep it up! :D



(And I agree with everyone here... Diplomatic, huh?)



My favorite baseball team is the Dodgers (rough year for me, huh - a whole bunch of "almost" teams), and Joe Torre drives me nuts... He is another Lavelle/Bronco. Never argues with bad umps, doesn't really light into his players... Ah well. At least I have the Bearded-Psycho-Bomber-looking Poppavich and good old Sloan to yell at their players and the refs all year long.
Advertisement
M
mcgregor
Mars wrote:
After thinking about last night's game a bit more, I've decided that, like Bronco has stressed, this game was about execution. TCU executed. BYU didn't. Bronco failed to execute by mentally preparing his team to play an athletically superior opponent. Robert Anae failed to execute by failing to properly utilize our strengths at the appropriate times. Max Hall failed to execute because he couldn't keep his offense on the field.

Perfectly executing crappy offensive and defensive gameplans doesn't win anyone anything. Take away our turnovers, take away our penalties, and TCU still beats us. "Execution" is a false idea too often when it comes out of Bronco's mouth. He thought that would be the key in this game, and he couldn't have been more wrong. That was the least of our worries.


Perhaps we are saying the same thing.



A review of my other posts on this site will demonstrate that I place the lion share of the blame on the coaching staff. THEY have failed to execute.



It takes very little effort to find examples in college football that inferior teams executing a superior game plan can beat any opponent.
M
mcgregor
Let me put it this way:



Coach execution + player execution = chance at beating superior team



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins



Coach execution + lack of player execution = better team wins



lack of coach execution + lack of player execution = UNLV
S
Schmoe
mcgregor wrote:
Let me put it this way:



Coach execution + player execution = chance at beating superior team



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins



Coach execution + lack of player execution = better team wins



lack of coach execution + lack of player execution = UNLV


lack of coach execution + lack of player execution + lack of talent in both parties = UNM (who knew you could get less by adding more?)
M
Mars
mcgregor wrote:
Perhaps we are saying the same thing. A review of my other posts on this site will demonstrate that I place the lion share of the blame on the coaching staff. THEY have failed to execute. It takes very little effort to find examples in college football that inferior teams executing a superior game plan can beat any opponent.

I wasn't disagreeing with your post, I was saying basically the same thing in my own words. I agree with a lot of what you've been saying since the TCU game: Work still needs to be done.
S
Sammich
mcgregor wrote:
Let me put it this way:



Coach execution + player execution = chance at beating superior team



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins



Coach execution + lack of player execution = better team wins



lack of coach execution + lack of player execution = UNLV

That's an awesome summary.
Advertisement
S
snoscythe
The only one I disagree with is:



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins.



To me, that formula just adds up to a perfectly executed piece of crap. You give the world's best pianist 20 years to practice a sonata written by a drunken marmoset, and it's still going to sound like crap after all that practice.



You gotta teach them correct principles so that they can properly govern themselves.
M
mcgregor
snoscythe wrote:
The only one I disagree with is:



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins.



To me, that formula just adds up to a perfectly executed piece of crap. You give the world's best pianist 20 years to practice a sonata written by a drunken marmoset, and it's still going to sound like crap after all that practice.



You gotta teach them correct principles so that they can properly govern themselves.


Here me out on this one point:



Let's assume (make your joke) that BYU coaches fail to properly prepare for a particular team, and that team is USU. Conversely, let's also assume that USU is well-coached. With these two assumptions in place, there is still very little USU could do to overcome BYU perfectly executing a vanilla game plan. They just aren't talented enough.



And yes, there is a sliding scale as to how much the coaches must prepare, and how athletic the players on each team are.



We can also look at SDSU, another well-executing coach and player tandem. But they simply weren't good enough to overcome a plainly coached by well-executing BYU team.



So Sno, yes, we may be a big piece of crap on the field, but it hardly matters when USU and SDSU is on the field with you. Stinks to be them.
S
snoscythe
mcgregor wrote:
The only one I disagree with is:



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins.



To me, that formula just adds up to a perfectly executed piece of crap. You give the world's best pianist 20 years to practice a sonata written by a drunken marmoset, and it's still going to sound like crap after all that practice.



You gotta teach them correct principles so that they can properly govern themselves.


Here me out on this one point:



Let's assume (make your joke) that BYU coaches fail to properly prepare for a particular team, and that team is USU. Conversely, let's also assume that USU is well-coached. With these two assumptions in place, there is still very little USU could do to overcome BYU perfectly executing a vanilla game plan. They just aren't talented enough.



And yes, there is a sliding scale as to how much the coaches must prepare, and how athletic the players on each team are.



We can also look at SDSU, another well-executing coach and player tandem. But they simply weren't good enough to overcome a plainly coached by well-executing BYU team.



So Sno, yes, we may be a big piece of crap on the field, but it hardly matters when USU and SDSU is on the field with you. Stinks to be them.


Point taken.
Y
Yzzazz
snoscythe wrote:
snoscythe wrote:
The only one I disagree with is:



Coach lack of execution + player execution = better team wins.



To me, that formula just adds up to a perfectly executed piece of crap...


Here me out on this one point:



... we may be a big piece of crap on the field, but it hardly matters when USU and SDSU is on the field with you. Stinks to be them.


Point taken.


Hey Guys.



What about OU? Did Bronco prepare only for OU in the offseason and then simply go on cruise control for FSU and TCU? That's hard for me to wrap my head around.



It is my opinion that the OU game was won by our pass rush (which was largely helped by Brody Eldrige's inexperience at center and Mike Stoops egregious non-preparation of his freshman backup). The main point is that the pash rush greatly diminished the liability in the defense's lack of speed, and kept the game on more even footing. Which has to be done, since our offense isn't capable of scoring big points on a reasonably good defense, only a poor one.



If BYU were able to execute a pash rush against TCU like the one the levied at Oklahoma, perhaps BYU would have only lost to TCU 10 to 7 (or maybe 17 to 7 because that reverse halfback pass was one masterful play call. Bronco's extention at 422-INFO has officially been changed to TCU's listing of Gary Patterson. Does Gary have Bronco's number or what?) Without McKay Jacobsen or any serious deep threat, I really do think BYU would have lost this game under any circumstances. TCU was certainly the better team this year. Hats off to them.



I still think BYU can beat Utah, but to do so, our defense is going to have to hold Utah to 21 points or less. Without a strong pass rush, I'd see a repeat of FSU and TCU.



Speed is the killer, but the antidote appears to be disruption as evidenced by the OU game. Why can't our players consistently execute a disruption of speed?
L
Lawboy
I think Bronco knows his team, at its limitations. BYU is not going to be the more athletic team in many games it plays. And because of that, they have to rely on execution. Florida can rely on athletes makin plays to win, so can USC. We can not. So I think this phrase is used for 2 reasons. 1) it protects the way bronco talks about his guys. saying we were out executed is a nice way of saying they were a better team than us. They had better athletes. 2) it is the truth. The Utah Jazz rely on it s well. and when they do it, they are efficient and win.



Of course, this does not address one HUGE issue, which is was the game plan put together by the coaches good enough? Against TCU it was not. Not by a mile. The game plan did not put our guys in position to execute. It put them in position to be handled, and thus, to fail. Scheme and game plan are huge in evaluating execution.



The players played hard and fought. Harvery did run for over 120. That means he O-line played well and battled. But the passing scheme was atrocious. On the majority of plays, Max had no one open. No one. 3 sacks were cover sacks, 2 poor like blocking. 2 is ok. The other 3 are not. Guys have to get open, or Max needs to learn to throw it away. Dude never ever does that. That is why he has zero shot in the NFL. He does not understand that at times, cutting your losses for the next down is the best thing, instead of taking a sack or throwing a pick. But overall Max played ok. he had a crap scheme to work with.
Page 1 of 4
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.