Jake needed a redshirt.... this is on Bronco too

I had no problem getting behind Jake (because his talent was obvious and his enthusiasm for BYU seemed palpable) once Bronco made the decision to play him last year, but a redshirt might might have solved so much of this problem.

I said since day 1 of the Heaps debacle that regardless of his talent, I believe that all true freshmen should redshirt; no ifs ands or buts. (I have an example of my good friend Tony Temple of Missouri and how he lost a year of great play because Gary Pinkel got nervous and inserted him in game 6 of his freshman year, just to have him seperate his shoulder 2 weeks later; the last game of his career was against a top 10 arkansas team (with darren mcfadden and felix jones... where tony rushed for 284 yards and won cotton bowl mvp....and there should have been another season). In my experience with the UMKC athletic department and working on basketball recruiting, I had never seen a time when a redshirt wouldn't have ultimately helped a team over the long haul (even when they only have 13 scholarships)... ask Mekeli Wesley and others what they would have done with an extra year of eligibility. No true freshman is going to be worth more to their team than as a rs senior, barring injury, professional aspiration, or complete change of heart.



I don't think the results would have been much different had Riley or Lark been the QB last year, and I don't think we would have won any less agmes with Riley or Lark this season... but maybe, just maybe, Jake would have been indoctrinated the way that all freshmen should be and we would have never gotten to this point.



He may end up being a great pro and decent college player, but he'll never be a great college player unless he has an epiphany of sorts when it comes to the cerebral part of the game because he's an emotionally immature and panic stricken field general. (same as matt stafford and jay cutler in college... they didn't win games in college)There's a chance that a redshirt and learning behind Riley for 2 years would have made a miraculous difference.



My issue here is with Bronco though. This problem was created last year and it was a problem that once created was going to be very very difficult to fix. All things considered a great coach knows how to make lemonade from lemons and Bronco never got through to Jake. Great coaches find a way.



The John Woodens and Bill Walshs of the world would have made this work.



Bronco has a ton of great qualities, he does not lose games that he shouldn't lose; but he does not harness the full potential of many of his talented players in spite of the fact that he professes to capture the heart of the team. This begins the day that these players set foot on campus. That is a culture that Bronco has not mastered.

From everything I have read, there was an expectation from the Heaps camp/family/advisers etc that Heaps was going to compete from the start. If you feel like you have the talent to go pro, you aren't redshirting behind Riley or Lark.



I don't completely give the coaching staff a pass because they had the oportunity to set the tone of expectation. My feeling is that if they say you are going to redshirt while a sophomore quarterback gets all the reps for a year then you can battle a now junior quarterback who has started a whole year, you don't get Jake Heaps as a recruit.

Tangent thought: there is no way in heck that the fans would have allowed this to happen. People were outraged he was sharing reps with Nelson at the time. People flame Bronco all day long for not listening to the fans, yet it seems like every time fans get their way, they flame even worse later. Not saying you are flaming at all, just an observation about the situation.



Actual thought: Yes Heaps needed a redshirt. Every player needs a redshirt. He was put into a difficult situation because the team needed him and he was not able to rise to the task. It happens in life all the time. It's not a tragedy. Everything will be ok.

Regardless of what Heaps family thought, what fans thought, the coaches have the power here. And as we know, Bronco does not do things to please the fans.



I think the staff panicked last year. Riley is not a practice QB, Lark and Munns were not ready after missions, and all hopes were on Riley or bust. because of that, Heaps was forced into play too soon.



I agree. Bronco gets some blame here. Things would have worked out differently had a redshirt been used. And that would have required better position recruiting and mission planning.



We will now have the same issue in 2013.

One issue Bronco should take a long hard look at is his redshirt policy. Right now his policy is that no one is redshirted at the beginning of the year--they don't play and don't dress, but they have to 'earn' the redshirt and are supposedly always competing for a spot on the team. I think this policy led to some of the Heaps heartache. Heaps was told he could come in and compete, because hey, everybody comes in and competes and we don't decide redshirts until the hiatus before the bowl game. Bronco can't tell recruits "you will redshirt" or even "you will probably redshirt your first year" without revising this redshirt policy of his.

I agree with almost every opinion in this thread. I have said like Craig that Heaps should have been redshirted from the beginning. I do wonder though what kind of uproar it would have caused in the media and fanbase (and it sounds like) Heaps entourage if Bronco would have tried to redshirt him. Would heaps have left the program imediately since as soon as he was benched he decided to leave as it is?

frdbtr wrote:
I agree with almost every opinion in this thread. I have said like Craig that Heaps should have been redshirted from the beginning. I do wonder though what kind of uproar it would have caused in the media and fanbase (and it sounds like) Heaps entourage if Bronco would have tried to redshirt him. Would heaps have left the program imediately since as soon as he was benched he decided to leave as it is?

Being coach means making unpopular decisions sometimes.



But yeah, 2009 could have been all sorts of ugly. One of the benefits to 2009's early struggles is that we all collectively realized that Jake Heaps wasn't going to be Matt Barkley and have a major head-turning freshman year. We recognized that he'd have to develop, like any other QB. During the pre-season of 2009, a fair number of fans thought Jake was a plug-and-play QB, no real development needed.



Can you imagine the boos and chants at LES if we had made Nelson our starter in 2009 and were committed to keeping Heaps on the bench? Every time Nelson struggled, I'd bet the atmosphere would get pretty toxic. Especially considering that we now know he was still recuperating from a camp injury that he'd end up aggravating. Poor Lark.



I think the only real reason BYU fans were able to stomach 7-6 last year was a) Heaps was really our only option by that point, and b) a bad season seemed like an acceptable sacrifice in the name of Heaps' future success. If we'd gone 7-6 or 8-5 last year with Heaps redshirting, we'd be looking at weekly threads about why Bronco is an idiot for valuing hard work and seniority over talent and success.



As for the threat of Heaps transferring if he didn't start his freshman year - well, we're seeing how it's playing out right now. But if Heaps transferred over that, I think he'd have even less defenders than he does now.

Dcr36 wrote:

I agree with almost every opinion in this thread. I have said like Craig that Heaps should have been redshirted from the beginning. I do wonder though what kind of uproar it would have caused in the media and fanbase (and it sounds like) Heaps entourage if Bronco would have tried to redshirt him. Would heaps have left the program imediately since as soon as he was benched he decided to leave as it is?

Being coach means making unpopular decisions sometimes.



But yeah, 2009 could have been all sorts of ugly. One of the benefits to 2009's early struggles is that we all collectively realized that Jake Heaps wasn't going to be Matt Barkley and have a major head-turning freshman year. We recognized that he'd have to develop, like any other QB. During the pre-season of 2009, a fair number of fans thought Jake was a plug-and-play QB, no real development needed.



Can you imagine the boos and chants at LES if we had made Nelson our starter in 2009 and were committed to keeping Heaps on the bench? Every time Nelson struggled, I'd bet the atmosphere would get pretty toxic. Especially considering that we now know he was still recuperating from a camp injury that he'd end up aggravating. Poor Lark.



I think the only real reason BYU fans were able to stomach 7-6 last year was a) Heaps was really our only option by that point, and b) a bad season seemed like an acceptable sacrifice in the name of Heaps' future success. If we'd gone 7-6 or 8-5 last year with Heaps redshirting, we'd be looking at weekly threads about why Bronco is an idiot for valuing hard work and seniority over talent and success.



As for the threat of Heaps transferring if he didn't start his freshman year - well, we're seeing how it's playing out right now. But if Heaps transferred over that, I think he'd have even less defenders than he does now.

Jake did not win one game last year that Riley or Lark couldn't have won. The difference between 7-6 and 8-3 was more a result of missing Harvey Unga.



The fans could scream and yell all they wanted, but I doubt they would have, if it was clear to the educated fan that Bronco does not play true freshman if he doesn't have to.



If you want to see an example of how redshirts build success, look no futher than Boise State. They redshirt 95% of their true freshmen and they've managed to build quite the sustainable team as a result. rs seniors > true freshmen... you do not mortgage the future for a quick fix in the present... it's too costly over time

craigoscarson wrote:

Jake did not win one game last year that Riley or Lark couldn't have won. The difference between 7-6 and 8-3 was more a result of missing Harvey Unga.



The fans could scream and yell all they wanted, but I doubt they would have, if it was clear to the educated fan that Bronco does not play true freshman if he doesn't have to.



If you want to see an example of how redshirts build success, look no futher than Boise State. They redshirt 95% of their true freshmen and they've managed to build quite the sustainable team as a result. rs seniors > true freshmen... you do not mortgage the future for a quick fix in the present... it's too costly over time

I agree with you 100% that Jake should've been redshirted, regardless of reaction. I just don't share your faith in the fanbase.



But that's a moot point, of course. Fans don't run the team.

This is all different if Nelson stays healthy last year or goes one more game before getting hurt. Nelson would be graduating after the bowl game if that happened. Even if Nelson takes over this year, the coaches could have gone to Heaps and said, "We're sorry we didn't prepare you appropriately but take this time to prepare for next year."



Not only did that not happen, but unlike what Craig said above, he was basically told he won't be able to compete for the job next year.

Oh, I am pretty sure the fanbase would have brought the torches and pitch forks if Bronco had tried to redshirt heaps and would have chanted "We want Heaps, we want Heaps" at the games if any of the players that Bronco had played had struggled even a little bit. I remember quite clearly what the atmosphere was around even this website Aug of 2010. And I think it was worse elsewhere. Heaps was the Second coming of you know who to this fanbase. Having said that, Heaps should have redshirted. That is the bottom line.

frdbtr wrote:
Heaps was the Second coming of you know who to this fanbase.

Voldemort!?!? :bug:

Yndian wrote:

Heaps was the Second coming of you know who to this fanbase.

Voldemort!?!? :bug:

Shaha I don't know why but I had the same thought and then didn't post it. You're a better Kwangju than I.