What to do with Taysom Hill 2012?

Bronco has said the 2013 schedule may very well be the “best ever” at BYU - translation the most competitive and challenging. Given this daunting schedule, it would appear to be in our best interest that we are not breaking in a new QB to start that season. Look at Heaps/Nelson escapade for example. Reps seem to be one of the keys to progression.



In order to prepare for the future of the program, and give the backups some game-time experience, wouldn't it be wise to have the reps shared between Lark and Hill (especially if Riley gets injured or game is decided and there is time to burn - i.e. the last part of the schedule is where I notice an opportunity for experience)?

Almost always better to redshirt. It is my belief that 9 times out of 10 an older player can improve faster than a younger player with a handful of garbage reps.

hawkwing wrote:
Almost always better to redshirt. It is my belief that 9 times out of 10 an older player can improve faster than a younger player with a handful of garbage reps.

but where's your evidence!!??



When has this EVER happened before at BYU? :D

Hawk-

Where would Riley be without Brendan Gaskins?

Would James Lark do the same?

Does a year running the scout team produce more growth than a year as second string QB?



I don't know the answer to these questions, but I think they're the right one's to ask to get to the answer to the OP's questions. I'd be really interested to see others' thoughts on these issues; I think it could have a large effect on the 2013-2015/16 seasons.

CrimsonCoug wrote:
Hawk-

Where would Riley be without Brendan Gaskins?

Would James Lark do the same?

Does a year running the scout team produce more growth than a year as second string QB?



I don't know the answer to these questions, but I think they're the right one's to ask to get to the answer to the OP's questions. I'd be really interested to see others' thoughts on these issues; I think it could have a large effect on the 2013-2015/16 seasons.

Good question, did Gaskin's stepping down help prepare RN? Tough to say. I can see ineffective arguments on both sides of that.

Scout team worked really well for Max Hall. If he starts there, he might move to 2nd string if RN gets hurt.

scott715 wrote:
Scout team worked really well for Max Hall. If he starts there, he might move to 2nd string if RN gets hurt.

Yeah, I don't see how early PT is better than the scout team. It cuts both ways - if Riley stays healthy, all Hill gets is garbage time snaps. If Riley goes down, Hill gets thrown into a tough situation, and I think the chances are just as good that the premature responsibility stunts his development.

I say they do the exact same thing with Hill as they did with Hall after he came off his mission. Red shirt him and let him run the scout team. But on every home game have him up in the box with Doman watching and learning so he'll have the knowledge and skill to run the offense in2013. There is also the chance for Mums to come around and be the starter for one year in 2013 as a senior. Im not sure why everyone has given up on him and placed Hill as the automatic starter.



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

a1247 wrote:
There is also the chance for Mums to come around and be the starter for one year in 2013 as a senior. Im not sure why everyone has given up on him and placed Hill as the automatic starter.



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

Because he's yet to show ANYTHING in any practice or spring/fall camps. He was injured AGAIN this spring and missed a vital chance to make an impression. Munns will be a non-contributor in his time at BYU - at least at the QB position.

I just watched the BYUtv Spring Football special (Iove my Roku! Love being cable free!), and Blaine Fowler basically said the same that some of you have said: Hill will be better off running the Scout Team against the 1s than getting paltry reps in practices and mop-up reps in games as the backup. He (and likely some of you guys) have a lot more football experience than I do, so I'll go with it.

But if that's true, it begs the question: Why didn't Riley redshirt his first year back instead of backing up Hall?



And by the way, Hawk, that countdown clock is really depressing!!

Two recent examples form BYU history.



Hall: red-shirted, ran scout team, watched from box. . . Winningest QB in BYU history



Heaps: No redshirt tried to share reps, became full-time starter for 2/3 of a season. . . Barely over .500 as QB.

Yea I think we have a good formula following Hall's example

a1247 wrote:
I say they do the exact same thing with Hill as they did with Hall after he came off his mission. Red shirt him and let him run the scout team. But on every home game have him up in the box with Doman watching and learning so he'll have the knowledge and skill to run the offense in2013. There is also the chance for Mums to come around and be the starter for one year in 2013 as a senior. Im not sure why everyone has given up on him and placed Hill as the automatic starter.



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

This has to be what they do. I find it hard to justify doing anythign else, especially after watching how things went with hall and then how things went with jake.

Comparing this scenario to Jake is off the mark. Jake came in and was a co-starter. Hill will not be anything of the sort. RN is the starter, will get the reps, and Lark is the back-up. Hill is 3rd string at best.



So the comparison is should Hill get 3rd string reps, or is he better served getting scout teams reps? Even with Scout team reps, then can still put together a 3-4 play specialty package for Hill, and run those plays against the #1 D, then have the starters run then a time or 2 as well with RN and TH. Obviously, it will be a running package.



I expect to see this happen. Scout reps, with 3-4 plays per game at most in 2012 to get him game experience and see the speed of the game. Over a 13 game season, could be 50-60 plays. Which is better than 0 heading into 2013.

Lawboy wrote:
Comparing this scenario to Jake is off the mark. Jake came in and was a co-starter. Hill will not be anything of the sort. RN is the starter, will get the reps, and Lark is the back-up. Hill is 3rd string at best.



So the comparison is should Hill get 3rd string reps, or is he better served getting scout teams reps? Even with Scout team reps, then can still put together a 3-4 play specialty package for Hill, and run those plays against the #1 D, then have the starters run then a time or 2 as well with RN and TH. Obviously, it will be a running package.



I expect to see this happen. Scout reps, with 3-4 plays per game at most in 2012 to get him game experience and see the speed of the game. Over a 13 game season, could be 50-60 plays. Which is better than 0 heading into 2013.

Does the value of giving him 3-4 plays per game outweigh having him a whole extra year where he could be a starter? Why burn red shirt for 3-4 plays per game? Seems stupid to me.

jonnylingo wrote:

Comparing this scenario to Jake is off the mark. Jake came in and was a co-starter. Hill will not be anything of the sort. RN is the starter, will get the reps, and Lark is the back-up. Hill is 3rd string at best.



So the comparison is should Hill get 3rd string reps, or is he better served getting scout teams reps? Even with Scout team reps, then can still put together a 3-4 play specialty package for Hill, and run those plays against the #1 D, then have the starters run then a time or 2 as well with RN and TH. Obviously, it will be a running package.



I expect to see this happen. Scout reps, with 3-4 plays per game at most in 2012 to get him game experience and see the speed of the game. Over a 13 game season, could be 50-60 plays. Which is better than 0 heading into 2013.

Does the value of giving him 3-4 plays per game outweigh having him a whole extra year where he could be a starter? Why burn red shirt for 3-4 plays per game? Seems stupid to me.

I agree. Let him run the whole offense against the 1st team defense on the scout team without wasting a year. I don't see how having 50 irrelevant game time plays will help him as a starter.

jonnylingo wrote:

Comparing this scenario to Jake is off the mark. Jake came in and was a co-starter. Hill will not be anything of the sort. RN is the starter, will get the reps, and Lark is the back-up. Hill is 3rd string at best.



So the comparison is should Hill get 3rd string reps, or is he better served getting scout teams reps? Even with Scout team reps, then can still put together a 3-4 play specialty package for Hill, and run those plays against the #1 D, then have the starters run then a time or 2 as well with RN and TH. Obviously, it will be a running package.



I expect to see this happen. Scout reps, with 3-4 plays per game at most in 2012 to get him game experience and see the speed of the game. Over a 13 game season, could be 50-60 plays. Which is better than 0 heading into 2013.

Does the value of giving him 3-4 plays per game outweigh having him a whole extra year where he could be a starter? Why burn red shirt for 3-4 plays per game? Seems stupid to me.

I agree Redshirt him. Can you imagine 2007 if we would have had Beck at QB? On the other hand can you imagine 09 without Max Hall? Redshirt him.

Who said anything about the reps being irrelevant? I think they will not be garbage time, but will be similar to what we saw Riley do last year in games 1-3 before he took over. IT will be about getting him used to live reps and the speed of the game.



Also, we assume BYU will give him the job in 2013, which may not be the case. But if he gets it, I want a QB who is more game ready to lead for 3 years, than one who takes a year to get ready to lead. That is what we learned from Heaps.



IF it means "blowing" a year to make the QB better for the 3 years we get out of him, I am all for it.

CrimsonCoug wrote:
And by the way, Hawk, that countdown clock is really depressing!!

Yeah, I didn't realize that I would have to get up at 7 AM Central Time to watch the season opener.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

And by the way, Hawk, that countdown clock is really depressing!!

Yeah, I didn't realize that I would have to get up at 7 AM Central Time to watch the season opener.

And I thought you would WANT to!

Lawboy wrote:
Who said anything about the reps being irrelevant? I think they will not be garbage time, but will be similar to what we saw Riley do last year in games 1-3 before he took over. IT will be about getting him used to live reps and the speed of the game.



Also, we assume BYU will give him the job in 2013, which may not be the case. But if he gets it, I want a QB who is more game ready to lead for 3 years, than one who takes a year to get ready to lead. That is what we learned from Heaps.



IF it means "blowing" a year to make the QB better for the 3 years we get out of him, I am all for it.

I doubt giving him those lives plays will make him much better for 2013 if that were the case. the value in those whether they are garbage time or any time are not worth burning a year. I just have to disagree with you.



I think having him run the scout team and then getting starters reps all through spring and fall will do get him as ready as he can be. in fact having him sit int he box with doman this year would do a lot more than havin ghim on teh field to run a few isolated plays each game. i just disagree. I think it is clear what the right choice is.