P
pjmuliAs some of you may recall, I struggled to accept the switch to Riley Nelson last year. "This is a matter of capacity," I said to myself, "not a matter winning games that we would probably win with Dell Schanze under center."
Basically, my concern with Nelson was that he did not have sufficient ability to throw to make defenses adjust and that his decision-making was always suspect. I couldn't see Nelson performing well against good teams and that by committing to him we are probably imposing a ceiling upon ourselves.
I looked for and saw the good in Nelson's play (though the Nelson/Heaps drama tainted my view on his leadership, selflessness, and influence).
Now...playing injured to the detriment of the team (what would Gaskins do?)...he has rendered some of the worst quarterback play in BYU history. Nevertheless, I am still left to wonder what would have happened if healthy.
There has been zero evidence that he would be able to sustain sufficient play to beat two teams with good defenses. I am guessing BYU is 2-2 with a healthy Nelson.
This, to me, points to the three big coaching questions of this season - none of which are the 2 point conversion decision:
(1) Is this the best offensive gameplan we could design according to Nelson's strengths?
(2) Why would we play Nelson when he is clearly injured and it is impacting his performance? (or perhaps better stated, why do we so strongly believe in grit, leadership, and grit?)
(3) How did Bronco and Doman develop such deference to Nelson to allow him to choose how much he would play in spite of blatantly awful production?
Basically, my concern with Nelson was that he did not have sufficient ability to throw to make defenses adjust and that his decision-making was always suspect. I couldn't see Nelson performing well against good teams and that by committing to him we are probably imposing a ceiling upon ourselves.
I looked for and saw the good in Nelson's play (though the Nelson/Heaps drama tainted my view on his leadership, selflessness, and influence).
Now...playing injured to the detriment of the team (what would Gaskins do?)...he has rendered some of the worst quarterback play in BYU history. Nevertheless, I am still left to wonder what would have happened if healthy.
There has been zero evidence that he would be able to sustain sufficient play to beat two teams with good defenses. I am guessing BYU is 2-2 with a healthy Nelson.
This, to me, points to the three big coaching questions of this season - none of which are the 2 point conversion decision:
(1) Is this the best offensive gameplan we could design according to Nelson's strengths?
(2) Why would we play Nelson when he is clearly injured and it is impacting his performance? (or perhaps better stated, why do we so strongly believe in grit, leadership, and grit?)
(3) How did Bronco and Doman develop such deference to Nelson to allow him to choose how much he would play in spite of blatantly awful production?

