Nate's Notes

Here is an article that Nate Meikle (sp) wrote in response to Vai's article on "ESPN didn't sign up for this". He talks about Bronco's record in Big games. I thought he made some really valid points.



http://www.ksl.com/?sid=22404561&nid=272&s_cid=rss-extlink" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I read the Vai article and I was loored. Vai really has lost any objectivity hasn't he? He was saying that old BYU is what ESPN signed up for and current BYU isn't old BYU. What BYU team is he referring to? 1984? BYU scored 24 points against Utah that year...



BYU's best teams have had a strong Defense, and a balanced offense. Vai just apparantly likes to now show his Ute to everybody and pretend that he likes BYU. Why doesn't he just come out and say that he hates Bronco and will not write anythnig objective about BYU 'till someone from the administration shoots that stooopid football coach?

Nate has done very good job of defending Bronco and the team. Vai on the other hand well he just needs to go away. He is not helping the school's reputation or his own by continuing to take shots at them. I find it amazing in Vai's column from last week he claims he and Bronco are good friends now and in fact he recently had a one hour meeting with Bronco. This is how you treat your good friends? Knowing Bronco he probably went out of his way to make that meeting happen. A meeting most of us would probably never get. Vai needs to let this go. Enough is Enough, Vai was recently called to be in a stake presidency he should know better than continuing to hold a grudge against someone.

I love Nate defending his coach. And while Nate makes a fairly persuasive case, he does clearly lean Broncos way on the positives while mentioning no negatives. Not exactly balanced, but again i love the defense of his case and the rebuttal/denouncing/callong out Vai.

However, consider one of Nates strongest points was the Hill effect. Nate make sthe case that Bronco recognizes talent, but applies it to past players and current freshman. Bronco missed the boat on talent recognition (or maybe he did read it right from high school and therefore did not recruit Riley). But Riley does not factor into Nates rebut.



On the other hand, I do agree, regrettably, with Vai that ESPN can't be thrilled with the performances at Utah and even more dismayed vs BSU. If BYU keeps playing like that, ESPN will not be happy. And while I detest Vai's Bronco bashing, this offense is not the old BYU offense AND IT BETTER CHANGE. It did change vs a bad Hawaii team, but let's see what Hill can do vs a better USU and go from there.

dmcougar wrote:
I love Nate defending his coach. And while Nate makes a fairly persuasive case, he does clearly lean Broncos way on the positives while mentioning no negatives. Not exactly balanced, but again i love the defense of his case and the rebuttal/denouncing/callong out Vai.

However, consider one of Nates strongest points was the Hill effect. Nate make sthe case that Bronco recognizes talent, but applies it to past players and current freshman. Bronco missed the boat on talent recognition (or maybe he did read it right from high school and therefore did not recruit Riley). But Riley does not factor into Nates rebut.



On the other hand, I do agree, regrettably, with Vai that ESPN can't be thrilled with the performances at Utah and even more dismayed vs BSU. If BYU keeps playing like that, ESPN will not be happy. And while I detest Vai's Bronco bashing, this offense is not the old BYU offense AND IT BETTER CHANGE. It did change vs a bad Hawaii team, but let's see what Hill can do vs a better USU and go from there.

NBC would have dropped Notre Dame a long time ago if "exciting" football mattered as much as Vai thinks it does. BYU is going to put a lot of eyes on the screen, even if the game turns into a knock down, drag out, defensive battle that was BYU vs BSU. Isn't that exactly what most SEC games are?



Bottom line, some teams and games get a lot of attention and generate positive ratings. BYU is one of those teams. I don't think ESPN cares one bit as long as their ratings aren't in the toilet. And Vai doesn't make mention of any rating in his "article".



Vai also says that Homoe better get BYU in a conference quick. Which conference would that be Vai? SUn-Belt? WAC? MWC? Now THOSE are games ESPN is going to want to put on TV. uh-huh.

In many ways Vai is worse than Gordon Monson. At least Monson openly writes trash to get reads based on what will get a rise out of people. Vai writes his nonsense out of hatred for Bronco yet denies it and tries to hide it.

BroncoBot wrote:

I love Nate defending his coach. And while Nate makes a fairly persuasive case, he does clearly lean Broncos way on the positives while mentioning no negatives. Not exactly balanced, but again i love the defense of his case and the rebuttal/denouncing/callong out Vai.

However, consider one of Nates strongest points was the Hill effect. Nate make sthe case that Bronco recognizes talent, but applies it to past players and current freshman. Bronco missed the boat on talent recognition (or maybe he did read it right from high school and therefore did not recruit Riley). But Riley does not factor into Nates rebut.



On the other hand, I do agree, regrettably, with Vai that ESPN can't be thrilled with the performances at Utah and even more dismayed vs BSU. If BYU keeps playing like that, ESPN will not be happy. And while I detest Vai's Bronco bashing, this offense is not the old BYU offense AND IT BETTER CHANGE. It did change vs a bad Hawaii team, but let's see what Hill can do vs a better USU and go from there.

NBC would have dropped Notre Dame a long time ago if "exciting" football mattered as much as Vai thinks it does. BYU is going to put a lot of eyes on the screen, even if the game turns into a knock down, drag out, defensive battle that was BYU vs BSU. Isn't that exactly what most SEC games are?



Bottom line, some teams and games get a lot of attention and generate positive ratings. BYU is one of those teams. I don't think ESPN cares one bit as long as their ratings aren't in the toilet. And Vai doesn't make mention of any rating in his "article".



Vai also says that Homoe better get BYU in a conference quick. Which conference would that be Vai? SUn-Belt? WAC? MWC? Now THOSE are games ESPN is going to want to put on TV. uh-huh.

Unlike you, VAI has a keen awareness that there are other conferences - including one that wants BYU that is better than any you mentioned.



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

More silliness. ESPN got the old BYU vs UH and UH was typical of who the old BYU played most weeks except bowl games -,go look at old BYU bowl records vs Navy, Indiana, Okie State, Ohio State in off years, UCLA, etc. to see how BYU fared vs decent teams most years or look at Detmer's senior season.



It was the OLD BYU UH game where ESPN switched over to baseball.



ESPN wants interesting games and they do not expect BYU to win them all.



The down-to-the-wire games vs teams fans have heard of keep viewers and sell ads - OLD BYU beating up WAC and lower MWC teams - not so interesting.



ESPN would put up with the cupcakes - like they did when BSU was eating cake on ESPN, if BYU ran the table - but BYU Overscheduled and thus has 2 losses.



Post the ratings. Old BYU feasting on Weber State and UH surely find the bottom right behind Wazoo who had The Leach factor going.



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

Cougarbib wrote:

dmcougar wrote:
I love Nate defending his coach. And while Nate makes a fairly persuasive case, he does clearly lean Broncos way on the positives while mentioning no negatives. Not exactly balanced, but again i love the defense of his case and the rebuttal/denouncing/callong out Vai.

However, consider one of Nates strongest points was the Hill effect. Nate make sthe case that Bronco recognizes talent, but applies it to past players and current freshman. Bronco missed the boat on talent recognition (or maybe he did read it right from high school and therefore did not recruit Riley). But Riley does not factor into Nates rebut.



On the other hand, I do agree, regrettably, with Vai that ESPN can't be thrilled with the performances at Utah and even more dismayed vs BSU. If BYU keeps playing like that, ESPN will not be happy. And while I detest Vai's Bronco bashing, this offense is not the old BYU offense AND IT BETTER CHANGE. It did change vs a bad Hawaii team, but let's see what Hill can do vs a better USU and go from there.

NBC would have dropped Notre Dame a long time ago if "exciting" football mattered as much as Vai thinks it does. BYU is going to put a lot of eyes on the screen, even if the game turns into a knock down, drag out, defensive battle that was BYU vs BSU. Isn't that exactly what most SEC games are?



Bottom line, some teams and games get a lot of attention and generate positive ratings. BYU is one of those teams. I don't think ESPN cares one bit as long as their ratings aren't in the toilet. And Vai doesn't make mention of any rating in his "article".



Vai also says that Homoe better get BYU in a conference quick. Which conference would that be Vai? SUn-Belt? WAC? MWC? Now THOSE are games ESPN is going to want to put on TV. uh-huh.

Unlike you, VAI has a keen awareness that there are other conferences - including one that wants BYU that is better than any you mentioned.



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

]

Sure, probably most conferences want BYU to join, but at what cost to BYU? And I don't think the Big east is really a viable option for BYU.



Your points about the Hawaii game/OLD BYU are spot on. That was a much more boring game than the BSU game.

BroncoBot wrote:
NBC would have dropped Notre Dame a long time ago if "exciting" football mattered as much as Vai thinks it does. BYU is going to put a lot of eyes on the screen, even if the game turns into a knock down, drag out, defensive battle that was BYU vs BSU. Isn't that exactly what most SEC games are?



Bottom line, some teams and games get a lot of attention and generate positive ratings. BYU is one of those teams. I don't think ESPN cares one bit as long as their ratings aren't in the toilet. And Vai doesn't make mention of any rating in his "article".

Totally agree. Many people here in Alabama have talked to me about BYU. In an area of the country that stresses defense first, people were VERY impressed with BYU's defense against Boise State. That was a very exciting game, despite the eventual outcome.

Despite the losses, both the Utah and BSU games were down-to-the-wire, exciting games that ESPN did sign up for. The Hawaii game, although a lot of fun to watch for me, was apparently so boring to the ESPN crew that they left the game to show us baseball, and then forgot to say word one about the game during most of the 4th quarter, choosing instead to talk about Notre Dame.



As much as we'd enjoy the dominating play shown in the Hawaii game, the ratings will be much better for the close ones. Bring on the tough opponents, and let's go. I think ESPN is happy with the product. It would be nice, however, if they put some announcers on who knew what they were doing. How about Greg Wrubell in a simulcast??? Good idea!! :crazy:

First off, let's be honest, BYU/Bronco struggle against above average teams. Our offense has been completely lackluster for 3 seasons in a row now.



I do not think this is due to Bronco's inability to identify and cultivate players. Too many players have risen to prominence under Bronco.



I do, however, feel strongly that our woes on offense are due to Bronco's complete failure at identifing talented coaches.

Gunk wrote:
First off, let's be honest, BYU/Bronco struggle against above average teams. Our offense has been completely lackluster for 3 seasons in a row now.



I do not think this is due to Bronco's inability to identify and cultivate players. Too many players have risen to prominence under Bronco.



I do, however, feel strongly that our woes on offense are due to Bronco's complete failure at identifing talented coaches.

You may have a point here for the offensive side of the ball. If he admits that he doesn't know offense very well, then he probably needs to lean on someone who is a great offensive mind to let him know what coaches would be good pick ups. I am sure he has connections out there. BTW, I don't buy that Bronco doesn't understand offense. A great defensive coach must know what works on offense, so all he needs to think about is what works against his good defenses and find someone who can coach that up in his team--preferably someone who has already proven it at another school.



In the meantime, I am patient enough to give Doman another year (like what I think matters in anyway).

Cougarfan87 wrote:

First off, let's be honest, BYU/Bronco struggle against above average teams. Our offense has been completely lackluster for 3 seasons in a row now.



I do not think this is due to Bronco's inability to identify and cultivate players. Too many players have risen to prominence under Bronco.



I do, however, feel strongly that our woes on offense are due to Bronco's complete failure at identifing talented coaches.

You may have a point here for the offensive side of the ball. If he admits that he doesn't know offense very well, then he probably needs to lean on someone who is a great offensive mind to let him know what coaches would be good pick ups. I am sure he has connections out there. BTW, I don't buy that Bronco doesn't understand offense. A great defensive coach must know what works on offense, so all he needs to think about is what works against his good defenses and find someone who can coach that up in his team--preferably someone who has already proven it at another school.



In the meantime, I am patient enough to give Doman another year (like what I think matters in anyway).

I agree Bronco needs to lean on someone with a great offensive mind. Bronco would also need to give this genius a long leash. As it stands now, we have a newbie OC with a stifling emphasis on execution over scheme.



I agree, as DC Bronco would/should have a solid understanding of offense and he probably does take the approach of implementing on offense that his defense struggles against, which is why there is a sudden shift towards mobile QBs at BYU. Bronco struggles against mobile QBs.



Problem is it’s not working, and there’s a difference between having a mobile QB that can take off when a play collapses or avoid a sack with his feet vs. using your QB like a RB.



I’m not a fan of Doman as OC one bit. Never have been, and unless he can right the ship ASAP he should be let go. Hill, our receiving corps, and RBs are too good of talents to be squandered while Doman potty trains himself at OC.

Great defense trumps great offense nearly every time.



And Bronco's struggles against above average teams is no different than most other coaches out there.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Great defense trumps great offense nearly every time.



And Bronco's struggles against above average teams is no different than most other coaches out there.

blasphemy! And I totally agree.



Would be nice to have a great OC though. Someone that is good enough that Bronco doesn't have to emphasize execution as much.

There is obviously some bias going on here.... If someone is critical of BYU then their credibility is shot..

I thought Vai's article was mostly right. I disagreed about some views but overall I think he's right.

Espn cares about money through TV viewers... Byu has been known as a powerhouse pass happy team. It's exiting to watch and you would assume that Espn factored in that when deciding to air Byu games.

Nates article was clearly a "stick up for your old coach" kinda article. Vai, Nate, gordon monson etc are journalists.. They get paid to write articles not pep rallies for fans....

Vai I'm sure is frustrated by the team this year as many fans and he wrote is opinion on it. I really don't know why some have to call him out on it..

stgeorgefan wrote:
There is obviously some bias going on here.... If someone is critical of BYU then their credibility is shot..

I thought Vai's article was mostly right. I disagreed about some views but overall I think he's right.

Espn cares about money through TV viewers... Byu has been known as a powerhouse pass happy team. It's exiting to watch and you would assume that Espn factored in that when deciding to air Byu games.

Nates article was clearly a "stick up for your old coach" kinda article. Vai, Nate, gordon monson etc are journalists.. They get paid to write articles not pep rallies for fans....

Vai I'm sure is frustrated by the team this year as many fans and he wrote is opinion on it. I really don't know why some have to call him out on it..

You pointed out why some have called him on it... He is supposed to be a journalist, not an opinion writer. And if he does write opinions, his opinion becomes free game for criticism if he's not backing anything up with facts. His article is full of holes, look at the ratings for BYU games this year, they aren't bad. ESPN probably doesn't give a darn.

BroncoBot wrote:

There is obviously some bias going on here.... If someone is critical of BYU then their credibility is shot..

I thought Vai's article was mostly right. I disagreed about some views but overall I think he's right.

Espn cares about money through TV viewers... Byu has been known as a powerhouse pass happy team. It's exiting to watch and you would assume that Espn factored in that when deciding to air Byu games.

Nates article was clearly a "stick up for your old coach" kinda article. Vai, Nate, gordon monson etc are journalists.. They get paid to write articles not pep rallies for fans....

Vai I'm sure is frustrated by the team this year as many fans and he wrote is opinion on it. I really don't know why some have to call him out on it..

You pointed out why some have called him on it... He is supposed to be a journalist, not an opinion writer. And if he does write opinions, his opinion becomes free game for criticism if he's not backing anything up with facts. His article is full of holes, look at the ratings for BYU games this year, they aren't bad. ESPN probably doesn't give a darn.

Actually, he's more of a columnist than a journalist. He is an unpaid, invited columnist who helps keep salary costs down at DN. the trade off is that he gets a public forum to aire out his opinions--under the guise of being a Phily sportscaster on loan.

And let's be clear, he was disgruntled prior to BYUs offensive woes. The O-woes just give him ammunition.

Technically he is paid to get eyeballs to the website. The best way for a writer to get views is to post something negative and inflammatory.