Archived Topic

A different take on the QB situation

by cscoug · 12/2/2012

Advertisement
C
cscoug
I admit upfront, I have been very frustrated with Bronco's insistence on Riley remaining the starter. I was mad for a while. I thought about it more, and I have come to the following conclusion--this more about a philosophy change than it is about Riley. See what you think.



I wanted to post a little a different take on the QB situation. It has been mentioned a number of times by Bronco but appears to largely have gone unnoticed on the discussion board. Namely, Bronco has stated that he is changing philosophy and wants BYU to have a running QB. I think Bronco has committed to this 100%, and when viewed that way, it makes a lot more sense why he has so adamantly stuck with Riley. Consider the following:



Current personnel decisions:

- Riley has been firmly entrenched as the starter, in spite of his persistent turnovers and critical errors

- Taysom Hill elevated to second string over James Lark, even as a newly returned missionary

- James Lark firmly planted on the bench, although he has shown to be a capable player and is a senior



Past personnel decisions:

- Riley Nelson overtakes Jake Heaps as the starter and remains so

- Jake Heaps decides to transfer to a school with a coach that has a reputation for being a keen offensive mind even though he will have to sit out a year. He could have stayed here and redshirted as well. He chose not to. Was this because too much water was under the bridge? Probably. But I would consider leaving as well if the coaches were committed to running QBs and I was a pocket passer. Look at how it’s played out for James Lark.



Staff make-up:

- Doman was a running QB at BYU. He ran the option in HS and did so effectively in college. He is well-versed in running QBs.

- Joe DuPaix was hired onto the staff when this philosophy started. He too was a running QB in college. He came from Navy where they run the triple option that relies on a running QB. He also came from the option in HS that was instilled by his father and coach. He is well-versed in running QBs.

- Doman comes from this same HS system



Coaching philosophy:

- Bronco is a successful DC that often gets burned by running QBs. He sees the value of a running QB

- Brandon Doman is the offensive coordinator and has a long history in the philosophy that utilizes running QBs



Future recruits:

- all future QB recruits are running QBs

- Tanner Mangum and Billy Green have already committed

- Austin Kafentzis and Kimane Domena, both already offered for class of 2015, are running QBs

- Joe DuPaix is the recruiting coordinator



Looking at it this way, makes me less critical of Bronco’s stubbornness to continue with Riley. It shifts the debate to whether or not this philosophical change is right for BYU. Bronco holds dear to much of the success and good values LaVell espoused. He obviously does not feel similarly about LaVell’s offensive approach, nor should he be required to feel so. After suffering through Riley and watching Taysom get hurt, I am apprehensive about the change in philosophy. This is underscored by Bronco’s insistence to stick with it while Riley so painfully cost us games and Lark atrophied on the bench. However, I am not as frustrated with Bronco’s man-crush on Riley now that I see why it was the case.
S
SpiffCoug
Just my two cents, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid the QB controversy that had hampered the team the last two years.



For whatever reason (whether the team turned on Jake Heaps before he arrived on campus or whether his lack of off-season participation cost him team support, etc.), Heaps was never an undisputed team leader. So when his play warranted it, he was benched in favor of an undisputed team leader.



Heaps then quit the program to seek a new start at a new program.



Nelson was clearly the team leader. For whatever reason, the team responded to his leadership as we saw in 2011. And the fan base was split and the QB controversy lived on, until Heaps left.



Bronco was not going to have a repeat in the QB department again. When Nelson got injured so early in 2012, I really think Bronco, in large part, went to Hill to avoid a controversy. Going with a freshman would allow him to more easily go back to Nelson - the indisputed team leader - when Nelson was healthy, since the injury wasn't season ending.



I think he didn't want to go with Lark because, a well-playing Lark would have reignited the QB controversy that had hung over the program for two full seasons.



He returned to Nelson after the Hill injury, instead of turning to Lark for these reasons as well.



Again, this is just my opinion, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid controversy and didn't want to bench an indisputed team leader.



I disagree with the decision. Team leader or not, I think Riley's play earned him a long stint on the bench.



But I wonder if Heaps not being a team leader led to his benching when he was playing extremely poorly and Nelson, being a team leader led to him not being benched when he was playing poorly.
M
MountainMD
I pray that this is not the case and that Bronco is not 100% committed to this idea. BYU could do much worse than to continue to recruit/ run/ establish the possession passing attack BYU has been known for. Bronco is a great defensive coordinator and surely realizes that even his defenses struggle as much with a good passing attack as with a mobile quaterback - particularly one with legs > arm.
F
frdbtr
SpiffCoug wrote:
Just my two cents, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid the QB controversy that had hampered the team the last two years.



For whatever reason (whether the team turned on Jake Heaps before he arrived on campus or whether his lack of off-season participation cost him team support, etc.), Heaps was never an undisputed team leader. So when his play warranted it, he was benched in favor of an undisputed team leader.



Heaps then quit the program to seek a new start at a new program.



Nelson was clearly the team leader. For whatever reason, the team responded to his leadership as we saw in 2011. And the fan base was split and the QB controversy lived on, until Heaps left.



Bronco was not going to have a repeat in the QB department again. When Nelson got injured so early in 2012, I really think Bronco, in large part, went to Hill to avoid a controversy. Going with a freshman would allow him to more easily go back to Nelson - the indisputed team leader - when Nelson was healthy, since the injury wasn't season ending.



I think he didn't want to go with Lark because, a well-playing Lark would have reignited the QB controversy that had hung over the program for two full seasons.



He returned to Nelson after the Hill injury, instead of turning to Lark for these reasons as well.



Again, this is just my opinion, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid controversy and didn't want to bench an indisputed team leader.



I disagree with the decision. Team leader or not, I think Riley's play earned him a long stint on the bench.



But I wonder if Heaps not being a team leader led to his benching when he was playing extremely poorly and Nelson, being a team leader led to him not being benched when he was playing poorly.


Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner. Just like I stated in my thread. I think this is probably better explained though. Riley stayed in even while playing badly because he is the leader of the offense and the players and Bronco want him there.
C
Cougs_Rule
Good points guys Spiff and cscoug. About time others have agreed with me. I have argued for almost over a year that the "drop back qb" is dieing and going away courtesy of Broncos philosophy. And notwithstanding my venom toward the whole Riley/bronco melodrama, yes, Bronco has demonstrated a conspicuous perseverance toward Riley and it may actually be this running man routine instead. Regardless his "commitment to principle" while fantastic in defensive results, it has rendered results on offense that can be explained as "a virtue pressed to an extreme [and thus becoming] a vice."

At any rate, I agree almost entirely with you both. Good job.
Advertisement
S
SpiffCoug
I don't think it is/was The style of play Bronco is/was committing or trying to commit to. I don't think we are seeing a shift to a dual QB. I don't think we are seeing the death of a passing QB. I think we witnessed the death of a non-team leading QB. It was Riley's playing style that won and kept him the job; it was his style of leadership.



It was his win at all costs: get on the field at all costs; never stop competing; never give up; never quit working. Leadership is what Bronco wanted. Player leadership is what Bronco wants.



What Bronco needs to find now is a QB who is both supremely talented in on-field skills and leadership. I think he may have had that in Lark this season. But Lark wasn't the team leader. Even Lark deferred to Riley. This was Riley's team.



Hopefully going forward the team's best leader and QB are the same individual.



It was the death of a non-type A personality, non-Alpha male, non-BMOC QB that we saw the last two years.
Y
YNot
What would our record be this year if Max Hall or John Beck had been under center?



Senior Max Hall was embarrassed by Florida State (7-6) and TCU (a really good team, 12-1, score was 38-7, ouch!). 4 turnovers in a 1-point win against Oklahoma (Sooners finished 8-5). Took overtime to beat Utah at home.



Senior John Beck lost to Arizona (6-6) and a decent Boston College team in overtime (10-3 record). Took one of the legendary plays in BYU history to beat Utah (8-5).



Was Hall's, Beck's, and BYU's past Senior QB success based more on easier scheduling than we give credit?



Sagarin rankings of our past schedules:

2012 - #56 (without SDSU bowl game)

2009 - #61 (lost to FSU and TCU at home)

2006 - #74 (lost at AZ and BC)



2012 record with Hall or Beck? Beat Utah and SJSU? 9-3? Neither proved that they could have beaten Notre Dame on the road.



I'm not saying Riley is as good as Max or Beck, because he is not. But, how would BYU have done in 2012 if we switched out #1 Notre Dame and #13 Oregon State for Wyoming and New Mexico? 9-3?
T
TulaneVandyRiceCoug
I think another item in Bronco's mind probably comes the perspective of the defensive coordinator facing a string of really good running QB's in the same season. Maybe it was 2010(?), when Bronco faced Landry Jones, Jake Locker, Andy Dalton, Collin Kaepernick, Chuckie Keeton, and a few others I can't remember that gave our defense a nightmare. (Looking at it now, those are some top quality QB's).



While I agree that there is a value to having a running QB, it should definitely not be the focus of the offense. Having a QB that displayed abilities like Lark just showed is what we need first. Having a QB that can run if needed, is like a good bonus to that first characteristic.
C
Cougarbib
I love James Lark. But keep in mind that he has not yet faced a fierce pass rush with tightly covered receivers. Simply has not. That is unfortunate. There have been several games in the past seven years where he could have been brought along and measured. The season is not over.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
M
Mars
SpiffCoug wrote:
Leadership is what Bronco wanted. Player leadership is what Bronco wants.

Bronco has always been one to not provide the needed leadership himself, instead letting the team choose to lose a bowl to inferior Arizona, or choose to splinter and play Riley Nelson. It's a weakness of his.
Advertisement
S
SpiffCoug
Mars wrote:
Leadership is what Bronco wanted. Player leadership is what Bronco wants.

Bronco has always been one to not provide the needed leadership himself, instead letting the team choose to lose a bowl to inferior Arizona, or choose to splinter and play Riley Nelson. It's a weakness of his.

Yep. In previous years, Bronco under-estimated the level of player leadership (See 2008 and the AZ loss) and this year he over-estimated.



In both years, the team needed better leadership than the players were providing.
C
cscoug
SpiffCoug wrote:
Just my two cents, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid the QB controversy that had hampered the team the last two years.



For whatever reason (whether the team turned on Jake Heaps before he arrived on campus or whether his lack of off-season participation cost him team support, etc.), Heaps was never an undisputed team leader. So when his play warranted it, he was benched in favor of an undisputed team leader.



Heaps then quit the program to seek a new start at a new program.



Nelson was clearly the team leader. For whatever reason, the team responded to his leadership as we saw in 2011. And the fan base was split and the QB controversy lived on, until Heaps left.



Bronco was not going to have a repeat in the QB department again. When Nelson got injured so early in 2012, I really think Bronco, in large part, went to Hill to avoid a controversy. Going with a freshman would allow him to more easily go back to Nelson - the indisputed team leader - when Nelson was healthy, since the injury wasn't season ending.



I think he didn't want to go with Lark because, a well-playing Lark would have reignited the QB controversy that had hung over the program for two full seasons.



He returned to Nelson after the Hill injury, instead of turning to Lark for these reasons as well.



Again, this is just my opinion, but I think Bronco was trying to avoid controversy and didn't want to bench an indisputed team leader.



I disagree with the decision. Team leader or not, I think Riley's play earned him a long stint on the bench.



But I wonder if Heaps not being a team leader led to his benching when he was playing extremely poorly and Nelson, being a team leader led to him not being benched when he was playing poorly.


I understand your take here. I still think that it doesn't incorporate the entire picture.



1. Bronco is definitely moving towards recruiting running QBs. He has mentioned the challenges they pose for him to prepare against, and his current offensive staff already has training and a bias in that direction.



2. I agree that Bronco looks for player leadership. He has the entire time he has been here. While QB is unquestionably the most visible leadership position on the football field, Bronco often finds player leaders at other positions. This year Olgetree at MLB is definitely it. He has succeeded with Rich at safety and Jensen at MLB in the past. He has not always been as successful at finding it on the offensive side, but he has always leaned on player leaders. I don't think this entirely addresses his stubbornness to stick with Nelson.
S
SpiffCoug
1. Billy Green and Tanner Mangum are the two most recent recruits and both are definitely more of the passing than running/dual-threat QBs.



2. Maybe part of his difficulties in finding those real offensive leaders is the lack of time he spends with the offense? Perhaps as the head coach, his time split between offense and defense should be closer to 50/50 than the 95/5 it currently is?
M
Mars
SpiffCoug wrote:
1. Billy Green and Tanner Mangum are the two most recent recruits and both are definitely more of the passing than running/dual-threat QBs.

Isn't Kimane Domena a running QB though? What about Austin Kafentzis? Danny Hong? Hayden Griffitts? John Wolford? Kai Nacua? Neil Pau'u?
S
SpiffCoug
Mars wrote:
1. Billy Green and Tanner Mangum are the two most recent recruits and both are definitely more of the passing than running/dual-threat QBs.

Isn't Kimane Domena a running QB though? What about Austin Kafentzis? Danny Hong? Hayden Griffitts? John Wolford? Kai Nacua? Neil Pau'u?

None of those have signed with BYU as of yet. My point stands.
Advertisement
M
Mars
SpiffCoug wrote:
None of those have signed with BYU as of yet. My point stands.

So if BYU is offering run-first QBs scholarships, but they haven't accepted, that doesn't point to the fact that Bronco is pushing the offense into more of a dual-QB direction?
S
SpiffCoug
Mars wrote:
None of those have signed with BYU as of yet. My point stands.

So if BYU is offering run-first QBs scholarships, but they haven't accepted, that doesn't point to the fact that Bronco is pushing the offense into more of a dual-QB direction?

No. Because they're still recruiting and signing pass-first QBs as well.
L
Lawboy
Austin Kafentzis is not a run first QB. Strong armed passer. Kid won the Utah 5A javeline toss and set a state record as a freaking sophie.



BYU won't get him anyway. He is not LDS. He will be like Cooper Bateman and go out of state.
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.