Last Night's INTs

The first INT (thrown by Riley) intended for Apo (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Lark had an INT thrown to Hoffman (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Who was the third INT thrown to? The one downfield by Lark. I think it was intended for Apo, but can't remember.



Does anyone recall?

The third one looked like it was intended for a bird flying over the stadium. It was either Apo or Hoffman, but that thing was just a wounded duck up for grabs. Very bad decision.

SpiffCoug wrote:
The first INT (thrown by Riley) intended for Apo (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Lark had an INT thrown to Hoffman (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Who was the third INT thrown to? The one downfield by Lark. I think it was intended for Apo, but can't remember.



Does anyone recall?

The wounded punt-of-a-throw by Lark was caught by the defender guarding Hoffman. There was another receiver down field as well, about 10 yards passed Hoffman, but I don't think it was Apo. Falslev or Ridley? I'm not sure whether Lark was trying to hit Hoffman or the other guy. That throw was terrible. Granted, the rush was coming so Lark was backing away as he threw, but still.



I felt that Riley actually sparked the offense when he came in and was very unfortunate to throw that pick. His INT wasn't a horrible throw. It was a great play by the first SDSU defender to hit Apo right as the ball arrived and another great play by the second SDSU defender to catch the tipped ball and run it to the house.

Looked like te throw was to Hoffman. Funny how it seemed every throw last night was to Hoffman. Lark must have a man crush (tic).



Amen on RN.h



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

That wounded duck int was terrible, but the other two were forgive able. The two that bounced off hands really shoud have been caught. The one of Larks that went across the middle to SDSu was actually right where it was supposed to be, except Hoffman got tripped up by the defense and ended up on the ground. Should have been flagged as PI, guess the refs missed it.

Nelson's interception was really far behind the receiver.

YNot wrote:

The first INT (thrown by Riley) intended for Apo (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Lark had an INT thrown to Hoffman (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Who was the third INT thrown to? The one downfield by Lark. I think it was intended for Apo, but can't remember.



Does anyone recall?

I felt that Riley actually sparked the offense when he came in and was very unfortunate to throw that pick. His INT wasn't a horrible throw..

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Qman wrote:
Nelson's interception was really far behind the receiver.

I found it nearly hilarious that we put riley in and he nearly loses us a game within a few plays. we are seriously lucky that was not a pick six. crappy call. lark didn't do much to impress but he avoided pick sixes which is riley's forte.

jonnylingo wrote:

Nelson's interception was really far behind the receiver.

I found it nearly hilarious that we put riley in and he nearly loses us a game within a few plays. we are seriously lucky that was not a pick six. crappy call. lark didn't do much to impress but he avoided pick sixes which is riley's forte.

I actually laughed out loud when it happened, if only to keep myself from cursing. I was so happy after the game, that all was forgiven

Given how this season has gone, I don't think you could have scripted Riley coming in and throwing a pick-6.



Well, it should have been a pick-6 if SDSU doesn't make a dumb and unnecessary block.



I give full credit to the coaches for realizing that the offense needed a spark, tried to make a move to get that spark. But then realize that spark almost blew up in their face and quickly corrected that mistake.



Going back to Lark won us that game.

jonnylingo wrote:

SpiffCoug wrote:
The first INT (thrown by Riley) intended for Apo (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Lark had an INT thrown to Hoffman (who didn't catch it but got hands on it). Who was the third INT thrown to? The one downfield by Lark. I think it was intended for Apo, but can't remember.



Does anyone recall?

I felt that Riley actually sparked the offense when he came in and was very unfortunate to throw that pick. His INT wasn't a horrible throw..

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Seriously. What planet do you live on? A negative 100 PER that spars the offense? - 100.



My Christmas came early knowing that Riley Nelson will never play another game at byu again. What a curse and plague he has been to this program. The coaches, too, for buying into the nonsense that he would ever amount to anything other than a fullback that could kind of throw.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Seriously. What planet do you live on? A negative 100 PER that spars the offense? - 100.



My Christmas came early knowing that Riley Nelson will never play another game at byu again. What a curse and plague he has been to this program. The coaches, too, for buying into the nonsense that he would ever amount to anything other than a fullback that could kind of throw.

OK. May be "spark" is a huge overreaction on my part. (and the fact that our D stuffed them after the pick-6-no-wait-penalty play allows me to re-write history as I wanted it). But it's not about stats and PER. It was nice to see Riley come in and make a play to get a first down on third and long after watching Lark and BYU's offense struggle to get to midfield for the first quarter and a half.



Also, the INT was NOT Riley's fault. It was not a great throw, but there's no way it should have been an INT but for Apo. It was similar to the INT in the Oregon State game. Same receiver. Apo just needs to be a man and catch the ball. I don't care if the Db is playing tight coverage. No way you should let the ball hit you and then pop in the air for an INT like that.



Looking forward to the Taysom Hill or Ammon Olsen era - or whatever 2013 brings.

FWIW, I think that the ball was deflected by the defender. Not a great throw, but easily catchable if that DB doesn't get his dirty paws on the ball. It was a good play by the DB and if anything it was Riley's fault for not getting the ball out in front of Apo a little more. Wasn't really Apo's fault on that one, but he did have a pretty sad game, and pathetic year (considering the hype).

Receiver's are receivers because they are good at catching balls. Apo hasn't proven to be very good at that. Physically he is a beast, but as a playmaker he has been a major let down!

The truth is that the throw by Riley was no worse than the first INT throw by Lark and who are we then to say that Lark's throw would have been any different. We won despite a terrible O-line and a borderline inept O-coordinator (remember how everyone was saying that he just needed a QB who could throw down field and Doman would look fantastic? Yeah...didn't happen). It turns out our O-line has been the biggest problem this year, as some of us had been saying, not our QBing, which ended up being more of a symptom of the O-line being awful. I fully expect Weber gone by next season, if not by the end of bowl season.

Amen.

Lark also had a pick 6 that was dropped by the defender after it hit him right in the hands and another easy pick that hit the defender in the gut with no BYU receiver anywhere near by but again was dropped by a bad corner.



The point is every QB looks bad under the guidance of Doman because he's a bad OC and a bad QB coach, and the offensive line is even worse than that.

hawkwing wrote:
Lark also had a pick 6 that was dropped by the defender after it hit him right in the hands and another easy pick that hit the defender in the gut with no BYU receiver anywhere near by but again was dropped by a bad corner.



The point is every QB looks bad under the guidance of Doman because he's a bad OC and a bad QB coach, and the offensive line is even worse than that.

Truth.

1. O-Line

2. Play Calling

3. QB Play



The funny thing is that the first two negatively influence the outcome of #3