What's Your Alternative to GFGH?

I've seen a number of people on here declaring that GFGH is dead and that we need to move on. I just want to ask--having seen how deplorable our OL is in pass protection for three games now, what is your immediately better alternative to GFGH that accommodates this deficiency?

I think GFGH can work, but some of the route combinations need to be changed. But that can be almost as big of a change as changing the tempo.

Ammon Olsen at QB in shotgun with quick throws (slants, out in the flat, etc.) to bring the D in and an occasional pass over the top to keep them honest and on their heels with Hill as a TB and lots of play action. Anything but GFGH... my guess is that Bronco and Anae will stick with it until A) it becomes obvious to them both it isn't going to work, B) the players begin to revolt against it, C) they keep losing to decent teams or D) when the defense begins to complain and lose morale because of the continued foolishness of trying to run it.

Wolfman wrote:
Ammon Olsen at QB in shotgun with quick throws (slants, out in the flat, etc.) to bring the D in and an occasional pass over the top to keep them honest and on their heels with Hill as a TB and lots of play action. Anything but GFGH... my guess is that Bronco and Anae will stick with it until A) it becomes obvious to them both it isn't going to work, B) the players begin to revolt against it, C) they keep losing to decent teams or D) when the defense begins to complain and lose morale because of the continued foolishness of trying to run it.

What have you seen out of our OL that makes you think that will work? The 5 sacks last week they gave up when Hill was in the gun?

snoscythe wrote:

Ammon Olsen at QB in shotgun with quick throws (slants, out in the flat, etc.) to bring the D in and an occasional pass over the top to keep them honest and on their heels with Hill as a TB and lots of play action. Anything but GFGH... my guess is that Bronco and Anae will stick with it until A) it becomes obvious to them both it isn't going to work, B) the players begin to revolt against it, C) they keep losing to decent teams or D) when the defense begins to complain and lose morale because of the continued foolishness of trying to run it.

What have you seen out of our OL that makes you think that will work? The 5 sacks last week they gave up when Hill was in the gun?

Hill is not a passer and he is having difficulty making the right reads which leads to indecision and time for the D line to get to you... if Olsen was in shotgun with a normal BYU playbook, the D wouldn't have as much success getting to him with quick throws, draw plays and play action. And, Utah usually has a top 20 D line every year and so for BYU to give up 5 sacks is about what you'd expect, especially given the adjustments made after the Virginia game with new guys in new roles.

Also snos, BYU is not Oregon or Clemson... you've got to have depth and speed at key positions on offense so that guys aren't getting winded... BYU doesn't really have that. Schools like Oregon can run GFGH because they are deep at so many positions which affords them the luxury of rotating guys in and out with fresh legs. Not in Provo though. GFGH also results in a lot of 3 and outs for teams unaccustomed to and ill-prepared in running that style. What Bronco and Anae are doing offensively right now is stupid. Stupidity was there last year too... they had an accurate, true throwing QB sit the bench the whole year (Lark) while Bronco's man-crush, Nelson, threw wounded duck after wounded duck with picks left and right and now this season, the better true QB (Olsen) is sitting on the bench so Bronco and Anae can experiment and try to prove to the college football world that BYU can run the same type of offense as the Oregon Ducks. :lol:

I like GFGH. I think it needs at least a full season before a fair assessment can be made.

Wolfman wrote:

Wolfman wrote:
Ammon Olsen at QB in shotgun with quick throws (slants, out in the flat, etc.) to bring the D in and an occasional pass over the top to keep them honest and on their heels with Hill as a TB and lots of play action. Anything but GFGH... my guess is that Bronco and Anae will stick with it until A) it becomes obvious to them both it isn't going to work, B) the players begin to revolt against it, C) they keep losing to decent teams or D) when the defense begins to complain and lose morale because of the continued foolishness of trying to run it.

What have you seen out of our OL that makes you think that will work? The 5 sacks last week they gave up when Hill was in the gun?

Hill is not a passer and he is having difficulty making the right reads which leads to indecision and time for the D line to get to you... if Olsen was in shotgun with a normal BYU playbook, the D wouldn't have as much success getting to him with quick throws, draw plays and play action. And, Utah usually has a top 20 D line every year and so for BYU to give up 5 sacks is about what you'd expect, especially given the adjustments made after the Virginia game with new guys in new roles.

I agree with Wolfman. I would tweak it to say let Ammon Run the GFGH offense since, from all accounts, he is still athletic enough to run it, though not as good as Taysom, but way better at passing. I would rather trade a worse running QB offense for a better passing QB offense than vice versa.



As for giving it a whole season under Hill, I don't think that is necessary. You don't have to let the rolling wheelbarrow full of dynamite get to the bottom of the hill and blow up your house before you realize that your estimation in fuse length was a mistake. I think we have seen what we need to see from Hill to know that he isn't a very good passer. Giving him more time will just repeat the mistakes of the past, where they all of a sudden look good against inferior competition. I would use the inferior competition this week to train the new QB, and get the new QB, Olson, ready for the tougher games ahead. To do otherwise is Football malpractice. We're talking less than 50% completion after three games. How does that warrant even one more snap?

I don't think we have to gill THill the full season. But I do think, at a minimum, we have to give GFGH a full season.



There could be some merit for Hill to remain in. We really don't have any inferior competition games coming up. The only teams remaining on our schedule that have inferior talent are (possibly Middle Tennessee, Idaho St and Nevada). The remaining six teams will be plenty challenging.



To a certain extent, I do think we're somewhat married to THill at the QB position.

SpiffCoug wrote:
I don't think we have to gill THill the full season. But I do think, at a minimum, we have to give GFGH a full season.



There could be some merit for Hill to remain in. We really don't have any inferior competition games coming up. The only teams remaining on our schedule that have inferior talent are (possibly Middle Tennessee, Idaho St and Nevada). The remaining six teams will be plenty challenging.



To a certain extent, I do think we're somewhat married to THill at the QB position.

Because we don't have many inferior competition games coming up, I think now is the time. I would use this week to get Ammon Olsen playing well. And use the next two weeks to figure out how to get Hill involved as scat back that can also throw it for some trick plays...Nevermind. I forgot that trick plays are against the honor code. In any event, Taysom Hill is Trey Burton. We should use him like Trey Burton. http://www.gatorzone.com/football/bios.php?year=2012&player_id=232 He would be great for a wildcat change of pace QB/scat back, but doesn't cut it as a every down QB.

How about some mid direction plays.



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

Cougarfan87 wrote:

I don't think we have to gill THill the full season. But I do think, at a minimum, we have to give GFGH a full season.



There could be some merit for Hill to remain in. We really don't have any inferior competition games coming up. The only teams remaining on our schedule that have inferior talent are (possibly Middle Tennessee, Idaho St and Nevada). The remaining six teams will be plenty challenging.



To a certain extent, I do think we're somewhat married to THill at the QB position.

Because we don't have many inferior competition games coming up, I think now is the time. I would use this week to get Ammon Olsen playing well. And use the next two weeks to figure out how to get Hill involved as scat back that can also throw it for some trick plays...Nevermind. I forgot that trick plays are against the honor code. In any event, Taysom Hill is Trey Burton. We should use him like Trey Burton. http://www.gatorzone.com/football/bios.php?year=2012&player_id=232 He would be great for a wildcat change of pace QB/scat back, but doesn't cut it as a every down QB.

Trick plays never work for BYU. For example, the double pitch play got blown up vs Utah. See? Proof!! :whistle: Besides, look what WE did vs Texas. We won't need trick plays vs Utah. We are strong enough. In fact we expect to dominate Utah, why would we need trick plays? :roll:

GFGH is actually a really suitable offense for exactly the type of team that BYU fields. You don't have to all world speed to play it, you just need to get to the line quickly after each play with the smarts to know quickly what the next play is.



GFGH also doesn't need to include the read option, though it is a useful play in that offense, but you could run it with a far more heavy passing attack, if the QB could make the throughs. A GFGH offense run of 5-8 yard pass plays over the middle and to the flats would be quite impressive and difficult to stop, especially if you could hit them over the top a few times as they suck up to stop the short passing game.

GRGN offense. Get real! Get Now!

SpiffCoug wrote:
I don't think we have to gill THill the full season. But I do think, at a minimum, we have to give GFGH a full season.



There could be some merit for Hill to remain in. We really don't have any inferior competition games coming up. The only teams remaining on our schedule that have inferior talent are (possibly Middle Tennessee, Idaho St and Nevada). The remaining six teams will be plenty challenging.



To a certain extent, I do think we're somewhat married to THill at the QB position.

I couldn't disagree more Spiff... BYU has no business running a GFGH offense... it's the equivalent of a track athlete conditioned for an 800 meter relay trying to run and win a marathon. Once again, the QB position and offense are being totally mismanaged. Had Bronco and Doman gone with Lark last season, I think the Cougs would have been in a BCS bowl because the D was that good, but instead, they went with Bronco's man-crush Nelson who was barely a D 1 QB. Lark was clearly the best QB in 2012 and now its Olsen who is clearly the better true QB and sitting on the bench. BYU's bread and butter has always been a drop-back passer who can carve up defenses, but for some reason, Bronco and Anae are trying to implement not only a running attack, but a GFGH offense that isn't tailored for a BYU O.

Lark stunk. It took SDSU one game of film to completely shut him down. BYU's bread and butter has always been a QB who could efficiently throw the football.



Right now BYU is now on year four of not having one.



As for the marathon comparison, you're correct. Anae used the same comparison. He said the GFGH offense is a marathon that shouldn't be judged after the 3rd mile. He said it was going to take until at least mile 13 (half the season) before it should be judged.



But the passing game MUST be fixed. I think GFGH gives THill his best chance to do that right now. He has passing lanes, he has open receivers. He's just missed them more often than not.



Once he starts throwing accurately and efficiently, the offense will take off.

I like GFGH, but I think BYU is doing it wrong. Their focus is getting as many plays in as possible, and that's not what makes the offense successful. Getting to the line quickly, not allowing substitutions, making the proper reads, then calling the play are what's important.



If you watch Oregon, they only get 75 to 85 plays a game. It's because they actually slow down to make sure the right play is called, instead of just going with the play called at the beginning.



My thought is any offense that gives Anae total control of every play ran is going to be a failed offense. He was only successful with QBs that changed plays consistently.

The guys on 1280 the Zone are asking listeners today to chime in on whether or not there should be a QB change at BYU in lieu of Hill being dead last in the nation in passing efficiency and his 35% completion percentage on the season so far. Thing is, it's not like it's a surprise... he was clearly having passing issues in spring and fall ball, yet, they made him the starter and I even heard Robert Anae say this morning that Hill's struggles passing are a result of the offense and O line not 'gelling'. Right Robert... what is wrong with these coaches???

The pistol.



We ran it a couple times vs. Utah and it worked. I liked the look and I think that Taysom and Jamaal could run it really well. Plus, it does not require 3 backs to run it, just 1. It adds a TE for better blocking and a WR, so it spreads a D out more. That means fewer in the box and opens things up in the middle for the run game. WE should have run it more.



I want ot see more pistol looks moving forward. UCLA is killing it with it right now as well.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Lark stunk. It took SDSU one game of film to completely shut him down. BYU's bread and butter has always been a QB who could efficiently throw the football.



Right now BYU is now on year four of not having one.



As for the marathon comparison, you're correct. Anae used the same comparison. He said the GFGH offense is a marathon that shouldn't be judged after the 3rd mile. He said it was going to take until at least mile 13 (half the season) before it should be judged.



But the passing game MUST be fixed. I think GFGH gives THill his best chance to do that right now. He has passing lanes, he has open receivers. He's just missed them more often than not.



Once he starts throwing accurately and efficiently, the offense will take off.

Interesting thoughts. After watching SDSU, I actually thought that had Lark played the entire season, we would have won a couple more of the close games. While he did not punch it in the end zone often, he was fairly effective at making some throws to improve the field position battle. When Nelson played in that same game, the floor caved in.



The reason why I don't like GFGH at the moment is because I believe it will wear down the defense as the season carries on. Would love to be proven wrong...but if we are going to have three and outs, GFGH seems like defensive suicide.



Also, it just seems a bit pollyanna to expect Hill to develop into an accurate passer within the scope of this season. I am not saying it will not happen - but there is very little evidence to support that viewpoint. He is the worst passing quarterback in the nation. To hold out hope that he will transform himself does not appear to be grounded on solid footing.



So long as the passing game is one of the worst in recent history, teams will load the box and the zone read will become more difficult and the offensive line will continue to look worse. Of course the offensive line looks terrible when the defense has no reason to drop into coverage.



Can GFGH compensate for athletic deficiencies? Probably...but one has to seriously question the degree to which we were outclassed athletically at any point this season. Exactly when will it be that the GFGH makes up this enormous gap? I don't see any game on our schedule where that is the case.



The bottom line is that the difference between being 8-5 last year and 12-1 was quarterback play. I think the difference between being 3-0 and 1-2 is the same this year - and it is mildly amusing that our solution is to speed up tempo and try to have a dual threat quarterbacks who are actually one dimensional.