What are the 3 - 5 plays?

Bronco has often said that the difference in most games comes down to 3 to 5 plays. What do you think the 3 -5 plays were last night ... or was it even that close?



Clearly the Kick-off return for a TD was one of those plays. And the next big kick-off return was probably another one.



But, perhaps the team was just too flat, too slow, too whatever, to win.



What are your thoughts?



I look at it and say the Kick-off return for TD, the other big return and the missed FG, may be the difference in the game. BUT, I also remember the (paraphrased) quote from Steve Young: everytime we kick a field goal I know we are that much closer to losing. How many times did the Cougs make it into the blue zone and NOT score a TD? That is probably the biggest problem and the difference in the game ... does it count a just a couple of plays? I think the problem is bigger than just a couple of plays, it is systemic and if BYU wants national recognition and prominence, they better correct that problem fast.



Despite that, I voted that it was within 3 - 5 plays difference.

Hoffman just missed catching a couple of TDs. Granted they were tough plays but he has made them in the pass.

How about BYU starts coaching, preparing and practicing in such a manner that a game isn't determined by 3-5 games.

The minimal practices showed up in many ways...eslecially KO coverage, punting, and timing on passes between TH and WRs. The team seemed a step slow all night and this may be conditioning as they certainly showed team speed vs UT, GT and UH.



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

There were dozens of plays on O, D, and ST that left a bit to be desired. UW had a few head scratchers, too.



I picked 3-5. BYU Could have won, especially with Spank and Price is Right out late. But, too be clear, UW was clearly a better offense, probably a better defense, and at least as good on ST all season.



First down to A S-J on 3rd and 16 killed us on their first possession - waltz to 7-0 lead.

KO return for a TD gave them 7 points and took away the momentum we had just gained on both sides of the ball.

KO return deep in BYU territory - gifted 7 more points

The high snap punt - that never got kicked - killer for field position

Bronson Kaufman killed 7 points with penalty on INT play.



or if Hoff made one or two of his trademark miracle catches.



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

There were dozens of plays on O, D, and ST that left a bit to be desired. UW had a few head scratchers, too.



I picked 3-5. BYU Could have won, especially with Bishop Spanky and Price is Right out late. But, too be clear, UW was clearly a better offense, probably a better defense, and at least as good on ST all season.



First down to A S-J on 3rd and 16 killed us on their first possession - waltz to 7-0 lead.

KO return for a TD gave them 7 points and took away the momentum we had just gained on both sides of the ball.

KO return deep in BYU territory - gifted 7 more points

The high snap punt - that never got kicked - killer for field position

Bronson Kaufman killed 7 points with penalty on INT play.



or if Hoff made one or two of his trademark miracle catches.



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

It's coach-speak to try to make you feel better, or if you win, to try and keep you rooted. UW is reviewing film and telling their players "man, we were 3-5 plays away from blowing them out!"



In almost every game you can pick 3-5 plays where you can play "what if", and it goes both ways.



What I dislike about this practice is that a coach can use it to build a false sense of hope/satisfaction. It can lead to coasting instead of renewed effort.

snoscythe wrote:
What I dislike about this practice is that a coach can use it to build a false sense of hope/satisfaction. It can has lead to coasting instead of renewed effort.

Fixed your post. :)



I think that this is what's happened. Similar to Bronco's bowl preparation. He said that they didn't change anything because they were getting results. But further analysis would have shown that BYU has performed less than optimally in recent bowls.

2008 was a real dud offensively.

2009 was great - but the senior leaders demanded extra practices and preparation.

2010 was a perfect storm of a bad team and QB with great confidence in throwing deep.

2011 was an abysmal offensive performance.

2012 had a defensive player as the team's best offensive player

2013 had one good quarter of good offense and three flat ones.



There should be a TON of reflection of how Bronco is approaching each game, each off season, each in-season break. EVERYTHING needs to be re-evaluated.



I like the staff and schemes they run, but recruiting needs to be upgraded. Execution needs to be upgraded. These are COACHING issues. I think we have the players. They're not being coached properly.



Bronco and the coaching staff have no fear of failure. They don't have to be their best. Being simply good is enough. And for the fans and in this sport it's not enough.

This game had a hell of a lot more than 3-5 plays that were the difference makers. There were at least that many holding penalties that hurt the cougs alone. The whole second half was a joke and anyone who thinks that 3-5 plays would have changed the outcome of this game I've got some ocean front property to sell to you for cheap, its right outside of the bubble you live in. :skeptic:

SpiffCoug wrote:

What I dislike about this practice is that a coach can use it to build a false sense of hope/satisfaction. It can has lead to coasting instead of renewed effort.

Fixed your post. :)



I think that this is what's happened. Similar to Bronco's bowl preparation. He said that they didn't change anything because they were getting results. But further analysis would have shown that BYU has performed less than optimally in recent bowls.

2008 was a real dud offensively.

2009 was great - but the senior leaders demanded extra practices and preparation.

2010 was a perfect storm of a bad team and QB with great confidence in throwing deep.

2011 was an abysmal offensive performance.

2012 had a defensive player as the team's best offensive player

2013 had one good quarter of good offense and three flat ones.



There should be a TON of reflection of how Bronco is approaching each game, each off season, each in-season break. EVERYTHING needs to be re-evaluated.



I like the staff and schemes they run, but recruiting needs to be upgraded. Execution needs to be upgraded. These are COACHING issues. I think we have the players. They're not being coached properly.



Bronco and the coaching staff have no fear of failure. They don't have to be their best. Being simply good is enough. And for the fans and in this sport it's not enough.

I had to read this 4 time and it amazed me each time how your evaluation is spot on. Everything about the program and how it's being run needs to be looked into and changes need to be made if different results are expected.

Football is a results based endeavor. I think Bronco has forgotten that to a certain extent. He's very concerned about the process - about doing things the "right" way, about developing life skills and preparing the players for their long lives after football, about finding balance in life between family, God, religion, football, school, employment, etc.



All these things are important. And they should be taught and emphasized. The process is important. But Bronco is still in a sport and occupation where results matter. But it seems like it's the process he wants to perfect. He's lost sight of the forest for the trees.



No one will care about your process of they no longer care about the product. We fans are buying the product of BYU football. The process is the ancillary. In Broncos mind it's the other way around.



That feeling seems to have gotten stronger the last few years too. Hopefully, this season's results will begin to have the pendulum start to swing back the other way.

Spiff ... I always love your analysis, I don't always agree completely with it, but I always love it. You have great insight.



On this thread, I think you and Sno have it nailed.

Bronco to borrow a political analogy is a government employee. He doesn't have to excel. He just has to put in the time, meet some basic requirements set forth by his bosses (board of trustees) and that will be sufficient.



The BoT wants a clean program that doesn't get in trouble, that emphasizes the honor code and mission of the church and wins the majority of their games.



But fans, like citizens, want a lean and mean football team that is the best by fighting for everything they can get.

There is a middle. I would not want either of the last Heisman Trophy winners on a BYU team.



I buy into what BYU stands for and all of the plusses and minuses that come with it.



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

Agreed. I think there is a middle. And I think Bronco's pendulum has swung too far one direction.



I really hope he learns from this season. I think maybe he thought he WAS doing things right because the results were there. Bowl games were still being won despite the purposeful lack of preparation. Games were still being won despite him not stepping in to correct offensive staff contentions (Anae & Reynolds), QB play (Heaps & Nelson), QB injuries (Nelson), etc.



Sure things could have bounced a litte better, but I think Bronco thought the shorter, "more efficient" practices were working. The losses were easily explained as "outside" his control so they weren't reflective of the process.



Perhaps now, he can see some of the flaws in his process.



I think there is a middle ground, and I hope Bronco can find it.

He is not that far off target.



UW, UW, and ND were better teams all year. U might have also been before TW went down.



UVA was a timing issue.



Next time BYU changes the entire offensive staff and starts the season as far away as you can be without leaving the country behind a Sophomore QB recovering from injury behind a porous OL without a legitimate TE or FB, with the only legitimate WR sitting out with an injury with a D sporting a decimated secondary - BYU will lose regardless of the coach.



This turnip gave about all it had.



Next year's turnip will look better whether it actually is or not.



This team beat



Texas in Provo

BSU in Provo

@Houston

@USU

GT in Provo,

MTSU in Provo

@Nevada

Idaho State in Provo



They lost to



Utah in Provo

@Wisconsin

@ND

Washington in SF

@UVA



Not many BYU teams have done better.



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

Poll is flawed. I agree with 1, 3, and 4. I am not Blue Goggled, thus 2 is N/A.



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

Back to the OP. I'm not sure what the 3-5 plays are. But at a minimum I would have liked to have seen Jamaal Williams with 3-5 more touches. 12 touches in a game just isn't enough for him.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Back to the OP. I'm not sure what the 3-5 plays are. But at a minimum I would have liked to have seen Jamaal Williams with 3-5 more touches. 12 touches in a game just isn't enough for him.

Agreed. He is valuable enough and did enough good with those that I would have liked to see a few more as well. But here my memory fails me ... were there any passes to him? If so, what happened on them?