Is Mangum next??

My guess is that Olson is gone partly bc Thill locked up the starter for Olson's Jr and Sr year. But part of this has to also be GFGH. Would Olson really fit in this GFGH offense if THill got injured? where Hill ended up playing "running man" in the bowl game? I really wonder if he just wanted out and pass Happy-Crowton is the perfect chance to not sit, not lose a year and play immediately.

I still think the drop back passing scheme is dying more and more each year.

GFGH is smoke and mirrors. If Thill doesn't figure out his passing, Anaes gimmicky offense will continue to add tot he set back recruiting TEs, QBs, and WRs for a long time, or until BYU gets another OC.

Can we please dispel the myth that GFGH is about the read/spread option attack?



It is not. GFGH is about pacing and tempo - something that I think will improve next year as Anae and the offense are better prepared for it.



GFGH does NOT require a QB who is mobile. It requires a QB who can make good and fast decisions and then accurately and efficiently throw the football.



If they can run, that is another weapon in the arsenal. But it still requires good decision making.



Good decisions are the key. Not the mobility of the QB.

GFGH would actually work BETTER with a pure pocket passer.



I hate to see Olson leave, I still think he was BYU's best passer on the roster, and 2nd best QB. He was a great insurance policy to have.

SpiffCoug wrote:
Can we please dispel the myth that GFGH is about the read/spread option attack?



It is not. GFGH is about pacing and tempo - something that I think will improve next year as Anae and the offense are better prepared for it.



GFGH does NOT require a QB who is mobile. It requires a QB who can make good and fast decisions and then accurately and efficiently throw the football.



If they can run, that is another weapon in the arsenal. But it still requires good decision making.



Good decisions are the key. Not the mobility of the QB.

So, the decision making in the bowl game was either impaired or the level of coaching to improve the decision making was impaired; the the decision not to go the other players was a good one bc the other players were impaired.........you see it just doesn't matter. It is still a running man offense and run by an OCD who thinks that his players are harder and faster than they actually are AND was not going to see Olson as a better decision maker bc the rest of his offense sucked?

Regardless, Anae went with the better runner not the better passer or the better decision maker. And what we got was the running man and the passing man is now gone. And the next one has to be wondering, should I stay or should I go? Cause now is the time. If I have to run for my life, I won't become the QB I can.

In a word no. Mangum is working his tail off as a missionary. When he gets back he will be a talent Anae will use well. You'll see

Olsen leaving has nothing to do with the style of offense and everything to do with Taysom Hill owning the starting spot for two more years. The kid wants to play and he gets an opportunity to do it right away. I hope he does well; I suspect he will be great there.

BYULV wrote:
Olsen leaving has nothing to do with the style of offense and everything to do with Taysom Hill owning the starting spot for two more years. The kid wants to play and he gets an opportunity to do it right away. I hope he does well; I suspect he will be great there.

And why has he owned the starting spot over Olsen? Because he can bail out this film flam offense with his feet with much more of a threat than Olsen. I really think some of you guys are missing the point. If Mangum has to bail out this offensive scheme and the lack of receivers and RBs who can catch the ball, AND Olinemen who can hold a block for linger than one second, do you think he wants to bail out the O by playing running man and taking punishing hits?

IF Anae was true to the passing game and if THill weren't such a beast on the ground, would he still be QB? Not if PER was used as a discriminator. Remember, Spiff bailed on THill after several sub-standard PER games. Credit him for staying true to his holy standard.

Cougs_Rule wrote:

Can we please dispel the myth that GFGH is about the read/spread option attack?



It is not. GFGH is about pacing and tempo - something that I think will improve next year as Anae and the offense are better prepared for it.



GFGH does NOT require a QB who is mobile. It requires a QB who can make good and fast decisions and then accurately and efficiently throw the football.



If they can run, that is another weapon in the arsenal. But it still requires good decision making.



Good decisions are the key. Not the mobility of the QB.

So, the decision making in the bowl game was either impaired or the level of coaching to improve the decision making was impaired; the the decision not to go the other players was a good one bc the other players were impaired.........you see it just doesn't matter. It is still a running man offense and run by an OCD who thinks that his players are harder and faster than they actually are AND was not going to see Olson as a better decision maker bc the rest of his offense sucked?

Yes, the QB decision making was poor in the bowl game. As was his efficiency in throwing the ball. The decision of which QB to go with was made long before the bowl.

Cougs_Rule wrote:
Regardless, Anae went with the better runner not the better passer or the better decision maker. And what we got was the running man and the passing man is now gone. And the next one has to be wondering, should I stay or should I go? Cause now is the time. If I have to run for my life, I won't become the QB I can.

We don't know that Olsen is/would have been a better decision maker than Hill. That, unfortunately, is completely unknowable.



The second half would be a valid concern for a QB. Knowing that he may face a lot of pressure during a pourous offensive line could definitely stunt his growth as a QB. Thankfully, the next heir apparent (Tanner Mangum) does not have to make a decision to transfer this year. He has the benefit of being able to see how/if the OLine improves in 2014.

Cougs_Rule wrote:

Olsen leaving has nothing to do with the style of offense and everything to do with Taysom Hill owning the starting spot for two more years. The kid wants to play and he gets an opportunity to do it right away. I hope he does well; I suspect he will be great there.

And why has he owned the starting spot over Olsen? Because he can bail out this film flam offense with his feet with much more of a threat than Olsen. I really think some of you guys are missing the point. If Mangum has to bail out this offensive scheme and the lack of receivers and RBs who can catch the ball, AND Olinemen who can hold a block for linger than one second, do you think he wants to bail out the O by playing running man and taking punishing hits?

IF Anae was true to the passing game and if THill weren't such a beast on the ground, would he still be QB? Not if PER was used as a discriminator. Remember, Spiff bailed on THill after several sub-standard PER games. Credit him for staying true to his holy standard.

I think Hill's ability to bail out the offense because of the poor OL was definitely a factor in naming him the starter. I think Hill's running saved his job long enough for the schedule to soften just enough for him to gain confidence in throwing the ball. I think that confidence - much like pretty much everyone's on the team - died during the Wisconsin game.



Of course, it's possible, Hill would still be the QB, as if Olsen came in, there is no guarantee he would have met the PER standard anymore than Hill did. Of course, Hill did better than ANY QB the last four seasons over the course of a season. He met the standard six times. That was two more than in 2012 and 2010 and the same amount in 2011 (but not all of there were by the same QB).

With much better running results. If Olsen could have passed like Ty Detmer, maybe he would have won the QB job and Hill would be a running back with possible trick plays added for throwing options.

I am sad to see such a quality back up leave. Good for him though. Hard to fault a guy who wants a chance to start/play.

To Cougs_Rule. I get it; you don't trust the offensive coaching staff. They saw both Qb's in the spring, they decided Hill was the better fit. Taysom despite his early passing troubles had elite running skills that helped this offense move the ball. If our offensive line couldn't protect Taysom long enough to throw, what makes you think Ammon Olsen could have had time? At least with TH he could take off when the pass protection broke down(which it did very very fast)

Byu IMO didn't have the O-line to allow ANY QB to be an effective passer OR passing offense. I think Anae adjusted to our strengths... Two 1000 yard runners shows that. Lots of sacks and poor passing % shows passing wasn't always the best option.



All that said; Taysom has the better upside and that's good enough for me since they were both in the same class( jr's next yr)

There is GFGH and there are the plays that Anae runs under it.



THill's biggest strength are his legs, so plays and and an offense that was suited for Hill was called. Throw in the fact our OL coulfnt block if their life depended on it and I don't see how you would have played it any better if you were Anae.



A pocket passer could exceed within GFGH as long as he had the OL to block for him. Olsen is not only stuck behind Hill, but would be playing behind an OL that couldnt protect him long enough to do the one thing he really excels at - passing.



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

I have to agree here. Olsen was not going to start any time soon because there was no O-line that could protect him, and Hill at least has a chance of escaping a sack and still getting a pass off. Hopefully, the O-line will be turned around by the time Mangum is looking to start so that pocket passers will feel like they can run BYU's offense. You saw what Nick Foles did on the Eagles vs. Vick. With a good offensive line, you just need quick decisions, not quick feet. Hopefully we have a good offensive line soon.

Cougarfan87 wrote:
I have to agree here. Olsen was not going to start any time soon because there was no O-line that could protect him, and Hill at least has a chance of escaping a sack and still getting a pass off. Hopefully, the O-line will be turned around by the time Mangum is looking to start so that pocket passers will feel like they can run BYU's offense. You saw what Nick Foles did on the Eagles vs. Vick. With a good offensive line, you just need quick decisions, not quick feet. Hopefully we have a good offensive line soon.

Big HOPE. It's a systemic problem that's approximating an historical precedent. if I were as smart as Mangum, i would be (or family) watching closely this next year. ironic that Thill transfered away from a legit Oline and now hes running for his life.

Another case of the backup QB being the most popular guy on the team...



The last time BYU started a clear backup QB, it caused 3 years of problems (there is evidence that maybe there wasn't a true starter on those teams either).



Hill would be the starting QB at 10 or 11 of the Pac 12 schools next year (only clear one where he wouldn't is Oregon), all but 1 or 2 of the Big 10 schools, all but 1 or 2 of the ACC schools, and all but 1 or 2 in the SEC. His talent level is something we rarely get at BYU. The coaching, play calling, and general play around him (especially OL) need to improve up to his level.



I will say that his decision making seemed to take a small step back this year. He was better at moving safeties with his eyes in the pass game when he played as a freshman. I think he needs to work on that aspect within the GFGH system. Hopefully Beck can come up with some ways to help him with that.