Of Luck and Logic

I had a crazy bad-luck morning. Today I drove to the park and ride lot to catch my normal train. (Now stay with me, this story has a point that will rock your college football world, but I'm setting up an entertaining read here. Just FYI.)



At the first intersection on my route, I noticed traffic was bad going left, so I decided to turn right to follow my alternative route which is normally only a few seconds longer. As it turned out, by making that decision, I actually ran into further incidental delays, a garbage truck, a distracted driver, hitting two stop lights one second two late. Sitting at the second red light, knowing I had one more more to go just two blocks away, and knowing that the third light on my route was often out of sync, I began to worry about what could go wrong between me and the next light. My vehicle was first in line and I didn't have to change lanes, so I assumed everything should be fine for getting through the next light before it turned red.



Then Murphy pulled up next to me.



A car to my right pulled up to the traffic stop and as the light turned green this car proceeded to accelerate and dangerously wedge in between me and the traffic stopped at the next light. After having one of those moments you later regret and confess in priesthood lesson sharing times, I noticed that this car was not going to make the red light. Primarily because they weren't paying attention. Had I been in that spot, knowing the short timing of the light, I would have hurried and made it through a "rellow" light. But with Murphy in front of me, I couldn't make the last light. I checked my watch and realized that what was going to be a tight schedule to make my train was now going to be even tighter. A couple minutes more down the road, and a scurry from the parking lot to the train, I double-timed it up the stairs only to watch the train pulling away from the platform.



I missed the express.



That meant I'd have to get the local train which takes 10 minutes longer and comes 10 minutes later. So but for about 20 seconds, I lost 20 minutes. Now I recognized that in that string of random events, I could have turned left rather than right and maybe that would have changed things. But in reality, everything else would have worked out fine except for the deliberate actions of a self-minded driver.



Randomness, in this case, couldn't keep me from by train all by itself. It had to have a little help.



Two weeks ago I posted that the popular narrative about Tanner Mangum was that he got lucky. I argued this narrative was wrong and that it didn't make sense because the actual events, if luck, could also just as easily be construed as bad luck. As a test, it was logical to assume that if Tanner just got lucky twice, then BYU should be blown out by UCLA. If they weren't lucky, if two great defensive stands could be parlayed into a third great defensive stand, then BYU should show its true colors. It wouldn't be a lucky team, it would be a very GOOD team!



The UCLA game, despite the loss, still seemed to back up that point of view. BYU was actually great in that game, and with one more quarter of defense, the headlines would have read that BYU manhandled UCLA, took charge early and never looked back. As it was, BYU still had a chance to win the game, in the end, got unlucky. But it proved they were at least a good team, if not a great team.



Then comes Michigan.



106 yards of offense, so-called, a shut out, some terrible looking defense and lots of people willing to say "i told you cougars so," with no shortage of fans picking their dead-horse coaching staff member to beat. But something stands out to me here. One simple stat: that this was the LOWEST offensive production since 1974.



Are we kidding here? We have to go back to practically the pre-LaVell era to find a stat THAT low? Something smells rotten here, and at the risk of sounding like a conspiracy cook, I'm going to be the one to say it.



I think someone might have pulled a fast one, maybe even outright cheated.



Consider that after the last three weeks it would be illogical to predict this outcome. Not to pick on Schmoe who wrote a great OP to start his thread, but I want to use his points to make mine. Nothing personal, I happen to agree with him, YES that's what it LOOKS like should be the "Why we lost" of this one. But even his points don't hold up. Here's what I mean:



>1. Fatigue: Hard on players and coaches to go through two emotional wins, a >heartbreaking loss, and play in four time zones in four weeks.



Granted, but LESS well-conditioned players at BYU have gone through MORE gruelling stretches and not performed so poorly. Why this time now?



>2. Hype: after the game last week, you start to believe your own press clippings, etc. >Playing in front of one of the largest crowds in football on TV's biggest stage can also be >overwhelming.



Did ANYONE on the BYU team REALLY have swagger after UCLA? Did ANY of the players let up in practice because they believed their press clippings? Even if they did. 100 yards and 31-0? Compare this team to the 2010 Squad with Jake Heaps and Riley Nelson. Talk about believing your press clippings. Even THAT junk put up 10 points in Doak Walker Stadium against Florida State! And Florida State that year was at least comparable to where Michigan is right now.



Does anyone seriously believe Mangum is WORSE than Jake Heaps as a starter?



>3. Fundamentals/Execution: Absolutely need to be bringing players down on first ?>contact and filling correct rushing lanes. O-line needs to pick up blitzes and shouldn't >be giving up sacks because of a simple D-line twist.



The change from the first two games to the last two games is nothing less than stunning on this point. Perhaps good video review is all it took to scout it out, but just 100 yards of offense? really?



> 4. Effort: Just didn't seem like we really wanted it today.



Actually I'll call BS on that. If that were true Michigan would have scored in the second half at least once. The BYU defense, despite its flaws did NOT quit the game. Few seem to notice that the defense stayed and played.



> 5. Officials: they didn't help us today, but at this point, it's just adding to the pile.



Largely inconsequential considering the outcome.



While all of the points might be true, not a single one of them explains the total implosion of the offense. Not even all of them together is sufficient to explain why Tanner Mangum, Adam Hine, and the best receiver corp we have seen in a long time (compare these guys to the clowns that dropped 13 of Feterik's passes in a single game and you are reminded that we have seriously good hands on the receiver squad this year), came up goose egg in EVERY meaningful way. And this not at the hands of a ranked opponent, but rather a rebuilding Michigan squad that could not outperform UCLA's performance against UNLV. Sure Michigan is good, and maybe under Harbaugh they are on their way to great. But BYU has done better against TOUGHER competition in the past. Why now?



When you consider how important it is to the P5 conferences for BYU NOT to be in the national hunt, and how close they came to getting there in the UCLA game, and how a few people STILL thought that BYU could remain relevant even with the UCLA loss, pose yourself this question: "Which is harder to believe? (A) That Tanner Mangum, who was capable of walking off the bench and picking up the offense from an injured Taysom Hill, leads BYU to two incredible wins and gives #10 ranked UCLA a serious scare in its own house has an outing so poor it makes the BYU history books, or (B) that in this information rich age, with millions of dollars at stake should BYU steal away bowl spot, someone finds a way to read Tanner's calls or worse, procures a copy of the BYU playbook and analyzes it, boiling down its setups to reveal key weaknesses to the UM defensive coordinator, leaving a hapless BYU squad dazed and confused because NOTHING they seem to try turns out to work. They can't even figure out how to adjust to it in the second half.



While it may sound hard to believe item (B), go back and consider what you are asking yourself to believe about (A). BYU was on the giving end of such a beat down once before. We all remember it clearly. 59-0 against UCLA in one of the most glorious routs the school has ever seen. You might ask if I'm so quick to accuse nameless, unscrupulous P5 boosters in general, then why wouldn't BYU be likely guilty of something similar?



Because there are logical explanations for the UCLA offensive implosion that don't hold up here. UCLA had a new coach who was clearly unprepared playing in a tough venue. UCLA had a new QB who was not on the same page with said coach. BYU got lucky breaks on a rapid series of plays that boosted them 20 points within 5 minutes early in the game. BYU still scored in the second half. UCLA defense DID seem to throw in the towel. Yes BYU got some luck going their way and the momentum carried along.



This game was different.



Bronco is not Neuheisel, and Harbaugh is still human.



I can remember many years ago watching as a kid stole the answer book in fifth grade. Our teacher, upon noticing the book was missing, wisely let the thing play out. When this student, an otherwise C or B average performer, suddenly got EVERY question right, it wasn't hard to know where to look for the missing answer book.



Michigan knew how to play BYU. Maybe they didn't get there by cheating. Maybe that was incredibly good analysis and preparation. But if they possessed that skill then what were they lacking against the other school from Utah? Or against a much weaker UNLV team that they didn't do any better?



I expected BYU to lose this game. That's documented. But not like this. Not in some freak show beyond the pale of luck and logic. I believe that for BYU to have THAT much bad luck, they needed a little help from some self-minded individuals. Call me crazy. I think anyone is crazy NOT to consider the possibility given the outcome.



So P5 boosters better beware over the next two years! You won't be able to stop Tanner that way all the time, and the harder you try, the more likely you will be to get caught. Just saying! This kid will go all backyard on a team that thinks they know how he plays.



Here's hoping he stays healthy enough to get payback during the course of his career.

The thought has crossed the minds of some people however the how is the question that has no answer at this time. Suspicious yes but just speculation at this time.

Yzzz, interesting theory/conspiracy. The problem with your logic is that it faded in the end in two ways:

1. If the P5 is involved in some conspiracy, why in heavens name would that discontinue next year with the murderous schedule we have?

2. I love TM but do you honestly think he alone can will this team to some NY6 or playoff level season? Particularly when 2016 schedule makes 2015 look like an medium degree of difficulty.

Why does the conspiracy have to involve the P 5 at all and not just some MI coach's desperate need for a signature win? :)

BoiseBYU wrote:
Why does the conspiracy have to involve the P 5 at all and not just some MI coach's desperate need for a signature win? :)

Of course that's what I started with, but I realized that collectively, the P5 actually has more to lose than Michigan does. If Michigan thinks they have a realistic shot at making the playoffs, then certainly no more motive is required there. But if THAT were true, why bother risking for lowly BYU. Surely this isn't the toughest game on the schedule, and in fact will be forgotten by poll watchers rather quickly.



The greater risk for BYU getting in the playoffs is not to UM alone, but to the entire P5. If I'm going to make an accusation, it should be the most plausible, thus the larger universe. That said, UM is part of the P5 so it is all the same at some point.

Yzzz, interesting theory/conspiracy. The problem with your logic is that it faded in the end in two ways:

1. If the P5 is involved in some conspiracy, why in heavens name would that discontinue next year with the murderous schedule we have?

2. I love TM but do you honestly think he alone can will this team to some NY6 or playoff level season? Particularly when 2016 schedule makes 2015 look like an medium degree of difficulty.

By the way for those who haven't made this connection, in my own head, I pronounce my handle "Y - zaz" a play on the word "wiseass." That is but a veneer for being able to come on here and anonymously make ridiculous statements. Keep that in mind when you read my posts. :skeptic:



In this case your question, "why shouldn't the cheating continue?" is precisely my reasoning for writing this post. If UM, or a lowly employee on the staff, did NOT cheat in some way, then they should be admired for their ability to unlock an opponent. By default, that is the position I take. I DO admire them. For now.



But if they cheated, that needs to be brought into the light. It needs to be investigated by anyone who could do so and it needs to be scrutinized by those who can do no more than merely observe. IF UM did cheat, and IF they get away with it, others will do so again. My point in putting this into the public consciousness is to raise suspicion and hopefully keep such a thing at bay.



As for TM, his abilities are at least as impressive as a freshmen Ty Detmer. If the team will improve, there is no reason they couldn't have a shot. In fact, if my wild speculation is true, that UM might have cheated, then it would be true that they COULD have had a shot this year! So is it crazy to think they have a shot in years to come? Not at all!

The thought has crossed the minds of some people however the how is the question that has no answer at this time. Suspicious yes but just speculation at this time.

True. So what could could give fuel to solidifying those suspicions or what would put them to rest? I'd offer these possibilities:



1. If UM has an otherwise mediocre season, while BYU goes on to do very well, this would heighten my suspicions.



2. If Tanner Mangum has another game or two this season where his numbers and performance are utterly abysmal, then my suspicions will be put to rest.



3. The fact that BSU and UCLA have already shown themselves to be legit programs bolsters my suspicions.



4. The fact that University of Utah, much as I hate to point this out, completely WASTED Oregon, brings out the possibility that Michigan is a much better team than previously thought, and thus dampens suspicions.



In the end, I can't let the suspicions go simply because UM scoring 31 makes total sense, but BYU scoring 0 with only 100 yards of offense simply does NOT.

At the implausible level you are posing one would hope that you are right because the alternative and reality driven explanation is that Anae is inept and Bronco "taking the blame", while seeming to be protecting the players, is in fact true--which all means that the Coaches got their hats totally handed to them by a far superior coach in Harbaugh. UM coaches worked their plan to perfection. And the last time BYU got shut out costed Crowton his job. 42 year old record of lowest yards is near inexcusable. I'm not calling for Broncos head. But ANAE can so easily prove he is indeed not the guy. He would have been better off drawing up plays on a napkin at halftime if he could actually be capable of believing that he was getting outcoached OR CHEATED ON as you posit. But since he is incapable of sensing that he would rather suffer the ignominy of the fewest yards in 42 years.

Cougs_Rule wrote:
At the implausible level you are posing one would hope that you are right because the alternative and reality driven explanation is that Anae is inept and Bronco "taking the blame", while seeming to be protecting the players, is in fact true--which all means that the Coaches got their hats totally handed to them by a far superior coach in Harbaugh. UM coaches worked their plan to perfection. And the last time BYU got shut out costed Crowton his job. 42 year old record of lowest yards is near inexcusable. I'm not calling for Broncos head. But ANAE can so easily prove he is indeed not the guy. He would have been better off drawing up plays on a napkin at halftime if he could actually be capable of believing that he was getting outcoached OR CHEATED ON as you posit. But since he is incapable of sensing that he would rather suffer the ignominy of the fewest yards in 42 years.

You can't fault Anae for sticking with the plan, that's what they practiced. Because even if Anae DID draw up napkin plays, they would have had little chance of working any better than the actual outcome.



One case in point, if you remember the last drive of the 3rd Quarter, Mangum rolls out and has a fair amount of time to throw, he looks like he sees something and launches it. But no one is there. The only person near is the Wolverine safety. Camera guys were too busy talking NFL by then and they didn't play it back from multiple angles. My guess is that Tanner had already decided to go backyard at that moment but his receivers were still running routes and veered away from his throw before they knew where he put it.



Now that's the kind of the thing that happens when you go off script and it DOESN'T work out. It makes me wonder if that, a tendency to improvise, might have actually compounded the poor offensive showing rather than help it.

Cheating is always a possibility. We live in an win at all costs world now days. Having said that, I don't think it was cheating. I think it was a 100% coaching meltdown. The players looked lethargic and uninspired. They didn't look confident that what they were doing was going to work. I was watching the routs on the passing plays and they were all long balls on all of them that I saw. There were not short crossing routs, no comeback or double moves. Nothing to the RB's. Tanner had no one to throw to because everyone was covered and our Oline couldn't keep the Dline off of him. Maybe everyone was covered because the defense knew exactly what routes were being run by cheating, but my theory is that BYU's vanilla offense was easy to defend by a good defense. BYU had to run a vanilla offense because Tanner is still learning and just got off a mission a couple of months ago. I think BYU will improve but the Michigan game is what happens when an Ocoordinator designs an offense that is destined to fail because it doesn't exploit the weaknesses of a defense and doesn't enhance the strengths of the offensive personnel.

Well, don't I feel picked on :blush:



It's probably more likely that it was a perfect storm of things going wrong for BYU than it was for cheating, but it's nice to think that possibly, in this Bill Bilecheat world of sports we live in, that maybe the powers-that-be decided this one in advance (but they didn't).



The more I look at it, the more nervous I get for the rest of the season. There was finally enough tape on Mangum and our limited offense with him at the helm for it to get exposed. They blew up Tejan, lining a noseguard head-up on him and had consistent pressure. I think we'll adjust though, I just hope it's quick.

Yzzazz wrote:

Why does the conspiracy have to involve the P 5 at all and not just some MI coach's desperate need for a signature win? :)

Of course that's what I started with, but I realized that collectively, the P5 actually has more to lose than Michigan does. If Michigan thinks they have a realistic shot at making the playoffs, then certainly no more motive is required there. But if THAT were true, why bother risking for lowly BYU. Surely this isn't the toughest game on the schedule, and in fact will be forgotten by poll watchers rather quickly.



The greater risk for BYU getting in the playoffs is not to UM alone, but to the entire P5. If I'm going to make an accusation, it should be the most plausible, thus the larger universe. That said, UM is part of the P5 so it is all the same at some point.

Yzzz, interesting theory/conspiracy. The problem with your logic is that it faded in the end in two ways:

1. If the P5 is involved in some conspiracy, why in heavens name would that discontinue next year with the murderous schedule we have?

2. I love TM but do you honestly think he alone can will this team to some NY6 or playoff level season? Particularly when 2016 schedule makes 2015 look like an medium degree of difficulty.

By the way for those who haven't made this connection, in my own head, I pronounce my handle "Y - zaz" a play on the word "wiseass." That is but a veneer for being able to come on here and anonymously make ridiculous statements. Keep that in mind when you read my posts. :skeptic:



In this case your question, "why shouldn't the cheating continue?" is precisely my reasoning for writing this post. If UM, or a lowly employee on the staff, did NOT cheat in some way, then they should be admired for their ability to unlock an opponent. By default, that is the position I take. I DO admire them. For now.



But if they cheated, that needs to be brought into the light. It needs to be investigated by anyone who could do so and it needs to be scrutinized by those who can do no more than merely observe. IF UM did cheat, and IF they get away with it, others will do so again. My point in putting this into the public consciousness is to raise suspicion and hopefully keep such a thing at bay.



As for TM, his abilities are at least as impressive as a freshmen Ty Detmer. If the team will improve, there is no reason they couldn't have a shot. In fact, if my wild speculation is true, that UM might have cheated, then it would be true that they COULD have had a shot this year! So is it crazy to think they have a shot in years to come? Not at all!

The thought has crossed the minds of some people however the how is the question that has no answer at this time. Suspicious yes but just speculation at this time.

True. So what could could give fuel to solidifying those suspicions or what would put them to rest? I'd offer these possibilities:



1. If UM has an otherwise mediocre season, while BYU goes on to do very well, this would heighten my suspicions.



2. If Tanner Mangum has another game or two this season where his numbers and performance are utterly abysmal, then my suspicions will be put to rest.



3. The fact that BSU and UCLA have already shown themselves to be legit programs bolsters my suspicions.



4. The fact that University of Utah, much as I hate to point this out, completely WASTED Oregon, brings out the possibility that Michigan is a much better team than previously thought, and thus dampens suspicions.



In the end, I can't let the suspicions go simply because UM scoring 31 makes total sense, but BYU scoring 0 with only 100 yards of offense simply does NOT.

Seems Very plausable to me because there are only so many plausable reasons to explain how Michigan knew excactly what defense to call and when to call it and that Harbaugh has had experience in stealing and/or filming the opponets playbook while coaching in the NFL as the 49ers HC.



Having said that I believe that it was the overly predictable play calling by Anae that is to blame. As everyone knows that BYU is going to call a running play virtually every time BYU has a first down and that was shown during the Michigan game as there were only 4 times in which BYU didn't run the ball on 1st down. Also it is known that on 3rd down and short BYU will call a running play on virtually every third and short as was shown in the first 3 games and will call a running play on 3rd and long 70% of the time as was shown in the Michigan game. It is not a difficult thing to predict what BYU was going to do when there is only about 8-10 plays in the offensive play book right now. I know it can be said that it is because of Mangum except that they were the same 8-10 plays that was Taysom was using. Granted Taysom has the ability to run but Mangum has shown he has an ability to run although not to Taysoms level but good enough to get first downs against a top 10 team in UCLA.



The 4 points that could give fuel to the cheating suspicions are mostly good possabilities except...



1. Michigan will end up with a mediorce season and will be proven



2. I is unlikley for Mangum to have another bad performance as he has been good but the offensive play calling is what has been abysmal.



3. This is true as BSU will not lose another game this season. UCLA will lose a game or 2 as the Pac12 is in decline. Nebraska will also finish strong.



4. Considering that Oregon doesn't appear any better than Colorado this year without their star QB who went pro and that Oregons defense is ranked in the 100s right now as it has given up an adverage of 400+ yards and 30+ points a game so far. Utah still has to play UCLA, USC, and Stanford which will be all losses.



We will see how it all plays out over the next several weeks.

Cougs_Rule wrote:
the last time BYU got shut out costed Crowton his job.

I think I've seen this a few times this week. I may be wrong but didn't Crowton get fired 12 plus months after we got shut out? Plus a rape scandal, losing seasons, and a few other things? I'm not sure the shutout did him in. Actually in his case I'm not sure it even played a factor in the decision at all.



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

Stirfry wrote:

the last time BYU got shut out costed Crowton his job.

I think I've seen this a few times this week. I may be wrong but didn't Crowton get fired 12 plus months after we got shut out? Plus a rape scandal, losing seasons, and a few other things? I'm not sure the shutout did him in. Actually in his case I'm not sure it even played a factor in the decision at all.



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

Correct. 2003 was the shutout. 2004 was the rape scandal season and crappy output on the field season as well (I think we lost to UNLV at home, which was the straw that broke the camel's back for me). It was the rape scandal that did Crowton in in the end. Bronco didn't think it was fair to fire Crowton over that, because, let's be honest, you can't control what players do in their off time, but you can not recruit them in the first place...if you know their character. Since Bronco was so upset by Crowton's firing, he mailed in the first interview for the HC job. If not for the players begging to give Bronco another chance, and KWhitt turning down the job, he would not be the HC today.

Stirfry wrote:

the last time BYU got shut out costed Crowton his job.

I think I've seen this a few times this week. I may be wrong but didn't Crowton get fired 12 plus months after we got shut out? Plus a rape scandal, losing seasons, and a few other things? I'm not sure the shutout did him in. Actually in his case I'm not sure it even played a factor in the decision at all.



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

And also the fact in that game BYU was using it's 4th string QB who that year was on the JV team. Yes BYU football did have a JV team back then.

Crowton was fired because of the rape scandal. If it hadn't been for that, he would have been given at least 1 more year.

The shut out was the begiining of the end. the Scandal was the nail in the coffin. excuses excuses. Grated, Crowton was the guy who preceded the guy who was 'the guy who followed the guy who followed LaVel" (Mike Holmgren).

Having said that I believe that it was the overly predictable play calling by Anae that is to blame. As everyone knows that BYU is going to call a running play virtually every time BYU has a first down and that was shown during the Michigan game as there were only 4 times in which BYU didn't run the ball on 1st down.

This is a surprisingly time-honored criticism of Offensive Coordinators at BYU dating back to Norm Chow. I can't remember a single OC of whom anyone ever said, "Wow! that guy really knows how to keep 'em guessing!" So I naturally tend to dismiss such a criticism. Knowing whether the play will be a run or pass play doesn't matter if your execution is good enough. LaVell's teams proved that over and over again, and it is theme Bronco has bought into.



That being said, it could very well be the case that Anae's performance is weak on predictability because, perhaps, they don't try to work on that factor at all. Perhaps predictability IS a blind spot for Bronco and Anae.



Well then let's accept the premise that Anae had predictable play calling that made it easier for the defense to sniff out what was coming. Now we have a problem: why does that translate into a 31-0 loss and a 100-yard offensive output? Especially when the week before, against an opponent at least seemingly equal to UM, maybe better, BYU almost won the game.



Why wouldn't Chow, who was statistically analyzed as being predictable, have turned in a worse outing than that? This outcome leaves you with only two real possibilities: really, really bad luck, or something else. That Cougarcorner posters could legitimately predict BYU should cover the ridiculous spread against UCLA, and that even Vegas bettors predicted a lower spread for UM than UCLA, makes it clear that it is easier to believe the latter of those two possibilities.

Yzzazz wrote:

Having said that I believe that it was the overly predictable play calling by Anae that is to blame. As everyone knows that BYU is going to call a running play virtually every time BYU has a first down and that was shown during the Michigan game as there were only 4 times in which BYU didn't run the ball on 1st down.

This is a surprisingly time-honored criticism of Offensive Coordinators at BYU dating back to Norm Chow. I can't remember a single OC of whom anyone ever said, "Wow! that guy really knows how to keep 'em guessing!" So I naturally tend to dismiss such a criticism. Knowing whether the play will be a run or pass play doesn't matter if your execution is good enough. LaVell's teams proved that over and over again, and it is theme Bronco has bought into.



That being said, it could very well be the case that Anae's performance is weak on predictability because, perhaps, they don't try to work on that factor at all. Perhaps predictability IS a blind spot for Bronco and Anae.



Well then let's accept the premise that Anae had predictable play calling that made it easier for the defense to sniff out what was coming. Now we have a problem: why does that translate into a 31-0 loss and a 100-yard offensive output? Especially when the week before, against an opponent at least seemingly equal to UM, maybe better, BYU almost won the game.



Why wouldn't Chow, who was statistically analyzed as being predictable, have turned in a worse outing than that? This outcome leaves you with only two real possibilities: really, really bad luck, or something else. That Cougarcorner posters could legitimately predict BYU should cover the ridiculous spread against UCLA, and that even Vegas bettors predicted a lower spread for UM than UCLA, makes it clear that it is easier to believe the latter of those two possibilities.

No it isn't a time honored criticism of OCs dating back to Norm Chow as Anae is the most predictable OC BYU has ever had. Norm Chow had Roger French as a co OC and at their worst their play calling was far less predictable than Anae's play calling has ever been. Most of Norm Chow and Roger French's problem's in those years where the offense struggled was due more to not having a decent QB or WRs that could catch the ball than anything else as their offenses worked for the most part. Crowton's offenses were quite dynamic but the main problem with the offense under Crowton was the crappy O-line that couldn't block anything to save their life let alone to save the QB's life. BYU O-line went from a multiple national award winning O-line to a total incompetent O-line in a matter of 2 years. You look at the way BYU's offense played under Crowton after the first year. The QB spent more time running for his life or on the seat of his pants because of the total lack of pass protection provided by the O-line. If BYU's O-line had stayed decent under Crowton like it was the last 3 years under Lavell then Crowton would probably still be the HC. It was funny to me the year they brought Bronco in as DC BYU fired it DC and QB coach who was Robbie Bosco BYU most successful QB up to that point but kept the crappy O-line coach that was the cause of all the offense's problems.



You say it doesn't matter whether the play will be a run or pass play if your execution is good enough. Well it does if the opposing defense knows exactly which ones you are going to run when you run it as Michigan did because no matter how well you execute it if the defense knows the exact offensive play your going to run it will get stuffed. Michigan’s defensive play calling was just too perfect as they knew just what defensive plays were the most effective against the offensive plays BYU would call when BYU would call it. Michigan knew BYU's offensive play book far to well to be just a mear coincidence. This tells me that either Michigan stole BYU's play book or that it was because the offense was way too predictable in the 8 to 10 plays that make up the BYU offensive play book right now as I have stated in the beginning.

TheDean wrote:

No it isn't a time honored criticism of OCs dating back to Norm Chow as Anae is the most predictable OC BYU has ever had.

Funny, I thought that would have been the least debatable thing I wrote. Over the past 40 years I have watched BYU games sitting next to fans in stadiums, homes, hotels, sports bars and stake centers in more than a dozen states from Hawaii to Connecticut. I can assure you that criticizing an OC's predictability ranks right up there with calling out the refs among Cougar fans. :lol: That's been my experience anyway.

You say it doesn't matter whether the play will be a run or pass play if your execution is good enough. Well it does if the opposing defense knows exactly which ones you are going to run

Ah, but those are two different things now aren't they! A general knowledge of run or pass gives us a variety of performances, NONE of which was as bereft as last saturday's

when you run it as Michigan did because no matter how well you execute it if the defense knows the exact offensive play your going to run it will get stuffed. Michigan’s defensive play calling was just too perfect as they knew just what defensive plays were the most effective against the offensive plays BYU would call when BYU would call it. Michigan knew BYU's offensive play book far to well to be just a mear coincidence.

Of course that is the point of this thread. It sure seems easier to believe that.



On the other hand, this came out in Jay Drew's trib article today:

Inside receivers Terenn Houk and Colby Pearson met with reporters... and Pearson said Michigan's defensive backs got away with holding. ...



"I think we just got out-physicaled," said Pearson, who caught two passes. "They were good, and what I think is that they were professional holders. They got their hands good on us, and held on to us well, and it was hard for us. We haven't seen that kind of physicality yet, and they were coached up really well. But yeah, we went back and watched it. We came up with some new things to beat that man-press stuff."



When Houk was asked what the meeting was like with Anae on Monday, he quipped, "We definitely learned a lot."

It is an interesting possibility that their receivers simply just were fabulous at holding, and ostensibly the refs just called it loose. But for that to translate into a shutout they'd have to be world class. Remember the '96 Cotton bowl? Canty and his crew were accomplished holders, but Sark and Co. still managed the win. Even so, this is a level of cheating that doesn't require the darker prospect of the UM coaching staff crossing the line somewhere. I'd prefer to think that this was a viable explanation.



But if so, that's a terrible indictment on our receivers. Are they really that mentally fragile? Let's hope they can fix that and that the coaching staff can guard against it in games and years to come.