Choosing a starting QB

I believe choosing Taysom was the right choice to start the season. Knowing what our O-line was, and the issues with implementing a new offensive system, Taysom's previous elusiveness was probably the best chance to beat the very good teams we played to start the season and have that special season we have been longing for. Reality check. There are a multitude of issues. Of note, the o-line doesn't block well, the receivers aren't getting open, the receivers are dropping balls, Taysom is missing reads when receivers are wide open, and Taysom is not throwing very accurately.



I don't blame the play calling, because as was famously stated by Bear Bryant, its about the Jimmys and Joes, not the Xs and Os. The offense has flat out not executed. I don't think the play calling has been that bad. I think the play playing has been very bad (see all the examples stated above).



Some think that bringing in Tanner won't change enough. I actually think it will improve a number of areas for the following reasons (an accurate QB covers a whole host of sins) :



1-Tanner will step up into the pocket to get more time. Taysom has been trying to escape too soon, and not stepping up into the pocket. Tanner will scramble when necessary to get time, or step up into the pocket, but, and this is key, Tanner will keep his eyes downfield to hit open receivers. When Taysom is scrambling, he is looking to beat people with his legs. Tanner focuses on the receivers down field and actually throws very well on the run. Taysom does not throw well on the run. Advantage with poor o-line play...Tanner.



2-The receivers will be more consistent in catching the ball. Taysom does not throw with great touch on short passes, has missed some wide open receivers, and sometimes puts the ball where the receiver will get laid out. I hate to say it, but he is passing like Jake Heaps. Some scoffed when the argument was made that Riley threw a more catchable ball, but it was true. Taysom, this year, is not throwing the ball as well. All of those things lead to receivers dropping the ball, breaking off routes, or just giving up on plays since they know once Taysom tucks it, he is running, not passing. Advantage of receivers catching more balls...Tanner.



3-Tanner, who I believe has better field vision, will see the breakdowns in defense and get the big chunks of yardage that keep defenses from crowding the line. Also, the defense will respect Tanner's accuracy downfield and his ability to stretch the field. As a result, the running game will become more effective, swing passes and draw plays will become more effective, and Ty Detmer will all of a sudden look like an offensive genius again. Advantage of loosening up the defense and taking advantage of defensive mistakes...Tanner.



I hate to say this. Taysom has given his heart and soul to this team. I loved those games against Texas. I just wish he still had that high gear and could still be as effective against our competition this year. Teams have figured out how to stop him. Based on the above and the following considerations, I think it is time to start Tanner:



1- The chance at a special season, BCS birth, etc. is gone. It is time to think about the future. That's the life of an Independent. Tanner should start taking reps in the offense in live games so that he is ready for next year.



2-Taysom will not be drafted. Starting Tanner and benching him isn't a loyalty issue, as I was trying to explain to my wife. These are college athlete's and the best players should play. I really wanted Taysom to be Steve Young this year. He just isn't. Steve was way more accurate. Taysom has not shown enough to retain the starting job, in my opinion.



3-Tanner is a gamer. He may not play as well in practice, which is why Taysom got the nod in the first place, but at some point you have to see if he will do better in an actual game situation. When Tanner was thrown in the fire last year, he was a very good QB. He reminded me a lot of the QBs of yesteryear. He is what made me think the QB factory is back.



So the big question is when is the best time to bring in Tanner? On the road in West Virginia? At home versus Toledo? My guess is that Tanner gets a lot of practice reps this week, but that Taysom starts. If Taysom cannot get the offense going again after a quarter or so, I think we put Tanner in.

UCLA shut down the run. Jamaal had 14 carries for 32 yards. 2.0 yards per carry! His longest run was 5 yards. Taysom was sacked 4 times and hurried many others. That's exceptional front-seven or weak-sauce oline play...or both.



Meanwhile, many of the catches and most of the drops were made in tight coverage. As mentioned, many of the third down drops would have been short of the first down without some yards after the catch. No one else was open.



They hurried and contained Taysom and played tight pass coverage...AND shut down the run game completely. UCLA put up a quality defensive performance. Their defensive game plan was better than our offensive game plan and execution was MUCH better.



With regards to Taysom v. Tanner, after the game Kilani said that they considered to start Tanner for the second half, but obviously stuck with Taysom (and did get 14 points....I know, too little too late). I believe that Taysom will start versus WVU and get at least 3 drives. But if the offense hasn't really done anything by the second quarter, we will see Tanner in the game.

Last year one of the knocks on Tanner was his lack of touch on short and crossing routes---now it's a positive?



This is one of my problems with this whole debate--people remember Tanner as they want to remember him, not for what he actually was.

snoscythe wrote:
Last year one of the knocks on Tanner was his lack of touch on short and crossing routes---now it's a positive?



This is one of my problems with this whole debate--people remember Tanner as they want to remember him, not for what he actually was.

We readily forget or gloss over the 0-point non-performance in Ann Arbor and the 16-20 loss to Missouri last year. Not to mention the 1-point 17-16 win over SJSU. AAC/MWC schedules hide a lot of shortcomings.



BYU is 2-6 in its last 8 games against "P5" opponents (granted, only one home game) and has averaged fewer than 20 points per game and only scored more than 24 points twice, so don't expect a huge offensive game against WVU, whether Taysom or Tanner:



W at Nebraska - 33-28

L at UCLA - 23-24

L at Michigan 0-31

L at Missouri - 16-20

L v. Utah - 28-35

W v. Arizona - 18-16

L at Utah - 19-20

L UCLA - 14-17



On the bright side, BYU's defense averages fewer than 24 points per game, with half of the games under that mark.

Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch. It may be selective memory, but my recollection was that Tanner always had touch, the complaint was that sometimes he needed to rifle it and didn't. But, the need to rifle it is rare compared to the number of times touch is an advantage.

So Kalani said they considered making a change at halftime? That's significant. They're seeing something for him to have said that. Tanner is a different type of quarterback. If BYU didn't have a good traditional type passer with some experience that they could bring in, then I could see them waiting longer. I tend to agree that if Taysom struggles again in the first quarter of the WV game that they may make a change to see what happens. This isn't your typical situation where a starter struggles and the backup is a complete blank slate.

mtnradio wrote:
Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch.

here's a sample for those with the same memory:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18842

snoscythe wrote:

Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch.

here's a sample for those with the same memory:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18842

Was that the right link? I saw a lot of knocks on Anae's play calling, lack of rub routes, crossing routes, etc., but not on Tanner's touch for those routes.

Cougarfan87 wrote:

mtnradio wrote:
Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch.

here's a sample for those with the same memory:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18842

Was that the right link? I saw a lot of knocks on Anae's play calling, lack of rub routes, crossing routes, etc., but not on Tanner's touch for those routes.

From the OP in that thread " Is Anae too stubborn to admit ... his QB doesn't have the touch to make throws into coverage?"

snoscythe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:

Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch.

here's a sample for those with the same memory:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18842

Was that the right link? I saw a lot of knocks on Anae's play calling, lack of rub routes, crossing routes, etc., but not on Tanner's touch for those routes.

From the OP in that thread " Is Anae too stubborn to admit ... his QB doesn't have the touch to make throws into coverage?"

Oh, I see. You quoted yourself. :lol:



No one else really talked about it.

snoscythe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:

Sno, I don't remember Tanner getting knocked for lack of touch.

here's a sample for those with the same memory:



http://cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=18842

Was that the right link? I saw a lot of knocks on Anae's play calling, lack of rub routes, crossing routes, etc., but not on Tanner's touch for those routes.

From the OP in that thread " Is Anae too stubborn to admit ... his QB doesn't have the touch to make throws into coverage?"

LOL. Sno, you are the OP in that thread. No one else in that thread mentioned Tanner's touch issues or any issues with him really (aside from always rolling to the right when he's pressured). So, who besides you shared this memory?

Funny no one seemed to disagree last year....

I know Tanner struggles with putting touch on his passes and often throws a frozen rope which means the ball is right at head level with the defensive line. It lead to several interceptions against Utah in the bowl game. I think if he had played like that against the UCLA front seven it would have had similar results.

snoscythe wrote:
Last year one of the knocks on Tanner was his lack of touch on short and crossing routes---now it's a positive?



This is one of my problems with this whole debate--people remember Tanner as they want to remember him, not for what he actually was.

People also remember Taysom for what they want to remember (sometimes I think fans simply remember him running over defenses and making 60 yard runs on every play). He hasn't changed. He's got some great qualities as QB and some questionable ones. Just like Tanner. Neither one is going to take THIS team where fans want it to be.