Was it AZ's HC/OC that stopped Tate or a good defensive game plan?

I watched coordinators corner today and Ed Lamb said that there were 40 plays designed for Tate to run in the AZ game but BYU had 2 spies on him all game and they didn't let him get away from them. BYU made a point to make him throw and keep him behind the line.

Yes.

I agree it was some of each.I have not been quiet about how un excited I have been about this season and I am not ready to buy in yet to any hype.That comes with age and a season like last season. That said I was very happy to see how we played. The Offensive line in particular looked much improved. This Arizona team would have beat us by 2 or 3 touchdowns last year. Wisconsin, Washington, Boise and Utah will still most likely be losses but I am optimistic that the team will continue to improve and maybe even be in every game. After Saturday I dont think 7 or 8 wins is out of the realm of possibility.We will see more this weekend. I am very happy for the team and hope this was just the begining of some really great wins this season. Go Cougars

I dont think you need to nut into any hype to be excited about this team. Beating AZ is not the exciting part to me, it is how we played. We came out prepared, with a old gameplan, in great physical condition, played as a team and they had confidence and excitement for the game. None of that was present last season, so win or lose, if they continue to be as prepared and give that kind of effort then I will enjoy the season. Winning just makes it so much better.

BYULV wrote:

I dont think you need to nut into any hype to be excited about this team. Beating AZ is not the exciting part to me, it is how we played. We came out prepared, with a old gameplan, in great physical condition, played as a team and they had confidence and excitement for the game. None of that was present last season, so win or lose, if they continue to be as prepared and give that kind of effort then I will enjoy the season. Winning just makes it so much better.

This ^ My post was just to correct the myth that it was AZ's bad coaching that was responsible for our win instead of our team having gone out and beat them. I am cautiously optimistic about this team after having seen them play last weekend. The Oline looked better than it has since 2006 which to me was fantastic. If the team keeps improving like it should we will still, probably, lose to WA and WI but, IMO, would have a great shot at beating everyone else, including ending the 7 game losing streak to the utes.

Thanks for bringing this up. It got real annoying listening to the ESPN commentators repeat over and over and over about how Arizona wasn't running Tate enough. I don't recall them ever mentioning how BYU was taking the run away from him and forcing him to pass. They definitely made it seem like Arizona lost the game rather than BYU won it.

I was a bit concerned at half-time about the second half. I was convinced that the AZ coaching staff was holding him back in the 1st half and was going to give him the green light with his legs in the second half.



Then the third quarter happened and they never really had the ball until the 4th quarter when they needed to pass to get back into the game.

byufan4ever wrote:

Thanks for bringing this up. It got real annoying listening to the ESPN commentators repeat over and over and over about how Arizona wasn't running Tate enough. I don't recall them ever mentioning how BYU was taking the run away from him and forcing him to pass. They definitely made it seem like Arizona lost the game rather than BYU won it.

Maybe it's just a persecution complex, or maybe it's because BYU's games on ESPN often have us as an underdog, but I tend to think that most TV commentators are lazy. They come in with an idea of how the game is going to go (Arizona's going to wallop BYU and Tate will be off and running in the Heisman race), and when things don't go that way they make it the fault of the team that should have won, because acknowledging that the underdog played well would be admitting that they didn't do their homework.

CrimsonCoug wrote:

Thanks for bringing this up. It got real annoying listening to the ESPN commentators repeat over and over and over about how Arizona wasn't running Tate enough. I don't recall them ever mentioning how BYU was taking the run away from him and forcing him to pass. They definitely made it seem like Arizona lost the game rather than BYU won it.

Maybe it's just a persecution complex, or maybe it's because BYU's games on ESPN often have us as an underdog, but I tend to think that most TV commentators are lazy. They come in with an idea of how the game is going to go (Arizona's going to wallop BYU and Tate will be off and running in the Heisman race), and when things don't go that way they make it the fault of the team that should have won, because acknowledging that the underdog played well would be admitting that they didn't do their homework.

It's not so much their homework, but their belief system. They believed Arizona was going to play a certain way, they believed Arizona was going to win. When the game didn't go as they believed it would, that takes admitting a mistake.



They did their homework. Look how much info they had on BYU. Tons on Squally. Tons on Tanner. They just weren't going to it in the 1st half. The game was supposed to be the Heisman coming out party for Tate. That's what they believed would happen.

Fair point. There's some decent research that when facts violate beliefs, those with strongly held beliefs dig in and cling to those beliefs even harder (which explains many Trump supporters, but I digress...)

And in fairness, to some degree it was the coaches holding Tate back. They knew they had a long season ahead of them and they believed they could beat a 4-9 team with just his arm without risking bodily injury. By the time they realized they should have cut him loose, it was too late and they had to heave desperation tosses downfield to try to catch up (and it nearly worked).

Guys, they didn't hold him back for arrogance or anything else. He couldn't run because they had Bronson Kaufusi spying him along with whatever linebacker was manning the side he would roll too. Coach lamb said that they called 40+ plays where he had the option to run but he never had the opportunity so when the run wasn't there, they tried to go deep because BYU had stopped not only his run but the rest of the runners as well. BYU opted to not rush the QB but to stop his ability to run and they still got 1 sack out of it. You all know I have not been a fan of this defense but this particular game plan was mastery. Lets hope they can keep it up when they haven't had an entire off season to prepare for an opponent.

Do people realize how close this game was? If Az had made even one of those catches in the end zone, the game would have been lost and the tenor of all these conversations would have been greatly different. His ypa would have risen by 2 per throw or more. I am very, and I mean very glad we won. But so many long balls defended well made a huge difference. And the refs not calling that PI in the end zone was huge. The replay showed it as very bad, but we got away with it.



Our D is what made Az and Tate fail to win the game. They had the plays, we just executed better.