After 18 innings

After watching 7.5 hours and 18 innings of baseball, what do I do for an encore? Watch BYU against N. Illinois. Ugh

I’m really worried that BYU is going to lose this 6-7.

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

Sammich wrote:

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

The "would TM have made a difference" game is difficult. It would have been different ... the play calling would have been different, the decisions would have been different. Would his poise and maturity have made a difference at the end? Very possibly.



ZW is a good player with the possibility of being great. He's young. He is not the guy some made him out to be after he looked good against USU and Hawaii ... his presence on the field does not and will not change the play of all the other players on the team.



The loss today is on the shoulders of the offense. ZW will take the blame because he leads the O. He has a lot to learn and some TOUGH games coming.

This team finds new ways to lose to inferior competition every week. This week it was the offensive line. If it weren't for the 2 false start penalties in a row, we win the game 10-7. That would still be an unacceptable performance offensively but at least we would have won.

mtnradio wrote:

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

The "would TM have made a difference" game is difficult. It would have been different ... the play calling would have been different, the decisions would have been different. Would his poise and maturity have made a difference at the end? Very possibly.



ZW is a good player with the possibility of being great. He's young. He is not the guy some made him out to be after he looked good against USU and Hawaii ... his presence on the field does not and will not change the play of all the other players on the team.



The loss today is on the shoulders of the offense. ZW will take the blame because he leads the O. He has a lot to learn and some TOUGH games coming.

I actually don't blame him at all. this loss is 100% on the offensive line. They were the ones who couldn't hold still on the 5 yard line (including the freaking center for crying out loud, how does the center start too early). They were the ones who couldn't keep NIU's defensive line off of ZW, and they were the ones who couldn't open holes in the running game.

Wilson used his legs to avoid the rush 25% of the time. With Tanner, that number would be closer to 1%.

mtnradio wrote:

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

The "would TM have made a difference" game is difficult. It would have been different ... the play calling would have been different, the decisions would have been different. Would his poise and maturity have made a difference at the end? Very possibly.



ZW is a good player with the possibility of being great. He's young. He is not the guy some made him out to be after he looked good against USU and Hawaii ... his presence on the field does not and will not change the play of all the other players on the team.



The loss today is on the shoulders of the offense. ZW will take the blame because he leads the O. He has a lot to learn and some TOUGH games coming.

Wilson failed to see several wide open receivers during the game that easily could have changed the complexion of the game. Tanner would not have missed seeing them.

BoiseBYU wrote:

Sammich wrote:

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

The "would TM have made a difference" game is difficult. It would have been different ... the play calling would have been different, the decisions would have been different. Would his poise and maturity have made a difference at the end? Very possibly.



ZW is a good player with the possibility of being great. He's young. He is not the guy some made him out to be after he looked good against USU and Hawaii ... his presence on the field does not and will not change the play of all the other players on the team.



The loss today is on the shoulders of the offense. ZW will take the blame because he leads the O. He has a lot to learn and some TOUGH games coming.

Wilson failed to see several wide open receivers during the game that easily could have changed the complexion of the game. Tanner would not have missed seeing them.

This is nothing against you Boise, but these kinds of statements are made after every game no matter the QB. I just don't know. QB's don't see everything, it is their job to get the ball out to the right guy asap. I don't know if he was doing that to the best that can be done or not. All I know is if the Oline would have played even close to as well as they did against Wisconsin, we win this game going away.

Zach made several throws that Tanner usually doesn’t bc of his slow decision making, wind up and Delivery. Zach also escaped a number of times that Tanner would not have. Yes, a pick, yes a few missed open WRs, but not close biggest reason why we lost.

I agree with frdbtr—this is far more attributable to a very sleepy, lazy performance by the Oline andOline Coach. What is with these guys? They are capable of much better games! It’s like they take off games mentally.

frdbtr wrote:

mtnradio wrote:

The question on my mind is whether Tanner would have won this game. Wouldn’t have made a difference for the terrible running performance, but Wilson has made several bad decisions (including the two plays that cost us a several yards prior to the missed field goal).

The "would TM have made a difference" game is difficult. It would have been different ... the play calling would have been different, the decisions would have been different. Would his poise and maturity have made a difference at the end? Very possibly.



ZW is a good player with the possibility of being great. He's young. He is not the guy some made him out to be after he looked good against USU and Hawaii ... his presence on the field does not and will not change the play of all the other players on the team.



The loss today is on the shoulders of the offense. ZW will take the blame because he leads the O. He has a lot to learn and some TOUGH games coming.

Wilson failed to see several wide open receivers during the game that easily could have changed the complexion of the game. Tanner would not have missed seeing them.

This is nothing against you Boise, but these kinds of statements are made after every game no matter the QB. I just don't know. QB's don't see everything, it is their job to get the ball out to the right guy asap. I don't know if he was doing that to the best that can be done or not. All I know is if the Oline would have played even close to as well as they did against Wisconsin, we win this game going away.

I’ve never said something like that before this game of a QB, mostly because I don’t always know of such overlooks etc. But it is true for today. He did not see very open players, the receptions of which would’ve resulted in substantial plays. I get QBs don’t see everything and I don’t disagree that the Oline didn’t win the battle today. I think a seasoned experience QB, however, wouldn’t have overlooked those guys. I’m not sure that wins the game or not. Too many other factors. Just pointing out though that today Wilson missed very open guys several times. I’m not trying to lay the blame on Wilson. He’s a FR. and if your team can’t run and can get pressure on the QB, well, it makes for a long day. Just saying he missed seeing some very open guys. Even the TV commentators pointed that out.

It's time to campaign for Jaren Hall.

BroncoBot wrote:

It's time to campaign for Jaren Hall.

I think you're missing the point, the complaints (if you can call them that, most of these posts are more like idle wondering) are about the coaching decision to keep the seasoned guy out there when the young guy was struggling, not about what's wrong with our quarterbacks. All of our quarterbacks have strengths and weaknesses and nothing is going to change that.

Cougs_Rule wrote:

Zach made several throws that Tanner usually doesn’t bc of his slow decision making, wind up and Delivery. Zach also escaped a number of times that Tanner would not have. Yes, a pick, yes a few missed open WRs, but not close biggest reason why we lost.

I agree with frdbtr—this is far more attributable to a very sleepy, lazy performance by the Oline andOline Coach. What is with these guys? They are capable of much better games! It’s like they take off games mentally.

It seemed like Wilson was getting hit 2 seconds after every other snap.

Sammich wrote:

It's time to campaign for Jaren Hall.

I think you're missing the point, the complaints (if you can call them that, most of these posts are more like idle wondering) are about the coaching decision to keep the seasoned guy out there when the young guy was struggling, not about what's wrong with our quarterbacks. All of our quarterbacks have strengths and weaknesses and nothing is going to change that.

It was mostly in jest. My point is that now that Wilson doesn't look like the superstar we all envisioned, let's move on to the next one. that is, after all, the reasoning I saw with playing Wilson in the first place.



Now in all seriousness, If we're going to start playing people to train/build our future starters, let's find out if Hall looks better than Wilson.