Y
YzzazzI can't see ANY realistic scenario where BYU beats Utah in this game, but neither can anyone else. It reminds me of Week 3 where everyone, especially after Cal, was 100% sure that BYU couldn't win in Camp Randall. Oh if only...
Anyway. College football has a weird way of delivering what nobody expects, especially in rivalry games. So as I look at this year's matchup, I'm wondering, what are we all missing? I think we are missing the possibility that this game could become an offensive shootout and that the last team with the ball could win.
I don't bet on sports. But if I did, I'd take the over on this game, here's why:
1. What everybody "knows" about this game is that BYU's chances of keeping the game close depend heavily on BYU's defense, and since the BYU defense is actually reasonably good, maybe the game could be close, though Utah still wins.
2. The next point that everybody "knows" about this game is that Utah has a great secondary (the exception being the game-winning play by Wazzou) and even if Zach could somehow get some stuff in the air, that secondary will find a way to knock it down or pick it off, so conclusion--Utah wins.
Here's why both of those ideas are wrong--and not by just a little:
1. Corbin. Corbin is actually the reason BYU beat Wisconsin. Takitaki had a monster game, but it was largely because the badgers doubled on Corbin so much. When they didn't you heard his name. When Corbin played out of his most productive pass-rushing positions, BYU failed to get pressure on the quarterback. The result was Washington and Utah State. BYU's defense is 50% Corbin. With Corbin out, BYU's defense will simply not be able to get sufficient pressure and Utah will score at will. So I'd predict a blow out just over that factor alone. However...
2. Zach can run. So this seems like a small factor, but in the Boise game, it was huge. YUUGE! Only Zach's inexperience kept him from punching it over the line and winning that game in the end, but the primary reason he was able to be in the game at all was that he broke Bronco containment when he needed to. The big question is can he do the same against Utah? Depending on what Utah does, he may not need to.
Washington Huskies blitzed with abandon against Tanner and he was never able to punish them for doing so. They took the lazy way out and simply stuffed the box and dared Tanner to beat them downfield. Thing is, I REALLY hope Utah decides to do this. Because Zach can do what Tanner didn't, quickly find an open man in a seam, I think stuffing the box and working to stop the run will not pay out for Utah and Zach will burn them. The teams will trade scores, Utah will have to take more risk, and the next thing you know, a shootout is in progress.
But I'm guessing Kyle's not that stupid. If he were, we'd have found a way to win at least once in the last seven games. So while his DC surely blitz strategically and lean towards run defense, it won't be all that. This opens an opportunity for Katoa and Hadley. To be sure, these guys are not top shelf runners and they need the O-line to do some of the work or they've got next to nothing they can give, but in recent weeks, the O-line run blocking has improved. Not just the last two either. Against Boise State they run game did deceptively well. A couple big sacks made it look less impressive, statistically, than it was.
Truth is, even with Utah at their best, Hadley (an extremely strong runner, have you noticed?) and Katoa (whose got some speed but needs to work on his angles and cutbacks) will get yards. Why? Because Zach can, and will occasionally, run. This will keep those Utah linebackers honest and allow an extra half second for the other two to find a hole. If Zach can shake loose and pick up ground yardage, then BYU will have the opportunity to keep Utah guessing. The more BYU is able to stay with Utah, the more risk the Utah team will have to take, and by the end of the game, both teams could be in the high 20s or thirties.
If this sounds crazy to you, then it proves my point. This is what most people DON'T expect about the outcome, therefore the betting line is likely to have priced down the predicted total (44 points) If BYU were within a touchdown of Utah, and the total points scored were 40, then you're talking about Utah 21 BYU 17. In my mind, there's no way BYU holds Utah under 24 points. So if you believe the line (44 total points) then you'd have to look at the possibility that Utah could beat BYU 35 -7. That sounds about what you'd expect to happen, worst case scenario, right? You're hoping it's only 21-7 or 21-14. You're counting on the idea that BYU could have this awesome defense--but if so, you're counting on Corbin playing. Not going to happen.
I think BYU wins only if they take Utah to an overtime period by tying with a score higher than 25 and that they win it by something that looks like a fluke (doink anyone?). So I still see a chance of winning as very remote. But I see the chances for a lot of offense at better than average.
Anyway. College football has a weird way of delivering what nobody expects, especially in rivalry games. So as I look at this year's matchup, I'm wondering, what are we all missing? I think we are missing the possibility that this game could become an offensive shootout and that the last team with the ball could win.
I don't bet on sports. But if I did, I'd take the over on this game, here's why:
1. What everybody "knows" about this game is that BYU's chances of keeping the game close depend heavily on BYU's defense, and since the BYU defense is actually reasonably good, maybe the game could be close, though Utah still wins.
2. The next point that everybody "knows" about this game is that Utah has a great secondary (the exception being the game-winning play by Wazzou) and even if Zach could somehow get some stuff in the air, that secondary will find a way to knock it down or pick it off, so conclusion--Utah wins.
Here's why both of those ideas are wrong--and not by just a little:
1. Corbin. Corbin is actually the reason BYU beat Wisconsin. Takitaki had a monster game, but it was largely because the badgers doubled on Corbin so much. When they didn't you heard his name. When Corbin played out of his most productive pass-rushing positions, BYU failed to get pressure on the quarterback. The result was Washington and Utah State. BYU's defense is 50% Corbin. With Corbin out, BYU's defense will simply not be able to get sufficient pressure and Utah will score at will. So I'd predict a blow out just over that factor alone. However...
2. Zach can run. So this seems like a small factor, but in the Boise game, it was huge. YUUGE! Only Zach's inexperience kept him from punching it over the line and winning that game in the end, but the primary reason he was able to be in the game at all was that he broke Bronco containment when he needed to. The big question is can he do the same against Utah? Depending on what Utah does, he may not need to.
Washington Huskies blitzed with abandon against Tanner and he was never able to punish them for doing so. They took the lazy way out and simply stuffed the box and dared Tanner to beat them downfield. Thing is, I REALLY hope Utah decides to do this. Because Zach can do what Tanner didn't, quickly find an open man in a seam, I think stuffing the box and working to stop the run will not pay out for Utah and Zach will burn them. The teams will trade scores, Utah will have to take more risk, and the next thing you know, a shootout is in progress.
But I'm guessing Kyle's not that stupid. If he were, we'd have found a way to win at least once in the last seven games. So while his DC surely blitz strategically and lean towards run defense, it won't be all that. This opens an opportunity for Katoa and Hadley. To be sure, these guys are not top shelf runners and they need the O-line to do some of the work or they've got next to nothing they can give, but in recent weeks, the O-line run blocking has improved. Not just the last two either. Against Boise State they run game did deceptively well. A couple big sacks made it look less impressive, statistically, than it was.
Truth is, even with Utah at their best, Hadley (an extremely strong runner, have you noticed?) and Katoa (whose got some speed but needs to work on his angles and cutbacks) will get yards. Why? Because Zach can, and will occasionally, run. This will keep those Utah linebackers honest and allow an extra half second for the other two to find a hole. If Zach can shake loose and pick up ground yardage, then BYU will have the opportunity to keep Utah guessing. The more BYU is able to stay with Utah, the more risk the Utah team will have to take, and by the end of the game, both teams could be in the high 20s or thirties.
If this sounds crazy to you, then it proves my point. This is what most people DON'T expect about the outcome, therefore the betting line is likely to have priced down the predicted total (44 points) If BYU were within a touchdown of Utah, and the total points scored were 40, then you're talking about Utah 21 BYU 17. In my mind, there's no way BYU holds Utah under 24 points. So if you believe the line (44 total points) then you'd have to look at the possibility that Utah could beat BYU 35 -7. That sounds about what you'd expect to happen, worst case scenario, right? You're hoping it's only 21-7 or 21-14. You're counting on the idea that BYU could have this awesome defense--but if so, you're counting on Corbin playing. Not going to happen.
I think BYU wins only if they take Utah to an overtime period by tying with a score higher than 25 and that they win it by something that looks like a fluke (doink anyone?). So I still see a chance of winning as very remote. But I see the chances for a lot of offense at better than average.