CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Time to look seriously at getting rid of Anae

by byutx · 9/15/2010

Advertisement
B
byutx
I usually hate it when fans call for a coach's job, but this is getting ridiculous. When asked about his strategy of abandoning the pass and focusing on the run, Anae said "We weren't able to connect in the pass game, so it probably backfired. Looking back on it, we'd do the exact same thing" (via Greg Wrubell's tweet)



ARE YOU FREAKING SERIOUS-YOU WOULD DO THE SAME THING AGAIN?!? I finally am convinced he doesn't care about winning as much as other stupid things like being right, his system, doing things his way, etc.



Most here, especially the long-haulers from cougarblue, know that I'm usually a "I trust the staff without any equivocations" kind of guy. I usually toe the party line and realize there are things going on behind the scenes-that we never have all of the information that the coaches have to base their decisions on. But, I'm starting to waiver. When you see guys like McGregor and other heavy hitters on TBS (chat has been crazy lately) start to question Bronco and the other staffers, you know something is wrong.
S
SpiffCoug
I've never been a huge fan of Anae, although it has been very tough to argue with his success of the last few years. BYU's 3rd Conversion for example has been better than outstanding. But Anae seems to have some very stubborn tendencies. And when they raise their ugly head, the Cougs play atrociously.



IIRC, Anae wasn't even Bronco's hire. I believe his hiring was announced the very next day after Bronco was hired. It's seems unlikely that Bronco was able to conduct a thorough and exhaustive search for an offensive coordinator in one night.



I just went and checked and BYU issued two press releases on 13 Dec 2004. One announcing Bronco's hire and the other Anae's. Whittingham was announced as Utah's Head Coach on Dec 8.



The fact that Anae has been as successful as he has and still hasn't been looked at seriously for a head coaching job or a coordinator at a BCS school to me says that he's not an overly wanted commodity.



I wouldn't mind him stepping down one iota, and handing the OC job to Doman.
W
Wickchad
kitic77 wrote:



The fact that Anae has been as successful as he has and still hasn't been looked at seriously for a head coaching job or a coordinator at a BCS school to me says that he's not an overly wanted commodity.



I wouldn't mind him stepping down one iota, and handing the OC job to Doman.


I've been hoping that some dumb BCS school would throw a head coaching job at Anae or even an OC spot. It just needs to be once Doman has enough experience to take over as OC. Let him call the plays for a few years and then he'll be ready for the head coaching job once Bronco becomes a general authority or mission president.
D
Ddawg
Be careful what you wish for.
B
bball
I'm not so sure about Doman. He came from Skyline H.S., an option offense. He got the BYU coaches to let him run a fair amount of option at BYU, and now we see Nelson doing the option. I just do not believe BYU is an option team, we don't recruit that way, we don't go get those kinds of players, and it isn't BYU football. Yet here he is influencing (I'm guessing obviously) Anae into running the option for Nelson. It isn't going to work.



So I'm not at all sure that Doman is the OC of the future. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. I think, if Anae leaves, we need the best offensive mind in college football--whoever that is.
Advertisement
B
byutx
bball wrote:
I'm not so sure about Doman. He came from Skyline H.S., an option offense. He got the BYU coaches to let him run a fair amount of option at BYU, and now we see Nelson doing the option. I just do not believe BYU is an option team, we don't recruit that way, we don't go get those kinds of players, and it isn't BYU football. Yet here he is influencing (I'm guessing obviously) Anae into running the option for Nelson. It isn't going to work.



So I'm not at all sure that Doman is the OC of the future. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. I think, if Anae leaves, we need the best offensive mind in college football--whoever that is.

When greg Wrubell asked Doman about the decision to pull heaps for Riley, Doman's response was something to the effect of "you'll have to talk to coach Anae about that, it was his call"
B
Brayden Green
I agree with looking at Anae. Not necessarily doing it, but I think that this is an evaluation year. He has not been very good, and in my opinion bolstered by NFL talent in every aspect (Collie, Beck, Hall, Pitta, George, Coats, multiple lineman, Tonga, Fui, a healthy Unga). His mismanagement of our underclassmen talent including Heaps is becoming the straw that breaks the camels back. Which I illustrated in another post, when someone called me out on posting against Anae:


If he is so smart, why is he switching our best player on offense to a different position every other play, rendering him inneffective? If he is so smart, why is everything we do outside of the tackles, when last week we outweighed the opposing line by almost 500 pounds? If he is so smart why did we lose to Utah on the same type of playcalling opting to throw instead of the 7 yards per carry Unga was averaging inside the tackles EVERY PLAY? Why did we absolutely blank at home last year against against FSU with one of our most seasoned offenses we have had in 5 years? Why are you benching your throwing talent, while down 2 touchdowns, and your other qb has been stopped for 4 drives in a row? Why do a qb draw to the outside on 4th and 2, when the whole world knows that is what we are going to do? Even worse than that, why bench your future for throwing a pick, then send him out on 4th and 2 after he has been sitting down for 45 realtime minutes? A throwing qb, mind you. When AF called a time out, surprised to see Heaps come out, what was the play that was drawn up? A qb draw for Riley that we had already called no less than 7 times. Brilliant!!! How about throwing every single down that Heaps is in, instead of creating a balanced offense with him at the helm?



There are a hundred more examples out there, see them or don't. The numbers don't show everything, because we are hands down better than 80% of the teams that we play, and I think that we have had players that have made something out of nothing. For example, how many calls did Max audible out of last year? A lot. And the offense didn't ever work better last year than when we were in the "no huddle" with Max calling the plays.


As to the "be careful what you wish for" post. I wish for an offensive coordinator that runs it through the tackles. And either runs to set up the pass, or passes to set up the run. Or both. How about a little balance? And 4th and 2 isn't a guaranteed dive off the tackles.



And if we get that, we will lose even less games.
F
frdbtr
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:
B
byutx
frdbtr wrote:
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:

Here's the direct quote: "we'd do the exact same thing". Not sure that you can take that to mean much other than they 'd still go with Nelson, knowing going into the game that they'd lose. That is a loser's mentality.
F
frdbtr
byutx wrote:
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:

Here's the direct quote: "we'd do the exact same thing". Not sure that you can take that to mean much other than they 'd still go with Nelson, knowing going into the game that they'd lose. That is a loser's mentality.


Did you read my post? Did you listen to the interview? Keeping the ball away from an offense you can't stop is SOUND FOOTBALL PHILOSOPHY. He DID NOT say they would go with Nelson again knowing that what they were doing was going to cause a loss.
Advertisement
B
Brayden Green
21-14 at the half, and one of the TD's was a fluke blown coverage from Thomas that any D1 FS shouldn't be suckered into. That was probably one of the easiest TDs in Falcon history.



The defense was doing fine enough at the half. It wasn't til Riley kept pulling blanks during the 3rd quarter and the D was on the field the entire time that they started getting gassed. Think about it. And Jake was doing fine getting first downs on JJ runs, etc. They punished a freshman named Heaps, and nobody else on the team for all that they did. JJ fumbles twice and it isn't til the 2nd they bench him, he was the only one running anywhere, by the way. Nelson fumbles and gets back in the rotation. Ashworth gives up on a very catchable Heaps deep ball that was 35 yards in the air easy. Just doesn't run his route. No big deal! Chambers fumbles into the endzone from the 5, and drops a very catchable TD pass from riley. No big deal, play it out! (Hoffman his understudy catches 3 balls and is our only offense besides JJ and riley running - sees half the plays). You switch a sick Matt Reynolds who is already playing through the flu from LT to RT, which is the all time dumb move in history. You just can't switch your best player on offense to a position unfamiliar, they are completely different. Also, you are messing with Braden Browm, an average tackle, and making him play an unfamiliar position. Just bush league! Why not run it through the tackles when you outweigh the line by 500 pounds? And the afformentioned stuff that is just from this game, like: Why are you benching your throwing talent, while down 2 touchdowns, and your other qb has been stopped for 4 drives in a row? Why do a qb draw to the outside on 4th and 2, when the whole world knows that is what we are going to do? Even worse than that, why bench your future for throwing a pick, then send him out on 4th and 2 after he has been sitting down for 45 realtime minutes? A throwing qb, mind you. The kind of qb you want in when down 2 and 3 touchdowns, a 20 mph wind headed at you, and down late. Then when the game is clearly out of reach, you don't put in the other qb for scrub minutes, you just keep in the guy that has been stinking it up for a full quarter and a half in a row.



It isn't just one game, it is a lot of games lost in the same way. This is just the latest in the Anae offense.
B
byutx
frdbtr wrote:
frdbtr wrote:
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:

Here's the direct quote: "we'd do the exact same thing". Not sure that you can take that to mean much other than they 'd still go with Nelson, knowing going into the game that they'd lose. That is a loser's mentality.


Did you read my post? Did you listen to the interview? Keeping the ball away from an offense you can't stop is SOUND FOOTBALL PHILOSOPHY. He DID NOT say they would go with Nelson again knowing that what they were doing was going to cause a loss.


That's not how I understood it and not how Wrubell framed it on twitter. I could be wrong-I often am, but this is what I'm going off: "More Anae: "We weren't able to connect in the pass game, so it probably backfired. Looking back on it, we'd do the exact same thing."
F
frdbtr
byutx wrote:
byutx wrote:
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:

Here's the direct quote: "we'd do the exact same thing". Not sure that you can take that to mean much other than they 'd still go with Nelson, knowing going into the game that they'd lose. That is a loser's mentality.


Did you read my post? Did you listen to the interview? Keeping the ball away from an offense you can't stop is SOUND FOOTBALL PHILOSOPHY. He DID NOT say they would go with Nelson again knowing that what they were doing was going to cause a loss.


That's not how I understood it and not how Wrubell framed it on twitter. I could be wrong-I often am, but this is what I'm going off: "More Anae: "We weren't able to connect in the pass game, so it probably backfired. Looking back on it, we'd do the exact same thing."


In other words, you posted an opinion by reading a twitter post that left out 99.9% of what the coach said about the question he answered. Go listen to the interview and then repost.
B
byutx
frdbtr wrote:
frdbtr wrote:
frdbtr wrote:
Ok, you took one statement out of a 2 minute answer to the question of why they pulled Heaps and are now saying that Anae should be fired. I listened to the interview and the answer he gave made good football sense and that is why he said that they wouldn't change it if they had to do it over. In retrospect, what they tried didn't work but it was a sound football decision from what he said. I will paraphrase.



Wrubell said 'why did you go with Nelson in the second half"



Anae said (I am paraphrasing, if you want to hear it for yourselves, go to ksl and download it): We realized we were in a fistfight, we thought that the best option for our offense was to go with the running game and try to keep it close (translation, we wanted to shorten the game with the running game and keep an offense that we weren't stopping off the field). He goes on....Heaps was not able to pick up first downs and Riley was with his running....what we did didn't work as well as we had hoped but in retrospect if we had to do it over we would have done the same thing. Meaning that it makes good football sense to try to shorten the game and keep the offense that your defense can't stop off the field.



Oh My! lets fire the guy for this type of thinking! :bug: :roll:

Here's the direct quote: "we'd do the exact same thing". Not sure that you can take that to mean much other than they 'd still go with Nelson, knowing going into the game that they'd lose. That is a loser's mentality.


Did you read my post? Did you listen to the interview? Keeping the ball away from an offense you can't stop is SOUND FOOTBALL PHILOSOPHY. He DID NOT say they would go with Nelson again knowing that what they were doing was going to cause a loss.


That's not how I understood it and not how Wrubell framed it on twitter. I could be wrong-I often am, but this is what I'm going off: "More Anae: "We weren't able to connect in the pass game, so it probably backfired. Looking back on it, we'd do the exact same thing."


In other words, you posted an opinion by reading a twitter post that left out 99.9% of what the coach said about the question he answered. Go listen to the interview and then repost.

Make me ;)
S
stuckinbig10country
We have running backs to run the ball. QB's need to ver able to throw too.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
Advertisement
G
Gunk
I'm going to post an opinion based on what I've read in this thread and based on what I've seen of Anae for the last few seasons.



He's vanilla, unimaginative, stubborn and insane (Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results). I've been hoping and calling for a new OC on this board and CougarBlue for years. With the talent we had last season and the season before there was no reason why we shouldn't have gone undefeated. Sure our defense wasn't quite up to par, but with 4 NFL players on offense we should have dominated. Think about it. At one point we had future NFL players at WR, TE, RB, and QB - every major point producing position. Imagine what other OCs at bigger schools could have done with the horses we had in the barn.



Anae saying he'd do the same thing over again is insane (see definition above), and I hope Bronco realizes how ludicrous that sounds. Hindsight is always 20/20, so here you have a coach saying in hindsight he'd do the same idiotic thing that cost us a game.



As I've said in the past, if BYU ever wants to compete on the national stage it needs a new OC, and Doman isn't it. Doman spent 2-3 seasons riding the bench in the NFL and 3 years as the QB coach at BYU and suddenly he's capable of running a complete D1 football offense? Doman is not only grossly under-qualified, but as pointed out by byutx, he goes against the grain of what a BYU quarterback should be and what BYU fans love watching in a BYU QB.
M
Mingjai
I've never been a particularly big fan of Anae, but I've been willing to tolerate him as long as the results hold. BYU's offense is very predictable and relies on execution. Perfect execution will only get you so far when a very athletic defense knows what's coming--that's why I think there's a ceiling on what BYU is able to achieve with the current offense. TCU the past two years is the example--even when BYU has NFL talent on offense (Hall, Collie, Pitta, Unga), they still can't stay in the game with an admittedly excellent TCU offense. At the very least, you'd expect some epic battles between the two talented sides.



I'm too lazy to actually keeps stats on this, but this is qualitatively what I've observed--

How often does BYU run when the QB is under center? 75% of the time wouldn't surprise me.

How often does BYU pass out of shotgun snaps? Again, 75% of the time wouldn't surprise me.
M
Mingjai
Gunk wrote:
As I've said in the past, if BYU ever wants to compete on the national stage it needs a new OC, and Doman isn't it. Doman spent 2-3 seasons riding the bench in the NFL and 3 years as the QB coach at BYU and suddenly he's capable of running a complete D1 football offense? Doman is not only grossly under-qualified, but as pointed out by byutx, he goes against the grain of what a BYU quarterback should be and what BYU fans love watching in a BYU QB.


I'm a little hesitant with Doman as well, because he doesn't have a West Coast offense pedigree--he ran read option/Coryell vertical passing style offense at BYU, and had some backup years under Dennis Erickson (I believe) running who knows what. I'd like to see BYU return even more to its pro-style West Coast offense roots, like Stanford, USC, and Washington run.



That said, I've always been impressed with Doman's grit and willingness to learn, so maybe he will make a good OC.
B
Brayden Green
I just listened to the entire Anae conversation. He absolutely said that they would go with Riley again (go with the more "experienced" guy), and mentioned several times that he was pleased (very excited) with the running, and that because the passing game wasn't clicking they decided to run the ball to try and keep it to a one possesion game. He said that he would do it again, meaning go with Riley just as it was. Whether or not that meant he would take a loss again is unclear, but you guys are (byutx and frdbtr), with all due respect are missing the point. It isn't about whether or not he is in the clear, or not - to me - it is about what degree of ... cluelessness... arrogance... egoism... he finds himself in. If he is saying that he would do it again, even if it meant a loss, then he is beyond reproach - and in my opinion - beyond repair. If he is saying that he would do it again, but wanted different results, then that is not as bad, but still terrible. He says, "It kind of backfired." So he knows that it was the wrong thing to do 1) changing to a run game, and 2) handling Jake the way that you handled him (2 might still be beyond him, he seems that clueless in the interview.)



He mentions multiple times that the running is great, and exactly where they want it, if they could only get the passing game to the same level... it is disgusting. Really, Anae? We want our qb's running 20 times a game? Really, we want a run first - pass if you have to - offense? We want our qb to make one or two reads, and run for the hills stepping on lineman as he goes? And the clincher for me: The run game is where you want it, so you don't need to develop runs inside the tackles so we aren't utilizing our biggest and best asset every single year for the last 15 years, the offensive line? Just run outside the tackles, and we'll just have the big mamba-jamba's put on a luau or something. Maybe they should all lose a hundred pounds and we can start chopping people, if we like the outside run so much.



Everyone should listen to that interview, it is disgusting.



http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=498" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
M
Mars
kitic77 wrote:
I wouldn't mind him stepping down one iota, and handing the OC job to Doman.

Based on WHAT, exactly?



I'm sold on Doman as a recruiter. I'm not sold on him at all as an OC. Or even a QB coach.



Anae is just good enough to not ever be seriously looked at to be fired. And Jaime Hill is better than that, IMO. Bronco, of course, takes the cake as lead-man Untouchable.



EDIT: Okay, when we score 7 points against TCU I'm considering what BYU would be like without Anae. Hire OC Crowton? Leach? ;)
Page 1 of 4
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.