On the QB's, from this guy (Lark Camp)

I have been patiently not trying to say anything on this board lately about the Quarterback play or even coaching. I have more of a sit back and see type of attitude. So I have been watching. I have read a lot of threads lately and just thought I would add my two cents.



1. Calling for heaps to be benched after the TCU game is ridiculous. Who thought he was going to go into that game and really be able to do anything? He missed alot of throws, and the passes he did make were nearly all check-downs, but we were playing the 4th ranked team in the nation. Max and Wynn both looked pretty bad last year against the same team.



2. That being said, I have been waiting patiently for Heaps to show me something that says he should be the starter. Every player on the field needs to earn his keep, if they are not producing they should be replaced, or at least looked very closely at. I think almost everyone would agree on that. Heaps hasn't been producing. I don't need to post numbers to prove my point here, we've all seen the games. Blame whoever you like, (which most everyone does), the receivers, coaching, running backs, the O-Line. Everyone so far has been pointed out as the problem that heaps isn't producing. I don't buy it, not all the way at least. Part of the problem is heaps. Part of the problem is everything else, to give him a magical free pass is not good enough.



3. He is a freshman. I made a thread a few months back asking how long people would give a poor performing Heaps. Many people said all season long, but I really don't agree. Heaps isn't ready right now, that is a direct quote from Brandon Doman (see True Blue last weeks episode). Just because he is a freshman, to me doesn't mean anything. If he is on that field he needs to be performing.



4. I've heard so many times about his poise, and conduct on the field being so good. Great, he is poised. Now can he needs to take that composure and use it be the spark the offense needs. Right now, he just isn't that spark. If anything that spark was Marshal during the SDSU game.



5. Leadership. I question Jakes ability to lead this team. He is a kid compared to many of the players on the team. He is a pre-mi. There is a huge difference between the maturity level of someone that has served a mission and hasn't served a mission. I really don't know if this is an issue at all, but it might be. His leadership I feel was determent of being able to be the best player on the offense side of the ball which clearly he isn't. I don't know if he is ready to be the emotional leader of this team.



6. He has the most experience right now. This is true and big advantage to him. But, Lark has been home from his mission for 10 months now. He is bigger faster and stronger than heaps. He has the arm and the legs to be able to lead the offense. When given the chance to show what he could do he has done well. Given his limited reps in the fall camp, I believe he had the best completion percentage. Many people agreed on this board that he had earned the chance to get a few more reps in practice, but because he started pre-season ranked number 3, thats where he was kept.



7. We should be playing the quarterback that gives us the best chance to win the game. So far that has been Heaps. He has played some tough defenses and like I said TCU is not the tipping point for me. If he cannot produce, I do not support him getting to finish out the season as a starter. That makes no sense to me. So far I haven't seen improvement, I feel his best game was actually the Washington game. I want Heaps to be the starter for this weekend against Wyoming. However, if he cannot produce against Wyoming, I will be calling for the birdman(lark) to get a chance.



8. If lark doesn't perform, I would want him to be removed as well. I want the quarterback that is going to give us the best chance to win, like I have said many times. If something isn't working you try something new. So if heaps isn't working post-wyoming, you try Lark. Worst case scenario, you lose half a game or so, and hopefully light a fire under heaps.

I'm not calling for Lark, but if Heaps continues his current level of play against the likes of Wyoming and UNLV, I could see him (Heaps) getting a breather in the 2nd half of the UNLV game. Sometimes QBs need that - a break to step away from the game to watch from the sidelines and see it differently.

This goes beyond liking one player. This is doing what is best for BYU. That is why the whole Nelson fiasco was so painful for me, because it seemed like we (Anae) got a man crush on someone and decided that he was going to change the offense to suit the player.



So I kind of just skimmed your post because I know that you are fully in the Lark camp, quite possibly at the expense of BYU (although you have alluded otherwise in this post). Which is what drove me mad about the Nelson camp. I don't mind being anti-freshman, or "prove yourself" but I can't get behind one guy at the expense of BYU. So the only thing that I want to respond on is #8.



Lark hasn't performed. To this date, he has done nothing to win the starting job, other than being next in line. Are you really that eager to bail on Jake after the abysmal way he has been handled, and the "adversity" he has had to deal with in the current state of BYU sports. A BYU defense that wasn't playing half it's games, not getting half the reps he earned, not getting half the respect or confidence he deserved from the coaches, playing with one of the worst receiving cores that BYU has had in the last 20 years (and that is saying something), no TE, running backs can't catch anything, and your offensive playcaller still thinks he is playing with a RS Senior that will audible out of every assinine call he makes (which is about once per sets of downs, if not more.)



Is it really time to move on now that we are through the toughest part of our schedule? If you like Lark so much, just pull up NCAA 11 and boost his stats so you can play with him, instead. But I promise he will not be an upgrade from Jake, not getting any of the reps in a backup position. See the coaches are trying to make up for lost time, giving Jake almost 100% of the reps now, and that is actually affecting Lark, our current backup - just the same way it was affecting our other "backups" (Riley and Jake... If you have two quarterbacks, you have no quarterback).

BlueIsBetter wrote:
This goes beyond liking one player. This is doing what is best for BYU. That is why the whole Nelson fiasco was so painful for me, because it seemed like we (Anae) got a man crush on someone and decided that he was going to change the offense to suit the player.



So I kind of just skimmed your post because I know that you are fully in the Lark camp, quite possibly at the expense of BYU (although you have alluded otherwise in this post). Which is what drove me mad about the Nelson camp. I don't mind being anti-freshman, or "prove yourself" but I can't get behind one guy at the expense of BYU. So the only thing that I want to respond on is #8.



Lark hasn't performed. To this date, he has done nothing to win the starting job, other than being next in line. Are you really that eager to bail on Jake after the abysmal way he has been handled, and the "adversity" he has had to deal with in the current state of BYU sports. A BYU defense that wasn't playing half it's games, not getting half the reps he earned, not getting half the respect or confidence he deserved from the coaches, playing with one of the worst receiving cores that BYU has had in the last 20 years (and that is saying something), no TE, running backs can't catch anything, and your offensive playcaller still thinks he is playing with a RS Senior that will audible out of every assinine call he makes (which is about once per sets of downs, if not more.)



Is it really time to move on through the toughest part of our schedule? If you like Lark so much, just pull up NCAA 11 and boost his stats so you can play with him, instead. But I promise he will not be an upgrade from Jake, not getting any of the reps in a backup position. See the coaches are trying to make up for lost time, giving Jake almost 100% of the reps now, and that is actually affecting Lark, our current backup - just the same way it was affecting our other "backups" (Riley and Jake... If you have two quarterbacks, you have no quarterback).

you really should have read his post. your response is completely out of line.

CougarPeasant wrote:

This goes beyond liking one player. This is doing what is best for BYU. That is why the whole Nelson fiasco was so painful for me, because it seemed like we (Anae) got a man crush on someone and decided that he was going to change the offense to suit the player.



So I kind of just skimmed your post because I know that you are fully in the Lark camp, quite possibly at the expense of BYU (although you have alluded otherwise in this post). Which is what drove me mad about the Nelson camp. I don't mind being anti-freshman, or "prove yourself" but I can't get behind one guy at the expense of BYU. So the only thing that I want to respond on is #8.



Lark hasn't performed. To this date, he has done nothing to win the starting job, other than being next in line. Are you really that eager to bail on Jake after the abysmal way he has been handled, and the "adversity" he has had to deal with in the current state of BYU sports. A BYU defense that wasn't playing half it's games, not getting half the reps he earned, not getting half the respect or confidence he deserved from the coaches, playing with one of the worst receiving cores that BYU has had in the last 20 years (and that is saying something), no TE, running backs can't catch anything, and your offensive playcaller still thinks he is playing with a RS Senior that will audible out of every assinine call he makes (which is about once per sets of downs, if not more.)



Is it really time to move on through the toughest part of our schedule? If you like Lark so much, just pull up NCAA 11 and boost his stats so you can play with him, instead. But I promise he will not be an upgrade from Jake, not getting any of the reps in a backup position. See the coaches are trying to make up for lost time, giving Jake almost 100% of the reps now, and that is actually affecting Lark, our current backup - just the same way it was affecting our other "backups" (Riley and Jake... If you have two quarterbacks, you have no quarterback).

you really should have read his post. your response is completely out of line.

Amen.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
This goes beyond liking one player. This is doing what is best for BYU. That is why the whole Nelson fiasco was so painful for me, because it seemed like we (Anae) got a man crush on someone and decided that he was going to change the offense to suit the player.



So I kind of just skimmed your post because I know that you are fully in the Lark camp, quite possibly at the expense of BYU (although you have alluded otherwise in this post). Which is what drove me mad about the Nelson camp. I don't mind being anti-freshman, or "prove yourself" but I can't get behind one guy at the expense of BYU. So the only thing that I want to respond on is #8.



Lark hasn't performed. To this date, he has done nothing to win the starting job, other than being next in line. Are you really that eager to bail on Jake after the abysmal way he has been handled, and the "adversity" he has had to deal with in the current state of BYU sports. A BYU defense that wasn't playing half it's games, not getting half the reps he earned, not getting half the respect or confidence he deserved from the coaches, playing with one of the worst receiving cores that BYU has had in the last 20 years (and that is saying something), no TE, running backs can't catch anything, and your offensive playcaller still thinks he is playing with a RS Senior that will audible out of every assinine call he makes (which is about once per sets of downs, if not more.)



Is it really time to move on now that we are through the toughest part of our schedule? If you like Lark so much, just pull up NCAA 11 and boost his stats so you can play with him, instead. But I promise he will not be an upgrade from Jake, not getting any of the reps in a backup position. See the coaches are trying to make up for lost time, giving Jake almost 100% of the reps now, and that is actually affecting Lark, our current backup - just the same way it was affecting our other "backups" (Riley and Jake... If you have two quarterbacks, you have no quarterback).

And also, just one point. You said that there was something about the "Nelson Camp" that bothered you. Just for clarification, from what I saw there WAS no "Nelson Camp". There was the "Heaps Camp" and there were the "Now hold on, don't shove Heaps down my throat till I see that he truly outperforms the other options camp". I was in the latter. There was OBVIOUSLY a Heaps camp, but the "Nelson Camp" was a name given to the latter camp by the former camp due to their BELIEF that everyone just HAD to be in SOMEBODY'S camp. I NEVER heard ANYONE say they were a "Nelson Camper", although I heard NUMEROUS people ADAMANTLY proclaim to be Heaps campers. (My dad being one of them, haha. )



Just to clarify.

If Lark already burned his RS, and is few more months off his mission, I don't see what it hurts to see what he is made of in game situations. Why not put him in when we are down big (read over 10 pts with this year's O) in the second half, and Heaps having another bad passing day? Who is over offensive subs anyway? Bronco or Anae? It seems we almost never give the other QBs game experience when the game is reduced to a formality.

Bronco would never bench heaps for a half to light a fire. Not his style. To think any qb could come ans suceed with what anae is doing and receivers who continually drop balls is just funny. The problem is a lot bigger than heaps. No qb will eveer get rythm until guys catch balls and coaches call the right plays.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

jonnylingo wrote:
Bronco would never bench heaps for a half to light a fire. Not his style. To think any qb could come ans suceed with what anae is doing and receivers who continually drop balls is just funny. The problem is a lot bigger than heaps. No qb will eveer get rythm until guys catch balls and coaches call the right plays.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I don't know if Heaps needs to be benched for a half. But I think there could be value in him watching from the sideline again. It would allow him to take a step back from the situation, and simply evaluate.



Sometimes when you study something and then try to do it, you don't quite get it. But then when you go back and look at the principles again, you can now put the theory to your experience and have an "Ah-ha!" moment. Where you can see how the theory and your experience go together. Then when you go back to the doing, you have a better understanding of the why and how, which can make the actual doing easier.

kitic77 wrote:

I don't know if Heaps needs to be benched for a half. But I think there could be value in him watching from the sideline again. It would allow him to take a step back from the situation, and simply evaluate.



Sometimes when you study something and then try to do it, you don't quite get it. But then when you go back and look at the principles again, you can now put the theory to your experience and have an "Ah-ha!" moment. Where you can see how the theory and your experience go together. Then when you go back to the doing, you have a better understanding of the why and how, which can make the actual doing easier.

Isn't this what the week of practice in between games should be used for? If not, then what good is film study of the previous week's game? I'm not opposed to giving Heaps a series or two at the end of a "blowout" to see things from the sideline perspective, but expecting this offensive coaching staff to make in-game adjustments that Heaps can implement immediately doesn't seem realistic to me.

I came away from the TCU thinking we should open up the QB competition, but I have to remember that it was the #1 scoring defense in the country.



BYU has faced a pretty brutal schedule thus far, #4 according to Sagarin. Things should get better from here on out. I also hate the idea of switching QBs during the season. I think it creates such a big distraction. It reminds me of 2003 [shudder].



I do feel, however, that Bronco ought to reopen the QB competition in the spring. We have some talented guys who are freshman or recently returned missionaries. In the spring I say we give them all a shot. But come fall camp I want a clear #1, even if it is arbitrary.



However, if we lose one of the next four games then I wouldn't be as opposed to a change. At that point it is a losing season and it becomes pre-spring camp IMO.

Isola wrote:
I came away from the TCU thinking we should open up the QB competition, but I have to remember that it was the #1 scoring defense in the country.



BYU has faced a pretty brutal schedule thus far, #4 according to Sagarin. Things should get better from here on out. I also hate the idea of switching QBs during the season. I think it creates such a big distraction. It reminds me of 2003 [shudder].



I do feel, however, that Bronco ought to reopen the QB competition in the spring. We have some talented guys who are freshman or recently returned missionaries. In the spring I say we give them all a shot. But come fall camp I want a clear #1, even if it is arbitrary.



However, if we lose one of the next four games then I wouldn't be as opposed to a change. At that point it is a losing season and it becomes pre-spring camp IMO.

I honestly have no confidence in our coaches to open up any key position for competition. they are indecisive and it only creates problems. you need to pick people and give them teh opportunity to excel. if they don't you give someone else a shot, but you don't play all of them until someone separates themselves. that is why you have spring and fall camp to a degree. having a qb competition again after the debacle this year makes me sick to my stomach.

Umm, Richard Wilson has scarcely seen the field since the AFA game. Explain that to me please, since at least he could get open...

This analogy might not be valid, but in baseball, minor league players (our second/third string) are often brought up to the parent club (the starting lineup) for a short, PRE-DETERMINED length of time during the season. They are utilized in non-critical situations only, and no matter how well or how poorly they perform, they are sent back to the minors at the PRE-DETERMINED time. I have heard managers refer to it as seasoning the player. If we lose again and are no longer bowl eligible (I am conceeding the U loss), then the remainder of our season is an extension of spring ball. You are right, jonnylingo, our coaches are indecisive. So, let's give them as much usable information on as many players as possible as early as possible to help them make decisions coming out of spring camp, instead of three weeks into next season.

cougdoc wrote:
This analogy might not be valid, but in baseball, minor league players (our second/third string) are often brought up to the parent club (the starting lineup) for a short, PRE-DETERMINED length of time during the season. They are utilized in non-critical situations only, and no matter how well or how poorly they perform, they are sent back to the minors at the PRE-DETERMINED time. I have heard managers refer to it as seasoning the player. If we lose again and are no longer bowl eligible (I am conceeding the U loss), then the remainder of our season is an extension of spring ball. You are right, jonnylingo, our coaches are indecisive. So, let's give them as much usable information on as many players as possible as early as possible to help them make decisions coming out of spring camp, instead of three weeks into next season.

Yeah, that doesn't really shake out, because these players are getting paid, and the majority of college athletes aren't. Also, you are looking at it from the wrong side of things. With 162 games, your starters normally want to take a few nights off here and there, and don't mind sitting. We have 13 games. Simply stated, you don't jerk a quarterback around. Stay with him, or don't. But don't do an "Andy Reid" (for those of you that watch the NFL) and have a new starter every week. That can damage a kid's psyche, and make him tentative and doubting mistakes. At the QB, CB, and FS positions are the 3 positions where you just need to go "(blanks) out" and let it ride. Any quarterback that is second guessing every one of his throws isn't going to be worth anything. We are seeing semblances of that with Jake. He needs time to find a rhythm and know that he is the guy no matter what. Then we will see great things - against teams that we match up well throwing against - not TCU, Air Force, FSU, etc.

I would agree on this point; if against Wyoming, Heaps has an awful day, misses receivers, throws interceptions, and fails to score TDs, the I would definitely let Lark have some playing time. The teams we've played so far (mostly) have been awfully good teams. Wyoming is not an awfully good team. Heaps should be able to throw long and often (assuming we have a receiver who can catch the ball), if not, boy we need to rethink a whole lot of things on this team, all the way up to the coaches.



Let's just take the worst possible scenario here; let's say Wyoming comes into LES and beats us, then we go to CSU and lose there too, then we lose to Utah. That record got Gary Crowton fired. BYU was picked third in the conference this year, as I recall. I think we win our next four games, but if we lose a couple of those to some really bad teams, then the cougar fanbase is going to get very rowdy.

I hope for Heaps to start looking like a college level QB over the next 4 games. IMO if he does not raise his accuracy on balls thrown over 10 yards, if he doesn't raise his PER into the hundreds (I would like to see it in the 120 range with a couple in the 150's) then IMO he is not ready to lead this team and needs to be benched. If he is unable to pass on ANY of these next 4 teams, then he needs to be benched. I find it hard to believe that Lark could be this bad, even having just come home from his mission right before spring ball. All of the excuses that have been used have grown thin IMO. His recievers/coaching are not causing him to throw completely behind his recievers on balls thrown over 10 yards.

If you guys are expecting his numbers to look better than what they were against utah st our sdsu, why?



This original post was money. It did what mine couldn't do, even though if you read mine I was simply asking for the same thing (verification that we have the right dude).



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Maybe there are those of us who believe that more time at the starting position and more snaps in practice should translate to more success than was seen out of Heaps vs USU, FSU etc. AND the competition is not going to be as fierce.



Let the kid prove his worth. I don't think he's had a fair shake so far.

cougman wrote:
If you guys are expecting his numbers to look better than what they were against utah st our sdsu, why?



This original post was money. It did what mine couldn't do, even though if you read mine I was simply asking for the same thing (verification that we have the right dude).



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Frankly, I don't expect them to go up at all. I think that he has been totally mishandled and he has lost confidence. He should have been redshirted and had Nelson given the starting job in the spring just like the coaches plan was before Heaps came into camp and looked so good. Lark should have been the backup. Lark has been in this system longer then Heaps since he redshirted in 2006 and backed up Hall in 2007 before his mission. It is ALWAYS a mistake to start a freshman and this year was a worse mistake because he was also throwing to freshman. I just hope that his confidence can be repaired since there is no denying his talent.