Fundamental Differences: Bronco and Bielema

I found it to be a great act of sportsmanship that Bronco in the last two games has pulled his starters at the start of the 4th quarter (which he has historically done once the game is out of hand). And then I saw the box score from the Wisconsin game - 83 points scored. To take a knee in the red zone when you could easily score shows the class of our head coach and University. Bielema dropping 83 on a weak opponent shows the fundamental differences in this head coach.



Pat Forde from ESPN writes a weekly column which I always enjoy, this is what he had to say.

From the article:

"You might recall last month when Bielema decided to go for two against 1-4 Minnesota while ahead 41-16. Tim Brewster, in the process of getting fired as coach of the Gophers, got in Bielema's face after that game.



Bielema rather lamely attributed the two-point decision to "the card," that infamous and mysterious calculator that coaches use to decide when to kick an extra point and when to go for two. The reality is this: If you're going to rub it in, don't make transparently weak excuses for it afterward.



Of course, the Badgers hung 70 on FCS weakling Austin Peay in September. That included a Montee Ball touchdown run with 4:15 to play and the Badgers up 63-3. Ball is no scrub -- he's Wisconsin's third-leading rusher and started this past weekend against Indiana, when Bielema accidentally ran it up again.



The Badgers hung 83 on the Hoosiers, quite possibly getting Bill Lynch (37) fired in the process. They threw a 74-yard touchdown pass midway through the fourth quarter while clinging to a 69-13 lead. And they scored their final touchdown in the last two minutes on a 17-yard bootleg by third-team QB Nate Tice. James White, who has rushed for more than 700 yards this season and splits time with normal starter John Clay, was in the game and getting carries on that drive.



The lame excuse from Bielema this time, on the final touchdown: He said he was going to have Tice take a knee on the next play. "



Here's the link

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Great comments and I felt the same way.

yeah, it would have been really easy for Bronco to say what a tough season they've had and that they really the extra reps with their starters while they are succeeding, but sportsmanship trump all.

It's interesting that 63% of those who responded on ESPN SportsNation said it's more embarrassing for a team to go out of its way not to score than to continue to score with a big lead.



SportsNation Polls > Running up the score?



I don't mind the running up the score part as much as I hate that he is trying to hide that fact he's running up the score with lame excuses. I heard his interview on Mike & Mike, and he claimed the TD pass was on a broken play. If he said we wanted to get some game action for our backup QB or practice some 2-point conversion plays, it wouldn't really bother me. But trying to pass it off as "broken plays" or "the card" is lame.

[quote="Mingjai"]It's interesting that 63% of those who responded on ESPN SportsNation said it's more embarrassing for a team to go out of its way not to score than to continue to score with a big lead.



SportsNation Polls > Running up the score?



I don't mind the running up the score part as much as I hate that he is trying to hide that fact he's running up the score with lame excuses. I heard his interview on Mike

Mingjai wrote:
It's interesting that 63% of those who responded on ESPN SportsNation said it's more embarrassing for a team to go out of its way not to score than to continue to score with a big lead.

That's because most sports fans are huge jerks without an ounce of sportsmanship in their bodies.

Bronco makes me want to grill some steaks and hot wings and watch the game. Bulemia makes you want to binge and purge and then binge some more. That's my understanding. Both make you want to binge essentially.

Wisconsin is running up the score because there are three one loss teams in the Big 10 that will not play eachother again (Michigan State beat Wisconsin, who beat Ohio State) and the tie breaker goes to the team with the highest BCS ranking. That does not make it right, but perhaps it explains why they keep running up the score. It is intentional because they want to go to the Rose Bowl, or perhaps have a chance at the BCS title game should a few teams fall.



That being said, I love Bronco's approach much, much more. How classy to be inside the ten yard line, but take a knee in the victory formation rather than running up the score. I am sure the coaches and the players from the other teams probably appreciate it too. It is the classy thing to do. It shows great sportsmanship. After all, the point of playing sports is to win the game, not to demoralize the opponent. You keep your foot on the gas until the game is out of reach because comebacks like the miracle bowl happen. But once it is clearly out of reach, the classy thing to do is throttle down, not disrespect your opponent by adding insult to injury.



I also like how our defensive players help up the opposing team after tackles. It shows that the game is about good competition--and that it is, after all, still just a game.

I've talked extensively about the value of the golden rule on other threads. This one is tricky for me because I can see both sides of it so I'm not sure how to call it yet.



As a strategy, running up the score is foolish at best, as it breeds contempt from your opponents and slaps a bulls-eye on your back for years to come. But I think it could be easily argued the most charitable thing you can do for your opponent, despite how it looks and how they feel short-term.



When I was 13 my soccer team, the Thunder, got TROUNCED by rich, over-privileged team, the Lightening (go figure) ELEVEN GOALS TO ZERO. Never felt so lousy in all my life. But then again, up until then my team and I were living under the delusion that we were competitive in our age group. That game was hard to swallow but it was a pill that caused us to grow. We never slacked in practice again and paid perfect attention to our coach from there-on-out. We improved tremendously because of that slap in the face.



One year later we beat them 3-2. And just for good measure, our INDOOR soccer team (me included) beat them 3-2 again in the indoor championship game.



So I'm torn on this subject and to how it pertains to the golden rule. As a rule of strategy, I think Bronco has it right. He doesn't want to motivate future opponents like that against us, but as a matter of KINDNESS and CHARITY....(although it APPEARS uncharitable in the moment) it may be the greatest gift you can give to an opponent: the gift of a wake-up call.



Hm. So I think I agree with Bronco's method as a matter of strategy, but not necessarily a matter of principle. Yeah. I may be thinking too hard. 8)

Bronco is a class act all the way.Chances are they wont play UNLV or CSU ever again and he still called off the dogs My eight year old son noticed and commented about it.I cant put a price on the lesson my son was taught.

My son (4 year old) ask me why they were kneeling down and not scoring again. It was a good moment to teach him that BYU is a good school and that they were being nice. Cougarfan87 pointed out that we've been helping opponents up after tackles - I'm sure its done in the past but I've noticed it more this year than any other. That to me shows that sportsmanship isn't just a good buzzword around a program but that it is being taught at every level and encouraged.

I agree with not running the score up with your starters, but I also feel like as long as your backups are in it is alright to run your normal offense. What if heaps goes down and lark has to come in? He has thrown one game pass to date. I think if your backups are in, have them run the offense to get a feel for it in a game situation, and if they cant stop your 2nd team then maybe the coach should be fired. Just my opinion I guess, but these arent grade school kids that will have their morals destroyed.

kfilly20 wrote:
I agree with not running the score up with your starters, but I also feel like as long as your backups are in it is alright to run your normal offense. What if heaps goes down and lark has to come in? He has thrown one game pass to date. I think if your backups are in, have them run the offense to get a feel for it in a game situation, and if they cant stop your 2nd team then maybe the coach should be fired. Just my opinion I guess, but these arent grade school kids that will have their morals destroyed.

That's my philosophy with one caveat--no long throws down the field. Run the normal offense make most of the normal throws. Just don't have your second string run play action, and throw the post pattern. That crosses the line in my book.

I think that if you are playing your 4th and 5th stringers, just running it up the middle, and you still score, I can live with it. You do not call the dogs off until there is about 2 minutes left and you can kill the clock. But before that you do not throw deep either. You just run vanilla up the middle and basically let them stop you and let as many of your guys play as possible. If they can't. so be it. I like the fact we have pulled jake for the 4th quarter the last 2 games.

I think that when you are comfortably ahead you put your backup quarterback in with most of the first team offense and you are fairly conservative on 1st and 2nd down, but on 3rd down, any play in the book is fair game on this first series. That's just to get the backup QB some real game reps for a few plays. After that, the substitutions come freely, and the game plan is very conservative, with the occasional 3rd down throw on short patterns until the last two minutes. At that point, if it's not 3 handoffs up the middle or victory formation, that's just low class.

Mingjai wrote:

I agree with not running the score up with your starters, but I also feel like as long as your backups are in it is alright to run your normal offense. What if heaps goes down and lark has to come in? He has thrown one game pass to date. I think if your backups are in, have them run the offense to get a feel for it in a game situation, and if they cant stop your 2nd team then maybe the coach should be fired. Just my opinion I guess, but these arent grade school kids that will have their morals destroyed.

That's my philosophy with one caveat--no long throws down the field. Run the normal offense make most of the normal throws. Just don't have your second string run play action, and throw the post pattern. That crosses the line in my book.

That also crosses the line in Anae's book at any time in any game



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

Cougy_Monster wrote:

kfilly20 wrote:
I agree with not running the score up with your starters, but I also feel like as long as your backups are in it is alright to run your normal offense. What if heaps goes down and lark has to come in? He has thrown one game pass to date. I think if your backups are in, have them run the offense to get a feel for it in a game situation, and if they cant stop your 2nd team then maybe the coach should be fired. Just my opinion I guess, but these arent grade school kids that will have their morals destroyed.

That's my philosophy with one caveat--no long throws down the field. Run the normal offense make most of the normal throws. Just don't have your second string run play action, and throw the post pattern. That crosses the line in my book.

That also crosses the line in Anae's book at any time in any game

Innit, though!

Here's the reason Wisconsin does it: Poll votes. A win by 30 over an inferior opponent is expected, but a win by 50+ gets noticed. It all ties back to the evil BCS and the crap we have to put up with. If a one-loss team makes it to the championship, Wisconsin is going to do everything in their power to make sure it's them. I don't like it, but when you're in that position I can see the rationale behind it.

Lawboy wrote:
I like the fact we have pulled jake for the 4th quarter the last 2 games.

Bronco's class is going to cost Heaps in the record books.

ProV1 wrote:

I like the fact we have pulled jake for the 4th quarter the last 2 games.

Bronco's class is going to cost Heaps in the record books.

Getting a season or career ending injury on a late hit by a frustrated defender in the 4th quarter of a blowout game will do a lot more damage to Heaps record book and the program. If that ever happens the coach that left a starting QB who has no backup ready to play in such a situation should be fired that very day. And I am talking Head Coach.



Bronco is not stupid enough to expose Heaps to unnecessary risk of injury in some silly chase to set statistical records. That, IMHO, in another kind of situation is why Jake Heaps was pulled from the AFA game. I don't think it was just because he threw the pick.



AFA was bringing everything, creating confusion, blocking was horrible because Matt Reynolds was sick and in pain, and the new center was getting confused by AFA imitating signal count, etc.



It was not a good situation for the guy who was being groomed to be the future of the program.



Unfortunately, bs FSU, they had to expose Heaps to more of the same thing.



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