Question regarding Doman

Brandon Doman is revered all over Cougar-affiliated cyberspace as a tremendous QB coach and a great offensive mind. I don't have the background to determine whether that's true by myself, but I generally trust all of you when you say it (okay, and Bronco said it too, I DEFINITELY trust him). Further, he's done amazing things with our most recent 3 quarterbacks.



I guess my query is, the first two quarterbacks are NFL material, and the 3rd was the number one QB recruit in the nation. I've heard it suggested many times that Anae has had the success he's had BECAUSE of talent, and in SPITE of his coaching shortcomings, and that all of the eventual NFLers masked his ineptitude. Why isn't the same thing being said about Doman? I trust you guys that Doman is good at what he does, I just don't know what would make him immune from the same reasoning that has apparently condemned Anae. It just seems like it could apply to both, especially considering Anae is the most visible scapegoat for failures.



What Doman's not done is coordinate an entire offense, or call plays. Why is everyone so sure that he would be leaps and bounds better than Anae? I understand that he has a great rapport with his quarterbacks. Invaluable, but not necessarily a guarantor of success. He was also "raised" in Crowton's running-quarterback system, followed by an EXTREMELY broken 49er system, followed by an Anae system that no one here seems to have much faith in (okay, playcalling is the major culprit, but I hope you see my point). That's not much training in the style of offensive football everyone here expects from BYU. I just want to know why everyone is so sure that Doman will guaranteed flourish here. To be clear, I don't doubt the guy at all, I just want an educated opinion on why no one else does.



I'm not trying to be cute here, and I've gone on record as saying I have no dog in the fight. I just really, actually don't know. I'm not an expert on football, and having grown up in a school too small to even HAVE a football team, I really have no firsthand knowledge of how coordinators and position coaches do the ins and outs of their job, or their relationships with each other, or their relationships with the players. I like Doman, I like his energy. Anae's never given me the impression that he can take the team to the next level, based on my limited but increasing experience. I just don't know whose is the lion's share of credit for past successes, and whose is the lion's share of blame for failures. WHY can Doman do the job better? Thanks!

Good points. Nobody can know if he will be good and those closer to the program would have the most informed opinion. but it does appear that bronco and the adminsitration have a lot of faith in doman. i presume there is a reason for that. also i think it was really clear that even from an outsiders perspective that he did very well with max.

I don't know enough to answer your question. Might be best for Sno or McGregor to answer, but here's a quick comparison of the two:



Anae: pushed the 2 QB system when he couldn't get his way and have Riley be the starter but Anae was given the last say; they put tons of pressure on Anae, whose stubbornness would only let him compromise if RN could be the starter; this decision cost us at least 2 and as many as 4 wins

Doman: knew coming into spring ball that Heaps should probably be the guy, and was certain of it after spring ball



Anae: disliked by players and coaches; stubborn, abrasive; rubs recruits and their parents the wrong way, which led directly to 2 top recruits going elsewhere; kind of a prick

Doman: revered by players, coaches and fans; humble, flexible, innovative, kind; best recruiter at BYU, probably ever; he's the reason we got Jake Heaps and the reason we'll get other top talent in the future; Bronco said he is the best QB coach in the nation

I've said it in another thread. Doman coaches with the same mentality that Bronco Mendenhall coaches. It is his mindset and intensity that is why he will be the OC for BYU. Bronco wants an offense that operates on the field with the same tenacity and intensity that his defense does and Anae is not the guy that will bring that intensity to the field. When Doman was hired as the QB coach with no previous experience, Bronco came out and said that he was hired because he had the temperment and attitude that bronco was looking for in a coach, it had nothing to do with x's and o's.

The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

hawkwing wrote:
The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

There is almost zero chance he'll be worse.

byutx wrote:

The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

There is almost zero chance he'll be worse.

Zero chance that he'll do worse than four 10+ win seasons in a row within his first 5 years as an OC? That's a lot of confidence in someone completely unproven.

hawkwing wrote:

hawkwing wrote:
The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

There is almost zero chance he'll be worse.

Zero chance that he'll do worse than four 10+ win seasons in a row within his first 5 years as an OC? That's a lot of confidence in someone completely unproven.

Yep. There is almost zero chance that he will be worse than Anae as OC, not to mention his other responsibilities, recuriting and in terms of team cohesion. Record may not be the best metric, especially as our schedules get increasingly more difficult, but I expect him to do as well record-wise as Anae. Again, there is almost zero chance that Doman will be worse than Anae, especially when you consider non-OC factors.

I've had a problem with Anae's play calling from day 1. Even when BYU was winning some of his in game calls just caused me to shake my head. Having said that, I am not calling for Brandon Doman to take over as OC because I believe that he will be a better play caller then Anae. We, frankly, don't know what type of play caller that he will be. I want Brandon Doman to be the OC because he is a Bronco mendenhall type of coach and I want to see the offense hit the field with the same intensity as I see a Bronco mendenhall led defense. The X's and O's will take care of themselves if that happens.

Good discussion. What happens when Doman makes first first controversial call, or doesn't go for it on fourth down, or runs too much, or throws too much?

ProV1 wrote:
Good discussion. What happens when Doman makes first first controversial call, or doesn't go for it on fourth down, or runs too much, or throws too much?

Going or not going for it on 4th down is Bronco's decision almost always.



In general, I have almost no problem with any one call in a game or even bigger game prep decisions. Some times we as fans just don't know what the play call even was if the players fail to execute. For example, I take very little issue with the Utah game going on 4th instead of the FG and killing the clock for what ended up being a blocked FG.



My problem with Anae is he has shown an entrenched pattern of ineptitude and an inability to adjust and to properly use the talent he has. I still think we had a shot of beating Utah in 08 if we'd continued to pound the ball with Harvey. Passing when they expected run was fine right up until it became clear we were going away from him.



I suspect we won't have nearly as many "why didn't we run/pass the ball more?" type games under Doman.

I can't add much. But I do know several former and current players and without exception they do not like Coach Anae. And not in the way you don't like your parents when you are a teenager. They don't like him and they don't respect him.

pikoi wrote:
I can't add much. But I do know several former and current players and without exception they do not like Coach Anae. And not in the way you don't like your parents when you are a teenager. They don't like him and they don't respect him.

Yep. And this goes back to when Anae first arrived.

byutx wrote:
I don't know enough to answer your question. Might be best for Sno or McGregor to answer, but here's a quick comparison of the two:



Anae: pushed the 2 QB system when he couldn't get his way and have Riley be the starter but Anae was given the last say; they put tons of pressure on Anae, whose stubbornness would only let him compromise if RN could be the starter; this decision cost us at least 2 and as many as 4 wins

Doman: knew coming into spring ball that Heaps should probably be the guy, and was certain of it after spring ball



Anae: disliked by players and coaches; stubborn, abrasive; rubs recruits and their parents the wrong way, which led directly to 2 top recruits going elsewhere; kind of a prick

Doman: revered by players, coaches and fans; humble, flexible, innovative, kind; best recruiter at BYU, probably ever; he's the reason we got Jake Heaps and the reason we'll get other top talent in the future; Bronco said he is the best QB coach in the nation

First off, I think your first comparison is off--in August and September, Bronco told the media that both Anae and Doman supported the 2QB system, and that he trusted THEM in that decision. That's not to say that the 2QB system wasn't their (horrible) way of coming to a compromise when the two couldn't settle on a starter, but the fault for the 2QB decision is spread equally between Doman, Anae, and Bronco.



As for how you know Doman is a good QB coach, you just look at the mechanical and intellectual progress of the QBs he has coached from year-to-year. That's what the QB coach does--help the QBs develop their specific talents within whatever offensive scheme is in place. If you have QBs that are improving from day one in footwork, follow-through, defensive reads, play-action fakes, ball position, audibles and general decision-making, those improvements are the fingerprints of the QB coach, not the OC. The way to tell if you have a good QB coach is to look at how far your QBs are playing their last snaps compared to their first snaps in practice, and to look at how well backups are playing. BYU has had a good run under Doman with backup QBs playing, and John Beck is the greatest testament of how far quarterbacks progress under Doman.

byutx wrote:

byutx wrote:

The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

There is almost zero chance he'll be worse.

Zero chance that he'll do worse than four 10+ win seasons in a row within his first 5 years as an OC? That's a lot of confidence in someone completely unproven.

Yep. There is almost zero chance that he will be worse than Anae as OC, not to mention his other responsibilities, recuriting and in terms of team cohesion. Record may not be the best metric, especially as our schedules get increasingly more difficult, but I expect him to do as well record-wise as Anae. Again, there is almost zero chance that Doman will be worse than Anae, especially when you consider non-OC factors.

There's no question that Doman is a better recruiter and "friend" to the players than Anae is, but make no mistake about it, Doman will be judged by his Win/Loss numbers. If he truly is better, he'll do better than 10+ wins a year for the next 5 years, if he's not, he wont. No one can argue that Doman doesn't have an easier road ahead of him as the OC than Anae did coming in.

Sno, I think saying that both Anae and Doman wanted the 2 QB system is not accurate. Bronco only made statements about trusting his coaches. Word is that Anae wanted Riley, Doman wanted Jake, and the guys graded out equal in spring and fall, so Bronco made a choice with the support of Anae. Of course Doman went with it, what else could he do? But Bronco was putting a unified front in place, then took the blame for the choice himself after the NM Bowl. Bronco was really stand up on that issue.



Water under the bridge. In spite of the difficult 2010 year, I honestly think the team will be better for it. hard lessons learned will toughen this team up. Winning does not come easy.

snoscythe wrote:

I don't know enough to answer your question. Might be best for Sno or McGregor to answer, but here's a quick comparison of the two:



Anae: pushed the 2 QB system when he couldn't get his way and have Riley be the starter but Anae was given the last say; they put tons of pressure on Anae, whose stubbornness would only let him compromise if RN could be the starter; this decision cost us at least 2 and as many as 4 wins

Doman: knew coming into spring ball that Heaps should probably be the guy, and was certain of it after spring ball



Anae: disliked by players and coaches; stubborn, abrasive; rubs recruits and their parents the wrong way, which led directly to 2 top recruits going elsewhere; kind of a prick

Doman: revered by players, coaches and fans; humble, flexible, innovative, kind; best recruiter at BYU, probably ever; he's the reason we got Jake Heaps and the reason we'll get other top talent in the future; Bronco said he is the best QB coach in the nation

First off, I think your first comparison is off--in August and September, Bronco told the media that both Anae and Doman supported the 2QB system, and that he trusted THEM in that decision. That's not to say that the 2QB system wasn't their (horrible) way of coming to a compromise when the two couldn't settle on a starter, but the fault for the 2QB decision is spread equally between Doman, Anae, and Bronco.



As for how you know Doman is a good QB coach, you just look at the mechanical and intellectual progress of the QBs he has coached from year-to-year. That's what the QB coach does--help the QBs develop their specific talents within whatever offensive scheme is in place. If you have QBs that are improving from day one in footwork, follow-through, defensive reads, play-action fakes, ball position, audibles and general decision-making, those improvements are the fingerprints of the QB coach, not the OC. The way to tell if you have a good QB coach is to look at how far your QBs are playing their last snaps compared to their first snaps in practice, and to look at how well backups are playing. BYU has had a good run under Doman with backup QBs playing, and John Beck is the greatest testament of how far quarterbacks progress under Doman.

Sno, you know more than I do almost always. But you should know that what is said and what actually happened are often different for P.R. and other reasons. I have it on good authority that Doman and Reynolds were doing all kinds of face palms about Anae's love for Riley Nelson. The 2QB system was as far as Anae would budge. The decision ultimately was in Bronco's hand and he deferred to his highest ranking underling. They hoped it would work out and put forth the effort, but Doman knew that it was a bad idea. I think Anae convinced Bronco it could work. He was wrong and THAT is why he's gone. All of the other crap was excusable to some degree because we were winning 10/11 games a year. (IMHO, winning that much was a shot in the foot in the way that beating UW was in that it gave everyone a false sense that things were working out. I believe that 06 BSU should never have happened and that our 08 game against Utah should've been a top ten matchup for a BCS berth. These changes are to take us to the next level, the one Anae could never get us to.)

byutx wrote:

The disparity in attitudes between the two is one of the most common and yet hard to understand phenomena in sports fandom. Where one guy gets all of the blame for everything that goes wrong and yet his record is solely in spite of the talent around him, and the other guy gets all the praise and credit for the talent behind him. We then also start to hear a bunch of rumors about how guy 'b' (the popular one) was against every bad decision guy 'a' made, yet there really is no substantiated proof of that, but it has become fact because it's been repeated so many times.



And then you get into the other contradictions fans have, like how they say the coaches need to be getting in the faces of the players and yelling at them, benching them, and bringing all kinds of firey. But then, if coach 'a' does in fact get in the face of his position group and bench them when they aren't performing well, it's because he's mismanaging the players, not that they are doing poorly, and coach 'b' is a better coach, because he's more well liked.



Not to mean I'm defending Anae, I think he's made some serious mistakes and mismanaged his position group to an extent (though none of them stepped up at all). I think it's time to replace Anae, but I don't know yet if Doman will be any better, and there's a chance he'll be worse.

There is almost zero chance he'll be worse.

When we are (except this year) perennially in the top-25, with 4 10-win seasons, a bevy of top-line recruits, which is good enough for 90+ percentile in terms of CF performance, that sounds like we're already pretty close to the top. How can you say "zero chance" we won't do worse? I think there's a VERY good chance we'll do worse.

Worse than 6-6?



The issue is that when BYU gets the right players, we need to run it, not go 11-2. We need to hit that next level. The last 6 years, we have not done that, and we should have in 2006, and possibly 2008. But 2006 for sure. We lost both games that year because of offense and play call issues. Bronco has this D in a position to get it done. Is the offense there in big games? No. Review the history of our O vs decent defenses the last 6 years, and we simply do not hit the next level, and that has to change. When we have the right mix of players, we have to reach the summit. In order to do that, changes had to be made. Because the next 3 years are shaing up to give us that chance. we need to grab it.

Lawboy wrote:
Worse than 6-6?



The issue is that when BYU gets the right players, we need to run it, not go 11-2. We need to hit that next level. The last 6 years, we have not done that, and we should have in 2006, and possibly 2008. But 2006 for sure. We lost both games that year because of offense and play call issues. Bronco has this D in a position to get it done. Is the offense there in big games? No. Review the history of our O vs decent defenses the last 6 years, and we simply do not hit the next level, and that has to change. When we have the right mix of players, we have to reach the summit. In order to do that, changes had to be made. Because the next 3 years are shaing up to give us that chance. we need to grab it.

Lawboy, give me those decent defenses the last six years and I'll run those numbers for you.