Loss Analysis 2005-2010

Regarding Anae, I've read many opinions that feel that most of our losses are because of Anae's offense. Accordingly, I have reviewed every loss since Bronco and Anae took over as HC and OC, respectively.



There were 6 losses in 2005:



Boston, 20-3. It was the very first game of Anae's tenure as the OC and it was a feeble performance. It was a feeble performance by the defense as well. Bronco was booed that game and never lets us fans forget it. This was a bad loss, but BC was a very good team that season. I don't blame Anae for that loss.



TCU, 51-50 (OT) A controversial loss on a phantom TD that TCU had to win the game. BYU had this game firmly in control until the defensive secondary started dropping like flies, which allowed TCU to come back and eventually win. An offense that scores 51 points is not to blame for an OT loss when the defense suffers an inordinate amount of injuries. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss.



SDSU, 31-10 BYU failed to game plan for SDSU thinking that if they could score 50 against TCU, the same plan would work against SDSU. Big mistake. Bronco accepted full responsibility for this loss as he was the one that decided that no game planning would be necessary. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss



ND 49-23 Notre Dame was the better team that day and had their way with BYU. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss.



:utard: 41-34 (OT) Another overtime game. :utard: brought in a new quarterback who BYU had no game film for planning. This game was lost more on the D side than the O side. Anae cannot be blamed solely for this loss.



Cal 35-27 BYU had a chance to win, but not really. There were some break downs due to turnovers. Anae cannot be blamed solely for this loss.



2006:



Arizona 16-13 The team was still trying to find its identity and were hosed by PAC10 refs. Still, the team had a chance to win, but missed field goals prevented a BYU victory. It's very hard to pin this loss solely on Anae.



Boston College 30-23 (OT) BYU lost on the road to a ranked team. BYU had a chance to win in regulation, but another missed field goal attempt allowed BC to prevail in OT. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss.



2007:



UCLA 27-17 BYU dominated this debut game for Hall. PAC10 refs again made controversial calls that allowed UCLA to win this game. The offense moved the ball well enough. The offense was rebuilt after 2006 and performed well except for not getting into the endzone. It's very hard to blame Anae for this loss.



Tulsa 55-47 BYU scored 47 points. No offense can be blamed for a loss when they put up 47 points. Bronco openly admitted he did not adequately prepare the defense for Tulsa and took the blame for this loss. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss.



2008:



TCU 38-7 TCU had this game circled for a full season. BYU was unprepared both offensively and defensively as they were worked by TCU. Anae shares in the blame for this loss, but BYU really did meet a better team that day.



:utard: 48-24 BYU was in this game up until the 4th quarter when BYU stopped running the ball. Many use this game to define what is wrong with Anae as an OC. Anae deserves a large share of the blame for this loss, though Hall was the one who threw the interceptions, not Anae.



Arizona 31-21 BYU was not motivated for this game. IT showed on offense and defense. Bronco also admitted that he wanted the players be ready for finals and only used about half the allowed practices allowed. Anae shares in some of the blame, but if the head coach deems school work is more important than game prep, it's hard to blame Anae solely for that.



2009:



FSU 54-28 Scott Johnson was out this game and Bronco admitted that hurt BYU more than anything else this game. It's very difficult to blame an offense for a loss when the team gives up 54 points. Anae cannot be blamed solely for this loss.



TCU 38-7 TCU dominated BYU a second year in a row. Neither the offense nor the defense were ready for this game. Anae should have planned better for this game given what happened the year before, yet, the team gave up 38 points. Anae deserves some blame, but was not the sole reason BYU lost this game.



2010:



AFA 35-14 Neither the offense nor the defense came to play that day. Later we learned that Nelson had a preseason injury that was affecting his play which he failed to disclose to the coaches. I put this loss on Coach Hill more than on Anae, though Anae shares some blame, mitigated by a player who wanted to play despite his injury.



FSU 35-10 Nelson's injury finally was exposed and Heaps took over for the team. The defense was not well prepared for this game. Coach Hill again deserves more blame for this loss than Anae. But, FSU played for the ACC championship and is a very good team this year while BYU clearly is in a rebuilding year.



Nevada 27-13 The score does not tell just how dominate Nevada was that day. They could have scored almost at will against BYU that day as the defense again was not ready. Again, Coach Hill deserves most of the blame for this loss. Further, Heaps got his first start of the season and struggled as a true freshman typically does. The receivers didn't help out much either. Anae was not the sole reason BYU lost this game.



Utah State 31-16 This was the nadir of the season and led to the rightful firing of Coach Hill. This is one game BYU should not have lost for any reason this season. Hill's defense was beat again and again by an inspired Aggie offense that destroyed a down BYU team. The receivers dropped 13 passes this game too. It's impossible to blame Anae for all the dropped passes and the horrible defense that were the causes for this loss.



TCU 31-3 The game was closer than the score indicated. Anae could have done a better job of preparing the offense for this game, but it was Heaps' third start of the season and the defense got burned for 4 TD passes. Anae deserves some, but not the full blame for this loss. Also, TCU didn't lose to anyone else the rest of the season so to expect BYU to win against the number three team in the country requires some very, very strong blue kool-aid.



:utard: 17-16 BYU should have won this game. Yet, a blocked field goal prevented BYU from beating the ewetes. BYU did enough to win this game and that is all I expect of an offense. BYU had some very bad breaks in the 4th quarter with the shanked punt recovered by the ewetes and the questionable call on Bradley's fumble. Further, we learned after the UTEP game that Heaps broke a rib in the Holy War and we don't know how much that affected play calling after it happened. That's providing Heaps told Anae. The team was in position to win the game. A missed block, which was not the responsibility of the OC, allowed the kick to be blocked preventing a BYU victory. :utard: finished 10-2 and ranked in the final BCS poll.



Of note, four of BYU's six losses this season were to ranked teams.





I really find it hard to blame Anae for every loss BYU has suffered in which he's coached. Bronco has made it clear that many of those losses were his fault for not having the team prepared. He also takes the blame for not managing the team better this season. This season we were caught in a rebuilding year and with a defensive coordinator who was in over his head and deserved much of the blame for the early season losses until he was fired.



Now, just because I don't think he deserves as much criticism for BYU's losses as some think, it doesn't mean he is beyond criticism in other areas. I think his play calling could be better, which is a valid criticism many share. Further, there is more to an offense than game planning and play calling. Anae is viewed as being abrasive, stubborn and difficult to work with, many of the same complaints about Coach Hill. These are valid reasons for wanting a changing of the guard. But based on on the field performance, Anae deserves only a fraction of the blame he's getting.

UCLA 27-17 BYU dominated this debut game for Hall. PAC10 refs again made controversial calls that allowed UCLA to win this game. The offense moved the ball well enough. The offense was rebuilt after 2006 and performed well except for not getting into the endzone. It's very hard to blame Anae for this loss.





Wrong- BYU moved the ball as long as they were passing. Anae kept the original game plan in place and kept trying to run the ball. UCLA shut down the run and Anae kept trying to run. All of the offensive production came off the passing game which was underutilized. Anae didn't adjust the game plan. When passing was working fine he should have focused more on passing until UCLA proved they could stop the pass. The next week Utah destroyed UCLA with the passing game. Anae is completely to blame for this loss. Adjusting the game plan probably could have won this game.





Tulsa 55-47 BYU scored 47 points. No offense can be blamed for a loss when they put up 47 points. Bronco openly admitted he did not adequately prepare the defense for Tulsa and took the blame for this loss. Anae cannot be blamed for this loss.





Wrong Again- Tulsa couldn't stop the run. However Anae kept calling passes. If the defense could stop Tulsa and Tulsa couldn't stop the run, we should have been running. This would have kept their offense of the field and put more points on the board. Anae once again did not adjust his game plan. Anae is most likely to blame for this loss.





:utard: 48-24 BYU was in this game up until the 4th quarter when BYU stopped running the ball. Many use this game to define what is wrong with Anae as an OC. Anae deserves a large share of the blame for this loss, though Hall was the one who threw the interceptions, not Anae.



Wrong Again- Hall threw the interceptions but Anae should have been calling running plays. Most OC's clue in after the second interception. Wait, most OC's won't be passing the ball if the other team hasn't stopped the run. Anae once again didn't change the game plan to what was working. Most of the blame can be placed on Anae.



2010 Any game that was utilizing the moronic two QB system places a significant part of the blame on Anae.





:utard: 17-16 BYU should have won this game. Yet, a blocked field goal prevented BYU from beating the ewetes. BYU did enough to win this game and that is all I expect of an offense. BYU had some very bad breaks in the 4th quarter with the shanked punt recovered by the ewetes and the questionable call on Bradley's fumble. Further, we learned after the UTEP game that Heaps broke a rib in the Holy War and we don't know how much that affected play calling after it happened. That's providing Heaps told Anae. The team was in position to win the game. A missed block, which was not the responsibility of the OC, allowed the kick to be blocked preventing a BYU victory



Wrong Again- Any OC that is calling the game not to lose instead of to win, shouldn't expect to win close battles. If Jakes ribs were a concern and affected play calling why did they have him pass at all on the last drive? He was four of four on the last drive and we don't even attempt a pass at the end zone. Conservative play calling kicked in half way through the third and it was all Utah after that. Boise State wins games they shouldn't because the always call plays to win. They don't call plays not to lose. Another loss that wasn't solely Anaes fault but he had several chances to prevent it and didn't.





There was at least four games where play calling and failure to change the game plan mid game was the largest factor in the loss. I am so glad Anae probably won't be back, If he is canned I will give one months pay to the football program. Now BYU will be able to move forward.

So if anything, Anae should become head coach right?

Bronco has specific point goals for offense and defense. On that basis, the defense fails far more often than the offense. But at BYU, we expect the offense to compensate for deficiencies on defense and special teams. Usually, it does.



This was the year Harvey Unga, OL, and WR were supposed to allow the offense to limp along while inexperienced QBs and TEs came around, and our defense was supposed to carry the offense for a change.



Bronco was too hands off early.

Hill did not have his guys playing to stop the run first.

Harvey Unga let down his teammates.

OL injuries in Spring, illness and injury in early season, performed badly the first few weeks.

RBs and FB took a while to click and pass protect

WRs looked horrible until Heaps accuracy and consistency improved



And yes - Anae is stubborn, unpopular as Norm Chow, and can be too predictable.



Only those that believe in magic will believe that replacing Anae will fix everything.



I am not and never have been an Anae fan. With or without Anae, the offense will be better next year. Magic does happen - but not consistently.



This coaching team, as does every coaching staff I have seen, struggled with how to handle too many inexperienced players at once including several phenols who just thought they needed to show up.



Oh, I forgot to mention several ST failures under Bronco, like sticking with OC too long on returns. Bronco can be a but stubborn, too.



Bronco and several players gave said those early losses were the best thing that could have happened to wake up these young players to the work needed. So - magic happens in mysterious ways sometimes. I guess we were blessed.



I am OK with making some coaching changes - but will remind that after Bronco took over the defense and brought in some inexperienced coaches - the defense did improve - and as has always been a problem for Bronco - became vulnerable to deep passes once again.



But, hey, in 2011, the offense will once again be able to carry a good but not great defense.



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

I guess you can figure a way to remove blame from people if you want to but frankly, I disagree with a few of your assertions.



BC in 2005. Do you remember how many pass plays Beck threw in that game? I think it was abou 60 times, they never even tried to run the ball after getting the run stuffed on the first drive a couple of times.



Utah in 2005. BYU had driven the entire field mostly on runs on the last drive in regulation and with nearly 2 minutes left and in FG range, BYU throws 3 incomplete passes and settles for a FG. That game still irritates me because it should have been won by BYU in regulation by continuing to run the ball.



SDSU in 2005. Totally on the coaches, Anae is the offensive Coordinator, he is responsible for that part of the team, it was his fault. Bronco has taken the blame for coaching mistakes the entire time he has been the HC because ultimately he is responsible for the team but Anae is the one that needs to prepare offensive game plans, not Bronco.



Tulsa 2007, as was stated before, BYU was running the ball at will on tulsa, we had just taken a lead and with the proper calls (runs) we could extend our lead with a drive down the field and a score, Anae calls pass, Max Hall throws interception, Tulsa scores TD to retake lead, we never got it back. Horrible. Yes, we did score 47 points but you have to adjust your calling to help the team win and running the ball and the clock and keeping a team off the field that you can't stop is the right thing to do sometimes.



Yes, all these examples are early in his career but he still does these same bone headed things nearly every game, luckily we have had enough talent to overcome these things. Anae is an average play caller on his best days and on his worst, you can see where that goes. Plus, I have never thought that the offense had the same fire that the defense always has with Bronco leading them. It is time to get an Ocoordinator that has the same intensity that Bronco has.

It was interesting to read your thorough analysis. Still seemed like you were saying for a lot of the games that Anae wasn't the only problem. I don't have a strong opinion on keeping Coach Anae or not, but it seems to me Coach Mendenhall would want to address all areas of weakness. If the OC is one, then by all means try and fix it.

Very good analysis, some of your points I agree with, some I don't. But I think it does point out a specific problem as has been seen by Ivie's response. Some people want to place all of the blame for everything on Anae, even when it makes little sense to do so. It does also make it a lot more clear why Hill was the first one to go, as he was truly responsible for a lot more losses.

If you are looking at this as purely a wins-losses analysis, you are missing 2/3 of the picture. This move, much like when Coach Hill was let go, was for cultural reasons. Bronco is making changes to further improve his team on many levels, including overall performance on the field. This change was necessary, and BYU is moving on. I wish Coach Anae well in his next job.

Lawboy wrote:
If you are looking at this as purely a wins-losses analysis, you are missing 2/3 of the picture. This move, much like when Coach Hill was let go, was for cultural reasons. Bronco is making changes to further improve his team on many levels, including overall performance on the field. This change was necessary, and BYU is moving on. I wish Coach Anae well in his next job.

There is much more to his job than wins and losses, however, the most visible results of his job will be wins and losses and if he doesn't at least match Anae people will be calling for his job in a few years. It's the nature of the beast.

Looking at the BYU schedule the next several years, there will be plenty of wins. The issue is going to be how does BYU perform in the 3-4 marquee games each year. BYU was basically .500 with Anae, so Doman, or whoever, HAS to do better than that. No question. Because BYU will feast on the sisters of the poor like usual.

ByuIvie wrote:
Wrong- BYU moved the ball as long as they were passing. ...

Sorry, UCLA was up 20-3 at half time, bad reffing and a UCLA run game that got stronger as the game progressed is what did in BYU, not Anae's play calling. I recall others complaining that Unga should have been used more, which is probably true, but we didn't know just how good he was until half way through the season.

Wrong Again- Tulsa couldn't stop the run....

Seriously, letting Tulsa score 55 points was the problem with that game, To think otherwise is irrational. Bronco made it a point to take responsibility for not being able to defend Tulsa's trickeration. This was a trap game and BYU fell into the trap. The offense kept the team in the game.

Wrong Again- Hall threw the interceptions but Anae should have been calling running plays.... 2010 Any game that was utilizing the moronic two QB system places a significant part of the blame on Anae.

I guess you missed where I said Anae deserved much of the blame for this loss. Yet, you cannot excuse Hall for throwing 3 INTs in the 4th quarter.

Wrong Again- Any OC that is calling the game not to lose instead of to win, shouldn't expect to win close battles. ...

This reminded me of Crowton's defense of his loss at home to Stanford. He wanted to win by 9 instead of by 2. Anae got the team into a position to win. He had to balance the final series against how many time outs were left for :utard: where the kick would be placed, and to leave no time left in the game so :utard: would have no chance of coming back. He did every thing asked of him. Perhaps he could have done a better job, but more likley, if the kick is not blocked, BYU wins the game. Anae is not blameless, but he is not the sole reason why BYU lost the game.

There was at least four games where play calling and failure to change the game plan mid game was the largest factor in the loss. I am so glad Anae probably won't be back, If he is canned I will give one months pay to the football program. Now BYU will be able to move forward.

And I am equally critical of some of his play calling and second half game planning. I just think it's unfair to saddle him with so much blame when in reality, others have fallen short too.

YBrit wrote:
So if anything, Anae should become head coach right?

Perhaps, but not at BYU, we have a head coach already. ;)

Cougarbib2 wrote:
Bronco has specific point goals for offense and defense. On that basis, the defense fails far more often than the offense. But at BYU, we expect the offense to compensate for deficiencies on defense and special teams. Usually, it does.



This was the year Harvey Unga, OL, and WR were supposed to allow the offense to limp along while inexperienced QBs and TEs came around, and our defense was supposed to carry the offense for a change.



Bronco was too hands off early.

Hill did not have his guys playing to stop the run first.

Harvey Unga let down his teammates.

OL injuries in Spring, illness and injury in early season, performed badly the first few weeks.

RBs and FB took a while to click and pass protect

WRs looked horrible until Heaps accuracy and consistency improved



And yes - Anae is stubborn, unpopular as Norm Chow, and can be too predictable.



Only those that believe in magic will believe that replacing Anae will fix everything.



I am not and never have been an Anae fan. With or without Anae, the offense will be better next year. Magic does happen - but not consistently.



This coaching team, as does every coaching staff I have seen, struggled with how to handle too many inexperienced players at once including several phenols who just thought they needed to show up.



Oh, I forgot to mention several ST failures under Bronco, like sticking with OC too long on returns. Bronco can be a but stubborn, too.



Bronco and several players gave said those early losses were the best thing that could have happened to wake up these young players to the work needed. So - magic happens in mysterious ways sometimes. I guess we were blessed.



I am OK with making some coaching changes - but will remind that after Bronco took over the defense and brought in some inexperienced coaches - the defense did improve - and as has always been a problem for Bronco - became vulnerable to deep passes once again.



But, hey, in 2011, the offense will once again be able to carry a good but not great defense.



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

Amen. This has been a tremendous learning experience for Bronco and his staff. If Anae is brought back next season, I am sure he'll be on a very short leash. If not, I wish him the best at his next job.

frdbtr wrote:
I guess you can figure a way to remove blame from people if you want to but frankly, I disagree with a few of your assertions.



BC in 2005. Do you remember how many pass plays Beck threw in that game? I think it was abou 60 times, they never even tried to run the ball after getting the run stuffed on the first drive a couple of times.



Utah in 2005. BYU had driven the entire field mostly on runs on the last drive in regulation and with nearly 2 minutes left and in FG range, BYU throws 3 incomplete passes and settles for a FG. That game still irritates me because it should have been won by BYU in regulation by continuing to run the ball.



SDSU in 2005. Totally on the coaches, Anae is the offensive Coordinator, he is responsible for that part of the team, it was his fault. Bronco has taken the blame for coaching mistakes the entire time he has been the HC because ultimately he is responsible for the team but Anae is the one that needs to prepare offensive game plans, not Bronco.



Tulsa 2007, as was stated before, BYU was running the ball at will on tulsa, we had just taken a lead and with the proper calls (runs) we could extend our lead with a drive down the field and a score, Anae calls pass, Max Hall throws interception, Tulsa scores TD to retake lead, we never got it back. Horrible. Yes, we did score 47 points but you have to adjust your calling to help the team win and running the ball and the clock and keeping a team off the field that you can't stop is the right thing to do sometimes.



Yes, all these examples are early in his career but he still does these same bone headed things nearly every game, luckily we have had enough talent to overcome these things. Anae is an average play caller on his best days and on his worst, you can see where that goes. Plus, I have never thought that the offense had the same fire that the defense always has with Bronco leading them. It is time to get an Ocoordinator that has the same intensity that Bronco has.

I agree with much of what you said, but still find it hard to pin all the blame on Anae for any of the losses you mention. I didn't start this thread to defend Anae, but to bring some rationality to the debate.

hawkwing wrote:

If you are looking at this as purely a wins-losses analysis, you are missing 2/3 of the picture. This move, much like when Coach Hill was let go, was for cultural reasons. Bronco is making changes to further improve his team on many levels, including overall performance on the field. This change was necessary, and BYU is moving on. I wish Coach Anae well in his next job.

There is much more to his job than wins and losses, however, the most visible results of his job will be wins and losses and if he doesn't at least match Anae people will be calling for his job in a few years. It's the nature of the beast.

Lawboy, I agree with you. I focused on but one part of the equation because that is the part that people are most critical of. I think Hill was given enough opportunity to prove himself as a DC and was sorely wanting by the time the USU game was over. He had to go, but he couldn't be removed until then. The rest of the season was to let the offensive crew get their act together or expect changes. They did a respectable job, but not enough to think we are going to take it to the same level that BSU, Utah, and TCU have reached the past 3 seasons. Without further change, BYU will unlikely get to a BCS bowl, let alone compete for a national title. Bronco shook up the defense for the better. Now it's time to shake up the offense.



Whoever is the OC next season will be expected to win at least 10 games and perhaps even all 12 if Texas, OSU, and Utah are having less than stellar years.

Moral of the story.... never never never lose to Utah and you might get to keep your job.



Seriously, Anae's biggest problem isn't wins or losses, it's that he's not flexible or particularly friendly to and with his players. He doesn't get the best out of many of them until they're experienced enough to do it on their own.



I hereby submit that you can win and still hurt a program...



The system is there, and it's not going away without Anae. Adding Doman to that system as the OC and adding a QB coach with some recruiting pull is an upgrade.



We have more $$ coming in and Bronco has a ton of good will built up with the young talented team and salvaging this season... I'd be spending it too if I were him.

hawkwing wrote:
Very good analysis, some of your points I agree with, some I don't. But I think it does point out a specific problem as has been seen by Ivie's response. Some people want to place all of the blame for everything on Anae, even when it makes little sense to do so. It does also make it a lot more clear why Hill was the first one to go, as he was truly responsible for a lot more losses.

I don't want to place all the blame on Anae. I am not blaming him for the BC loss or the SDSU loss. I am only blaming him for a few losses. I don't think that qualifies as "everything".

Sorry, UCLA was up 20-3 at half time, bad reffing and a UCLA run game that got stronger as the game progressed is what did in BYU, not Anae's play calling. I recall others complaining that Unga should have been used more, which is probably true, but we didn't know just how good he was until half way through the season.





Yes that is absolutely correct. BYU came out in the third quarter and drove down the field with passes to score twice. The score was then at 20-17 and Anae stopped focusing on the pass and then went right back to the run. That was poor play calling. So don't blame the officials they didn't change the game plan in the 4th quarter to focus on the run that wasn't working.



Seriously, letting Tulsa score 55 points was the problem with that game, To think otherwise is irrational. Bronco made it a point to take responsibility for not being able to defend Tulsa's trickeration. This was a trap game and BYU fell into the trap. The offense kept the team in the game.



Who cares what the score is as long as we win. If Anae would have focused on the run when BYU was ahead, Tulsa probably wouldn't have scored that many points. How many of those 55 points came off an interception. 14 in the third quarter. I may not be the football guru like you but I am pretty sure it wasn't the defense who was calling the plays.



I guess you missed where I said Anae deserved much of the blame for this loss. Yet, you cannot excuse Hall for throwing 3 INTs in the 4th quarter.



Here is a concept, maybe if the play calling wasn't so predictable and poor, just maybe, the Utah DB's wouldn't have figured out that it was going to be a pass before the ball was snapped. Blame Max hall for the interceptions all you want, Anae called the plays and his play calling was so predictable that Utah knew what was happening. You can blame Max for throwing interceptions but at some point the OC who keeps calling predictable plays has to take the blame.



Some games were lost because of Anae and if that wasn't the case he probably wouldn't be let go.

One thing missing in the argument is that the offense and the defense are not separate. For example, you can't say that it's not the offenses fault that BYU gave up 55 points to Tulsa. The offense had 4 turnovers, including 3 in the 3rd quarter (1 returned for a touchdown). Tulsa had 1. When you give the other team momentum changing plays, it makes it difficult for the other unit. The defense feeds the offense, the offense feeds the defense. You can look at most games that were lost by BYU and illustrate why it is either units "fault." Just because the offense had 47 points does not mean that they have no culpability. It does not mean that we didn't have boneheaded plays called by the offense which cost us the game. Football is played with one team on each side, not two teams on each side. Certainly, there are games where the offense played badly and the defense was great, however, in order to find those games, you have to look further than the final score.

rblack wrote:
One thing missing in the argument is that the offense and the defense are not separate. For example, you can't say that it's not the offenses fault that BYU gave up 55 points to Tulsa. The offense had 4 turnovers, including 3 in the 3rd quarter (1 returned for a touchdown). Tulsa had 1. When you give the other team momentum changing plays, it makes it difficult for the other unit. The defense feeds the offense, the offense feeds the defense. You can look at most games that were lost by BYU and illustrate why it is either units "fault." Just because the offense had 47 points does not mean that they have no culpability. It does not mean that we didn't have boneheaded plays called by the offense which cost us the game. Football is played with one team on each side, not two teams on each side. Certainly, there are games where the offense played badly and the defense was great, however, in order to find those games, you have to look further than the final score.

You're right, but that's also why the offensive problems were defensive problems too. Tulsa was scoring in 2 or 3 play drives, long passes over the middle. This in turn caused Hall to panic and feel like he had to score quickly. If the defense had been able to force Tulsa into even a couple of long drives, we would have won that game.