Heaps and Autonomy to Call Plays at LOS

Interesting to hear Bronco discuss on ESPNU what freedom Jake will have to audible at the line of scrimmage. Seems like he will have 1-2 options to consider when modifying the original play if he sees something favorable. I believe this opportunity for him will only expand as he and Doman develop their trust throughout the season - leading to more uncertainty for the defense in identifying patterns/trends. Sure does sound refreshing and exciting compared to the Anae play-calling days.

Beck and Hall had the same autonomy under Anae. If Heaps didn't have it last season, it was a youth/2-QB driven decision.

One has to argue this point given some of the play calling that went on during UT, USU games, etc. Not sure Doman, Heaps and Anae were all in agreement about allowing strengths of Heaps to be implemented, the type of plays to run, and at line decision-making. There were some real questionable decisions made - that I don't believe were supported by the H/D team - it is probably why Anae sought greener pastures elsewhere. Remember, under Anae it was dink, doink throws with not a lot of variety occurring - fairly predicatable - put a lot of pressure on Heaps to perform. I believe the UTEP game showcased what was to come with Doman/Heaps and there was definitely a lot more latititude at that time to allow Jake to make some at the line of scrimmage decisions.

I think allowing the QB to audible to a different play or side of the field is actually a great idea because it keeps your QB engaged in his film studies. He is not just watching to see what the other team does, but looking to see how to exploit those tendencies. Film session is now about "if we see this D, audible to this", rather than "look out for this". All about improving and putting the team in a better position to succeed--one play at a time.

byucougar1 wrote:
One has to argue this point given some of the play calling that went on during UT, USU games, etc. Not sure Doman, Heaps and Anae were all in agreement about allowing strengths of Heaps to be implemented, the type of plays to run, and at line decision-making. There were some real questionable decisions made - that I don't believe were supported by the H/D team - it is probably why Anae sought greener pastures elsewhere. Remember, under Anae it was dink, doink throws with not a lot of variety occurring - fairly predicatable - put a lot of pressure on Heaps to perform. I believe the UTEP game showcased what was to come with Doman/Heaps and there was definitely a lot more latititude at that time to allow Jake to make some at the line of scrimmage decisions.

It is also true that UTEP was not a good team. Utah was.

The 10th-ranked BSU Broncos dominated No. 20 Utah 26-3 in the Las Vegas Bowl - it was a game that wasn't as close as the final score indicated. Boise State's defense held Utah to just 200 yards, shutting down both the running and passing game, and Utah never scored after its opening field goal. The way BYU played in their final bowl game, I believe that they would have also dominated the Utes.

It's really strange - the things that can happen when you pick a starter, and put faith in him.



It'll be interesting to see how badly Anae has done things all these years (and - in all fairness - how well he has done a few things. Like win games we should, and lose games we should.)



All I know, with this new coaching lineup, the Vegas odds are going to get pretty interesting. There was nothing more predictable than BYU football the last 5 years.

byucougar1 wrote:
The 10th-ranked BSU Broncos dominated No. 20 Utah 26-3 in the Las Vegas Bowl - it was a game that wasn't as close as the final score indicated. Boise State's defense held Utah to just 200 yards, shutting down both the running and passing game, and Utah never scored after its opening field goal. The way BYU played in their final bowl game, I believe that they would have also dominated the Utes.

You are aware that UTEP was probably the worst team playing in a bowl last season, right?

I thought Max Hall had more control than just calling an audible. Didn't he make all the calls in the final drive, against the Utes his Sr year?



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

Yeah, and if I remember right he made most if not all the calls for the final drive against Oklahoma as well.

Point I was making is that Doman began to have a more influential role than Anae as the OC towards the end of the season which, not surprisingly coincided with with a rapidly-maturing quarterback. With Heaps progress, Doman helped capitalize on some of his natural talents (i.e. can fluidly hit the mid-range and deep patterns). One of the changes included allowing Jake more freedom than Anae was giving him at the LOS. This is unique in that Heaps was a freshmen but Doman saw his skill set and not his class ranking.



During the UTEP game, the freshman hit 25 of 34 passes for 264 yards, four touchdowns and one pick. This translates to a completion rate of more than 70 percent and at least 10 yards per completion. Pretty good stats and I am quite sure Doman had a lot to do with the game plan and also allowing Heaps some freedom to take some risks. Yes, BYU played really well. Yes, the opponent also had something to do with the difference in the final score. My feeling is that the Y would have put the hurt on a number of teams because they were peaking and really beginning to jell as a team. They would have beaten UT had they had a rematch. Bronco even stated that he wished the season could continue because they were playing well, and it has carried over to the Spring and I assume the summer/fall.



Expect Doman to instill a modified/upgraded package that will allow Jake to have an increase in this autonomy. They both have stated that Heaps has improved since the last game - so I would expect more responsibility and autonomy could be anticipated.



Regarding Sno's comments about UTEP, I hope that his intent is not to undermine the Y's victory by stating that UTEP was such an inferior opponent that they would have been beaten by a similar score by anyone. First, UTEP, against a stout Bronco Y defense, still put up 24 points.



There are a number of bowl teams other than UTEP that didn't do this, and I dare say that we played/were better than the below listed winners:



Northern Illinois 40 vs Fresno State 17

Troy 48 vs Ohio 21

San Diego State 35 vs Navy 14

NC State 23 vs West Virginia 7

Iowa 27 vs Missouri 24

Maryland 51 vs East Carolina 20

Illinois 38 vs. Baylor 14

Oklahoma State 36 vs. Arizona 10

Army 16 vs. SMU 14

I still submit that UTEP was one of, if not THE, worst team playing in a bowl game last season. Their team had the following rankings at season's end: 58th in passing yards per game, 84th in rushing yards per game, 71st in points scored per game, and 66th in points allowed per game---in other words, they were below average in 3 of those 4 metrics, and only 2 spots above the median in the fourth metric. And to think they managed that with the #89 strength of schedule.



Forgive me for not thinking that our beat-down of lowly 6-6 UTEP was some indication that we could have drubbed the 10-2 Utes like 11-1 Boise State (with their only loss an overtime road loss to a top-20 team). I apologize if I don't buy into that logic.

snoscythe wrote:
I still submit that UTEP was one of, if not THE, worst team playing in a bowl game last season. Their team had the following rankings at season's end: 58th in passing yards per game, 84th in rushing yards per game, 71st in points scored per game, and 66th in points allowed per game---in other words, they were below average in 3 of those 4 metrics, and only 2 spots above the median in the fourth metric. And to think they managed that with the #89 strength of schedule.



Forgive me for not thinking that our beat-down of lowly 6-6 UTEP was some indication that we could have drubbed the 10-2 Utes like 11-1 Boise State (with their only loss an overtime road loss to a top-20 team). I apologize if I don't buy into that logic.

agreed.



Jake's beat downs of teams towards the end of the season had more to do with the gosh-awful crappiness of teams we were playing. Not the plays being called. (Utah was the last game of the season. Remember that one? WR sweep reverse handoff, anyone? Running on 1st and 2nd practically in your endzone, anyone?)



Jake was making the most out of crappy play calls towards the end of the season. His natural talent and ability was good enough to move them down the field. Things will be a lot better now, and also - a lot worse once in a while. We will be taking a lot more gambles, and some of those won't pan out. But I would rather lose 10 games in a row putting the pressure on the entire game than lose a couple playing conservatively.

We lost by one point to UT 17-16 at their stadium - in a game we should have won - despite questionable play calling. We learned from that game and improved - can't say the same for the Utes - they were heading the opposite direction. While I never said that we would drub them, I find it hard to believe that we wouldn't have beat them by more than one point on a neutral field.

BYU was a good team at the end of the year. Good teams make bad team look bad. BYU made bad teams look really bad. If BYU had another two weeks to prepare for Utah, I think we could have beaten soundly.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
agreed.



Jake's beat downs of teams towards the end of the season had more to do with the gosh-awful crappiness of teams we were playing. Not the plays being called. (Utah was the last game of the season. Remember that one? WR sweep reverse handoff, anyone? Running on 1st and 2nd practically in your endzone, anyone?)



Jake was making the most out of crappy play calls towards the end of the season. His natural talent and ability was good enough to move them down the field. Things will be a lot better now, and also - a lot worse once in a while. We will be taking a lot more gambles, and some of those won't pan out. But I would rather lose 10 games in a row putting the pressure on the entire game than lose a couple playing conservatively.

Interestingly enough we saw the same thing in the spring game. BYU's first team offense ran 3 consecutive plays in over time when inside the blue zone.

hawkwing wrote:

agreed.



Jake's beat downs of teams towards the end of the season had more to do with the gosh-awful crappiness of teams we were playing. Not the plays being called. (Utah was the last game of the season. Remember that one? WR sweep reverse handoff, anyone? Running on 1st and 2nd practically in your endzone, anyone?)



Jake was making the most out of crappy play calls towards the end of the season. His natural talent and ability was good enough to move them down the field. Things will be a lot better now, and also - a lot worse once in a while. We will be taking a lot more gambles, and some of those won't pan out. But I would rather lose 10 games in a row putting the pressure on the entire game than lose a couple playing conservatively.

Interestingly enough we saw the same thing in the spring game. BYU's first team offense ran 3 consecutive plays in over time when inside the blue zone.

Wait a minute!!!



Anae is still calling the plays?!?!



I thought he left :skeptic:



(TIC)



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

Eh, practice is one thing. Games are another. I have zero doubt in my mind that in a real game, Doman will put the game in Heaps' hands and give him room to be exceptional.



And, quite frankly, if he doesn't then he doesn't deserve to have the job.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Eh, practice is one thing. Games are another. I have zero doubt in my mind that in a real game, Doman will put the game in Heaps' hands and give him room to be exceptional.



And, quite frankly, if he doesn't then he doesn't deserve to have the job.

Awesome! Already calling for Doman's head! The honeymoon is now officially over!



Blue, this is almost as great a comment as your calling Coach Rose insane.

I believe what blue is saying, is that any repetition of Anae type play calling (especially in the red/blue zone) is not what we hired Doman to do and would be a big mistake. Doman was hired to bring a fresh approach to our offense, make it more versatile and balanced, and present a more unpredictable scheme going up against the defense.