Bronco let the cat out

Bronco's statements this week reveal, I think, that it is a coaching decision to run more and pass less, thus the many runs on first down, and sometimes three runs in a row (then punt). For whatever reason, the coaches believed BYU could run on anybody, including Texas. This proved not to be the case, thus the theory disproven.



This may also reveal why Heaps has not looked sharp, he's obligated to run all the run plays instead of passing, and he cannot get in any kind of rythm. Consequently, neither can the receivers get into their groove of working the DBs so they can get open. I am betting that if BYU came out and just began throwing the ball (as in days of yore), receivers would be open, Heaps would hit them...and then we start slipping in the runs and draw plays.



But it seems the coaches are still so committed to the run, that they're going to stick with it. I see another low offense, low scoring, nail biter on Saturday.

golong wrote:
Bronco's statements this week reveal, I think, that it is a coaching decision to run more and pass less, thus the many runs on first down, and sometimes three runs in a row (then punt). For whatever reason, the coaches believed BYU could run on anybody, including Texas. This proved not to be the case, thus the theory disproven.

The problem was that the theory was proven well before the 4th quarter of the Texas game...

We still led and the D was looking solid.



However, this does make me wonder if the 4th quarter brakes put on in games like Utah the last several years are an HC decision. Perhaps we need more killer instincts from the staff, and less protective instincts. No inside knowledge on this point, though, just know I want to see us play to win, and be aggressive, and not play to outlast an opponent by running the clock.

Remember when Bronco used to preach that if you win the turnover battle, 80% of the time you win the game--or some stat like that.

This could be the constraining influence on this offense. then again, Bronco really thought we would be able to run on teams. Maybe we should have taken that day-off form practice and gone 1's on 1's? Maybe a downside to not alot of our O going against the 1 D. They would have known sooner the anemia of our running game. BUt oh well, we almost pulled it off.

But I think some of you are right. BYU has not learned just yet and will not likely take the restraints off the O. Because certainly da youts arent as fast or talented as Texas, right?

Lawboy wrote:
We still led and the D was looking solid.



However, this does make me wonder if the 4th quarter brakes put on in games like Utah the last several years are an HC decision. Perhaps we need more killer instincts from the staff, and less protective instincts. No inside knowledge on this point, though, just know I want to see us play to win, and be aggressive, and not play to outlast an opponent by running the clock.

Halelujah and 1 million amens! This team sits on leads as if they're paid to do so. I am sick of it! Especially against the U and other good programs.

Lawboy wrote:
We still led and the D was looking solid.



However, this does make me wonder if the 4th quarter brakes put on in games like Utah the last several years are an HC decision. Perhaps we need more killer instincts from the staff, and less protective instincts. No inside knowledge on this point, though, just know I want to see us play to win, and be aggressive, and not play to outlast an opponent by running the clock.

Yes, this is my take. Many of your points, such as preparing ourselves to be a defensive oriented approach to victory, reflect this noticeable trend.



To me, this team's competitive advantage is really in the pass game. The line appear to be better pass blockers, Heaps, the WRs, TEs, and JJ is really a changeup runner/receiver out of the backfield. I would advocate being more aggressive and leveraging these competitive advantages.



We can pass to set up the run...but it has to be better than a "checkdown" Saturday plan. I think the coaches will tinker this and piece it together. I have not lost any faith in Heaps or our WRs.

Lawboy wrote:
We still led and the D was looking solid.



However, this does make me wonder if the 4th quarter brakes put on in games like Utah the last several years are an HC decision. Perhaps we need more killer instincts from the staff, and less protective instincts. No inside knowledge on this point, though, just know I want to see us play to win, and be aggressive, and not play to outlast an opponent by running the clock.

I would definitely say there is a lack of killer instincts on the offensive side of the ball. Seemed to me Doman was intent on keeping it on the ground to try and eat up clock. Can't eat up clock if you're not going anywhere. Need to kick the opponent while they're down.



In the meantime, our defense was tired and they experienced a brain fart when Texas changed schemes.

golong wrote:
Bronco's statements this week reveal, I think, that it is a coaching decision to run more and pass less, thus the many runs on first down, and sometimes three runs in a row (then punt). For whatever reason, the coaches believed BYU could run on anybody, including Texas. This proved not to be the case, thus the theory disproven.

That's funny, if you look in Dcr36's thread, BYU has so far averaged around 41% running plays... or do you want them to only run 2 or 3 times out of 10?

AJP wrote:

Bronco's statements this week reveal, I think, that it is a coaching decision to run more and pass less, thus the many runs on first down, and sometimes three runs in a row (then punt). For whatever reason, the coaches believed BYU could run on anybody, including Texas. This proved not to be the case, thus the theory disproven.

That's funny, if you look in Dcr36's thread, BYU has so far averaged around 41% running plays... or do you want them to only run 2 or 3 times out of 10?

Bronco himself stated that his wish is for 25% of plays be "down field" plays, so run plays making up 30% of the offense isn't that far off with the remaining half of plays resembling the dink and dunk plays Doman and Heaps seem keen on running as of late as well as some mid-range throws. That would seem balanced to me.



Right now, it's 40% run and 50% short ranged stuff with little mid-range and fewer still "down field" throws. All defenses have to do is pack it in within the first 8 yards and they've got us stopped.

Gunk wrote:

golong wrote:
Bronco's statements this week reveal, I think, that it is a coaching decision to run more and pass less, thus the many runs on first down, and sometimes three runs in a row (then punt). For whatever reason, the coaches believed BYU could run on anybody, including Texas. This proved not to be the case, thus the theory disproven.

That's funny, if you look in Dcr36's thread, BYU has so far averaged around 41% running plays... or do you want them to only run 2 or 3 times out of 10?

Bronco himself stated that his wish is for 25% of plays be "down field" plays, so run plays making up 30% of the offense isn't that far off with the remaining half of plays resembling the dink and dunk plays Doman and Heaps seem keen on running as of late as well as some mid-range throws. That would seem balanced to me.



Right now, it's 40% run and 50% short ranged stuff with little mid-range and fewer still "down field" throws. All defenses have to do is pack it in within the first 8 yards and they've got us stopped.

Bronco's also said that they've been throwing the ball more than we would like to, so I don't think he'd agree quite with that balance.

Wow... many years of arm chair quarterbacking have taught me that playing not to lose often makes you lose. Maybe more rigorous analysis doesn't bear that out?? But this can't be rocket science.. it seems intuitive that unless you're vastly superior to a team, you have to take risks to win. I hate conservative football.