Sometimes the truth hurts

[bengel]

To ttw

Representing the church does not preclude you from being the best or winning big games.

False dichotomy not found in the article. There is a difference between being a consistent contender for the national championship and being considered among the best programs and winning big games.

I disagree with the assertion in the article that winning is a bonus and not part of the job description. Winning is the goal. A losing football program does not serve BYU or LDS Church interests. However, winning at the expense of principle isn't the goal.

I don't believe that Utah or Boise state have superior talent.

Between the honor code and BYU's academic standards, the talent pool is smaller. Star Lotulelei is an academic case in point. We wanted him. He wanted us. He couldn't meet the academic standards.

Bringing in gifted athletes who cannot or will not meet BYU's standards is counter-productive. One need look no further than some who came to BYU under Coach Crowton.

Where this is most telling is not starters, but depth. BYU will never be a team where most of the second string would be starting somewhere else.

I don't think that fan expectation of the coaches at BYU is all that much different from fans expectations at any program that is used to winning.

True, but fan(atic) and realist should never be combined. Realistic fan is an oxymoron. Realists temper expectations by considering all factors. Fans don't. This does not mean realistic BYU supporters will never have a basis for expecting success or improvement.

I don't think that just because fans expect of a coach making a million dollars a year to win every game is a reason for him to move on.

Agreed. (Implicit acknowledgement the preceding point.)

I don't think that an honor code and winning are mutually exclusive.

True, but not the point of the article. See above.

I don't think that innovation in football is a thing of the past.

I hope innovation will be around for a long time, and that it will again manifest at BYU.

I don't think that BYU's future is limited to to a weak talent and shallow roster.
I don't think that losing fulfills the mission of BYU football even if it is fifthI don't think fan expectations are outrageous.
I don't think that it is reasonable that a ten win season and poinsetta bowl should be "good enough."

See above. Go Cougars

[Cougarfan87]

Now you guys all love Bronco? With friends like you, who needs enemies? I get more than ever that when things do not go perfectly, message boards become a place for many to rant and rave. But seriously, the anger at Bronco and certain student athletes has been shamefully over the top. I'm not sure I'd agree with everything in the article, but I think it is true that Bronco has challenges coaching at BYU that no other coach has and that it does make for a more difficult assignment. Between the honor code, academics, missions, to name a few, these are things the BYU coach hasn't deal with that no one else has to to the same degree. Whit doesn't. Peterson doesn't Kelly doesn't. Those difficulties make winning harder. Deal with it

Nobody is arguing that those aren't challenges unique to BYU. Having fans with almost impossibly high expectations is not (there is already talk of firing Chizick at Auburn two seasons removed from a national championship). Of course, Bronco has done nothing but talk about getting to the highest level of the game, so those expectations remain high. And they should.

The problem is the author mistakes having criticism for the way a situation has been handled with wanting the coach to be fired. Furthermore, the article sites the limitations as reasons we should be satisfied with the results we are getting. Bronco is not satisfied. If you have ever heard him speak at a fireside, he believes it is a competitive advantage and will be a shining example when the team goes undefeated.

No one that I know of has said Bronco should be fired. If they have they are loony. However, many have criticized the way we play Utah, the decision to play an injured, ineffective QB in the last two games, the decision to go for two (although that one is arguable), and the indefensible decision not to onside kick it after missing the two point conversion. None of that says, "Bronco should therefore be fired." The article takes the criticism beyond what the criticism was meant to address. Instead of recognizing that issues exist with clock management, loyalty to an injured player above the good of the team, and turnovers, the author makes it seem like everyone is calling for Bronco's head. No one is saying that.

The vast majority of the firing talk has all been about Weber (and deservedly so). The poll on this site even showed that most people want to give Doman another year as well.

It is a complete straw man argument meant to defend Bronco about his decision making without addressing whether there are issues with the decision making based on an emotional plea. In short, garbage.

[hawkwing]

I was one of the few calling for his head after his bonehead call against Boise. But after hearing some of the "fans" on the radio call in shows I'm not sure you can ever please anyone. We as fans think we know all. I would like Bronco to concentrate on just defense and hire a veteran ol and oc coach. Though I believe his pride would never allow him to step down to a dc only role.

If he steps down to only DC then he wouldn't have the authority to hire a veteran ol and oc coach.

I also don't think it's pride that would keep someone from volunteering to step down to a subordinate roll when they are currently considered to be one of the better head coaches in the game.

[stuckinbig10country]

The writer loses all credibility in his first 2 paragraphs. Saying Bronco is in a worse position than the Penn State coach is just dumb. Then he says that the BYU admin isn't concerned with winning (tell that to Vance Law). Then he encourages Bronco to just leave on his terms instead of staying around? Even if the rest of the article were spot on (which I doubt), the author loses all credibility with his intro.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[BYZoo]

Methinks the author is a Yewt.

[hawkwing]

The writer loses all credibility in his first 2 paragraphs. Saying Bronco is in a worse position than the Penn State coach is just dumb. Then he says that the BYU admin isn't concerned with winning (tell that to Vance Law). Then he encourages Bronco to just leave on his terms instead of staying around? Even if the rest of the article were spot on (which I doubt), the author loses all credibility with his intro.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Stuckin is exactly right. Encouraging Bronco to leave is asinine.

[BoiseBYU]

Now you guys all love Bronco? With friends like you, who needs enemies? I get more than ever that when things do not go perfectly, message boards become a place for many to rant and rave. But seriously, the anger at Bronco and certain student athletes has been shamefully over the top. I'm not sure I'd agree with everything in the article, but I think it is true that Bronco has challenges coaching at BYU that no other coach has and that it does make for a more difficult assignment. Between the honor code, academics, missions, to name a few, these are things the BYU coach hasn't deal with that no one else has to to the same degree. Whit doesn't. Peterson doesn't Kelly doesn't. Those difficulties make winning harder. Deal with it

Nobody is arguing that those aren't challenges unique to BYU. Having fans with almost impossibly high expectations is not (there is already talk of firing Chizick at Auburn two seasons removed from a national championship). Of course, Bronco has done nothing but talk about getting to the highest level of the game, so those expectations remain high. And they should.

The problem is the author mistakes having criticism for the way a situation has been handled with wanting the coach to be fired. Furthermore, the article sites the limitations as reasons we should be satisfied with the results we are getting. Bronco is not satisfied. If you have ever heard him speak at a fireside, he believes it is a competitive advantage and will be a shining example when the team goes undefeated.

No one that I know of has said Bronco should be fired. If they have they are loony. However, many have criticized the way we play Utah, the decision to play an injured, ineffective QB in the last two games, the decision to go for two (although that one is arguable), and the indefensible decision not to onside kick it after missing the two point conversion. None of that says, "Bronco should therefore be fired." The article takes the criticism beyond what the criticism was meant to address. Instead of recognizing that issues exist with clock management, loyalty to an injured player above the good of the team, and turnovers, the author makes it seem like everyone is calling for Bronco's head. No one is saying that.

The vast majority of the firing talk has all been about Weber (and deservedly so). The poll on this site even showed that most people want to give Doman another year as well.

It is a complete straw man argument meant to defend Bronco about his decision making without addressing whether there are issues with the decision making based on an emotional plea. In short, garbage.

I think you make some very good points. I personally think there have been some wrong decisions--playing an injured player, not going for the onside kick--and the need to address OLine performance etc. I have no problem with fans raising that. What has been very hard--almost has driven me away at least--is the venom, vitriol, and arrogance displayed repeatedly by people who think they know it all, have all the facts, and can't stand that our players don't win every game or at least games very very important to them. The fact that this behavior manifests itself elsewhere is no excuse or justification for it to rear its ugly dark side here or with BYU fans in my humble view. It is shameful, debilitating, and disgusting. And if there is something that is "garbage," it is that. I am fully aware that my words mean nothing and will not change one vent, but that is how I feel.

[SpiffCoug]

His shot at Jake Heaps was unnecessary as well.

[Mingjai]

I don't think that fan expectation of the coaches at BYU is all that much different from fans expectations at any program that is used to winning.

True, but fan(atic) and realist should never be combined. Realistic fan is an oxymoron. Realists temper expectations by considering all factors. Fans don't. This does not mean realistic BYU supporters will never have a basis for expecting success or improvement.

You must not know many Cubs fans. None of them expect to win, but they're still fanatical in their support of the Cubs.

[ABYUFAN]

From the article...

"BYU fans need to decide what they want. It is no longer possible for BYU’s football program to be both a missionary for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a consistent national championship contender. I wish it were."

What the heck does this mean? BYU has never been a “Consistent “ national championship contender if “consistent” means having a legitimate shot at the national championship year after year. If, however, he means winning consistently and occasionally, with an insane amount of luck, having a shot at a national championship (which is how we got our first one) we are exactly that