CougarCorner

hawkwing wrote:I will not be satisfied until BYU beats a team that ends the year unbeaten.

LOLZ.

That's what I love about these analyses--by definition, teams with really good records don't lose much, so no one has winning (or I would dare say better than .400) records against them--if you could pull out a .350 record against top teams over a decade, I would classify that as a top-5 program.

Against teams .750 or better, Bronco has a 4-10 record. It looks bad, but it's actually a much better than average performance. Look at it this way:

In those 14 games, the opponents have had an average win percentage of .833
Taking the inverse, their schedule had a .167 winning percentage against those teams.
Bronco's teams have a .286 winning percentage against the .833 teams--that's more than one absolute standard deviation above the mean.

Even if you want to control by removing the D-II teams, here are the results:
Win percentage: .842
Inverse: .158
BYU's: .167

So this argument that Bronco must not be good because he loses to teams that don't lose much doesn't add up as cleanly as its proponents would have you believe.

snoscythe wrote:

Against teams .750 or better, Bronco has a 4-10 record. It looks bad, but it's actually a much better than average performance.

More like 2-10 considering two of those wins were against D-II opponents.

KingCoug wrote:

snoscythe wrote:

Against teams .750 or better, Bronco has a 4-10 record. It looks bad, but it's actually a much better than average performance.

More like 2-10 considering two of those wins were against D-II opponents.

And then did you finish reading the post?

KingCoug wrote:Has BYU Hit Its Ceiling?
Brett Richins
September 17, 2012

It’s also time for Mendenhall to start coaching the entire team and not just the defense. It’s time to start holding an offensive line coach and offensive coordinator accountable for performances like the one we witnessed on Saturday. It’s time to start developing quarterbacks so that you don’t have five-star quarterbacks leaving the program and four-star QBs languishing on the bench while a gutty, gritty, slot receiver plays the position.

http://deepshadesofblue.com/has-byu-hit-its-ceiling/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

First, I think Bronco identifies with Nelson. Both were shunned by BYU in favor of more talented players. Both showed the internal resolve and perseverance to right that situation (in their own minds, at least). Bronco beat BYU while playing at Oregon State. RN transferred to BYU and became the starter.

Second, Bronco has said on many occasions that he doesn't really know that much about offensive football, so he stays out of it. I always assumed it was part of his schtick, but Saturday night, I came to the realization that he may really not have a clue about a successful offensive performance. I believe he watched what unfolded in the game and thought "Wow! Utah's front 7 are executing at a very high level!" I don't believe he took the poor offensive performance in to consideration.

This is a glaring weakness. And if Bronco is really as oblivious to offense as he claims, what gives him the confidence to choose an offensive coaching staff? Focus on execution? We clearly aren't there yet. Even if our playbook has only 10 plays that we are going to execute with precision, we haven't done that in the Bronco era.

BTW, when other coaches are reviewing film, they'll come to the conclusion that they can put 2 guys on Hoffman, 2 guys on Friel and the rest in the box without threat of getting beat. OK, that part is TIC, but the rest is my honest opinion.

That said, if not Bronco, who? I know he's not reading the boards, but does he listen to his assistants? Do they have a voice? Can they say, "we aren't doing enough"? and have him listen to what more they can do?

This article is right on. Add to it that Bronco doesn't like the fans, shows no emotion on the field, acts more like a general authority than a head football coach, dresses like he is doing yard work, and seems un-involved with the offense. He also doesn't do a good job at developing talent.

The problem is, I don't know who we would replace him with. I want it to work with him but there needs to be some changes made!

Sorry - this BS lost me right at the part about the opening snap getting away from Riley.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

jacksonman wrote:This article is right on. Add to it that Bronco doesn't like the fans, shows no emotion on the field, acts more like a general authority than a head football coach, dresses like he is doing yard work, and seems un-involved with the offense. He also doesn't do a good job at developing talent.

The problem is, I don't know who we would replace him with. I want it to work with him but there needs to be some changes made!

I really couldn't care less that he doesn't like the fans, shows no emotion on the field, acts like a general authority, or dresses like he's doing yard work, because I don't think these things directly effects him as a coach.

There are plenty of things to gripe about Bronco but what you listed above are frivolous non-issues.

Cougarbib wrote:Sorry - this BS lost me right at the part about the opening snap getting away from Riley.

Are you talking about the article itself? I sure hope not.

I don't think many people will disagree with the basic premise of the article. BYU needs to change something or it will continue getting the same results. It's not rocket science.

The question is what to change. Hate him all you want, but isn't likely you're going to round up a better coach than Bronco, who is willing to coach at BYU given the baggage that comes with it (pay-grade, honor code, culture, etc.) Changes could certainly be made to coordinators and position coaches with positive results, but even then, I think the BYU's problem might run deeper.

Frankly, I don't see BYU having elite success while playing conventional football. The last time BYU was having elite, national success, they accomplished it on the back of solid defense and throwing the ball what was then an absurd number of times. Defenses didn't know how to defend it consistently as BYU was so far ahead of the curve, and that compensated for BYU's weaknesses in recruiting, coaching etc. Eventually, however, BYU became the model most teams adopted. Today, almost everybody spreads the field on pass plays and airs it out 25+ times a game. Consequently, defenses have adjusted, and BYU's unique advantage has worn off.

If BYU wants that level of success again, and I'm not talking about hovering around the top 25, I'm talking BCS/national championship level success, they are going to have to embrace the same kind of risks Lavell took when he decided against all the strategy of the time to throw the football like crazy.

There are options. Constant, nitro-paced offense, No-punt football, etc. I'm not familiar with everything out there, and I'm not sure which one would work for BYU, but I am aware enough to know that statistics definitively show that teams aren't maximizing their potential when it comes to strategy. And I think that is where BYU is going to have to go if they want to be back in the echelons of elite national success.

No punt football? LOL. I can't see Bronco swallowing that bitter pill. haha.

(not saying it isn't a great idea... just saying that you would have to pry the punt from Broncos cold dead hands.)

KingCoug wrote:

CDH wrote:here is a different opinion........ One I tend to agree with...
http://www.vanquishthefoe.com/2012/9/17 ... g-altitude" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The problem with that article is much of it is based on what still could be. And what could be is nothing but future speculation.

The problem is the original article apparently reflects a viewpoint that you agree with, while the second article apparently reflects a viewpoint that you disagree with. Both articles are based on the assumption that future results will reflect their assessment of the situation.