Redshirting Heaps

[GolfDiveNCougs]

I HOPE you meant relative. Though, humorously, your commentary at respect's relevance is quite appropriate. You'll note I haven't said I agree or disagree with anything you've said. Contrarily, I've stated clearly that my opinion hasn't been formulated yet.

I take exception to you showing up here and rudely calling out respected members of the board community whose opinions are almost always well thought out, and much more worthy of my respect than yours.

And yes, you WERE being disrespectful.

[WestCoastCat]

Golf I wasn't responding to you but thanks for the spelling correction...

You really shouldn't be so easily offended just because someone doesn't agree with you or your buddies.

[SpiffCoug]

Kit as usual you are wrong about your spring ball analysis or maybe sno has talked you into his fantasy of Nelson dominating spring ball. I personally saw allot of spring practice with my own two eyes since I know one of the players family members. I am not speculating here I actually saw what was going on and Nelson didnt bring up his numbers till the very very end. It was like the coaches started given him some defensive combinations that he could beat so he wouldnt loose heart and keep the race closer than it actually was. They couldnt let Heaps run away with spring as they wanted to keep the competition going into fall.

I saw the 11 on 11's too and Nelson struggled often to move the ball.

The difference between the two QB"s is glaring and Heaps is just a freshman. Hence Wrubell's comments Keeping Heaps off the field is going to be hard to do... the kid is just that good.

Sorry, the logic that "Nelson didn't bring up his numbers till the very, very end..." and then implying that the coaches somehow were fixing the race is very interesting to me.

Point 1) Do stats at the end of the game count less than stats accumulated at the start. Are touchdowns in the 4th quarter worth fewer points? Do passing yards only count for 3/4 of their value. That's bad logic. Nelson picking up his game to a higher level by the end of spring ball is a good thing. It shows he can improve and started making plays. To somehow suggest that his accomplishments mean less because they came in the last week and not the first is just weird to me. No where in any of my posts have I tried to discredit Heaps' stats or accomplishments. I've simply tried to point out that he was not head and shoulders better over the entire course of spring ball.

Point 2) To suggest that somehow BYU coaches were fixing the race implies a lack of integrity and honest competition that I simply cannot see Bronco condoning or encouraging. That's insulting to BYU's program and both Heaps and Nelson. I don't know Nelson, and I highly doubt he would want to win the job in that fashion.

[gmj81]

I voted yes. There isn't anyone who couldn't benefit from a redshirt year. It's a year to get a little bigger, let the game speed down a bit, and learn the play book that much better.

That said, you could say the same thing for any one of the guys in this race. Sure some of them have already used their redshirt year. That doesn't mean that another year couldn't benefit them. Do you think that Lark and Munns remember every little thing from before their mission? And we know they certainly aren't in the kind of shape to play to their best nor is their timing as sharp as it has been in the past. But I think it's clear that Riley's days at QB are numbered. Even if he starts this year, I don't think it's a given that he retains his job next year. He has a distinct advantage over all the others by being in the program the longest (current and continuous). That advantage sure didn't give him much if any edge on the job through spring ball. So it's only a matter of time before the other's close the gap and/or pass Riley up. Maybe he could benefit from taking his redshirt year and finding a new position where he could help the team more?

Again, I've made it clear all along that I don't care who starts the first game against UW. I just want the guy starting each week who gives us the best chance to win that game. If that's Riley, I'm down with that decision. If it's someone else... coolio. I'll respect whatever decision the coaches make. They certainly should have earned the benefit of the doubt from the fans for the product they've put on the field the last four years without feeling like they should be second-guessed from game 1 of the season.

That said, I do think the writing is on the wall about who is in the lead for the job. Of all the people who have seen these guys the most (the media and the players), it sounds like the majority favor Heaps. Both Wrubell and Drew have already crowned Jake. While I don't recall others having singled one guy out, they certainly have commented on how good Jake looks and how amazing it is that he looks that good so early. I've spoken to a couple of players that favor Jake and have read/heard of others (who I trust) who have spoken to other players that have said similar things. None of these guys ever make it sound like there will be mutiny if Riley is named the guy but they just seem to think that Jake can take them the farthest this year. Think about the older guys on the team. They just want to have the best year possible this year. I remember Curtis Brown and Matt Berry were very good friends but Curtis didn't really have any qualms about Beck being named the starter over Matt because he knew or believed that John gave them the best chance to win. A junior or senior doesn't want to suffer through a losing or so-so season just to watch the program grow to have a successful future after they've departed. They want the absolute best guys in the trenches next to them, whoever that may be, to make sure they have the best season possible.

If Jake gives us the best chance to win, I want him to start... as soon as possible. But if Riley is the guy, then I think it would be in Jake's best interest to redshirt as opposed to backing up Riley. He would learn more from running the scout team and getting all those reps against a D1 defense than getting blowout reps or second team reps in practice. If Riley is the starter, then Lark or Munns, who have both already exhausted their redshirts would be more than capable backups that we wouldn't need Jake to be the #2 even if he were the second best QB.

[Cougarbib]

The coaches will figure it out and I don't think any of them like losing games and will have confidence tha they can figure out 2011 when 2011 gets here but will focus on trying to win every single game in 2010 as their first priority. Once they have given themselves the best odds for success in any given game, they will look for opportunites to develop other players whent he opportunity is there.

And most years, there is a huge wildcard - INJURIES. They will happen. It might be something minor like a finger, thumb, or sprain - or heaven forbid - somethign worse.

Ask Jake Locker. Ask Bradford. back in the day, you could have asked Ryan Hancock, John Walsh, and Steve Clement all in the sme year. Kevin Feterik played through a foot injury after a miraculous recovery in a very shor time du eot technology. I don't recall every ankle or knee sprain or jammed finger or thumb - but we usually get some of theat stuff every year. Don't forget Detmer getting a shoulder separated and then getting both separated in the bowl game. McMahon lost to Wyoming in a blizzard playing with a knee brace. Don't forget Steve Young's concussion at the hands of USU iirc. And speaking of concussions - Sean Covey. It seems that Matt Berry injured a hand and never came back to full form an dconfidence.

I may have a little of this mixed up - but wouldn't it be nice to have 4 really good QBs when stuff happens. In the year of Hancock, Clement, and Walsh, the 4th string QB transferred during fall camp, and the 5th string QB - Steve Young's youngest brother Tom, started the bowl game and won the MVP award.

McMahon was peeved when he had to redshirt while Marc Wilson went about 12-1, but it all worked out fine. SInce McMahon never went better than 12-1, one could certainly argue it cost BYU nothing to let Wilson start that year and prodduced the benefit of getting an extra great year saving McMahon till later. It worked out ok for Jim, too. I lived in Chicago the year he won the Super Bowl for the Bears. 1986.

Go Cougs

[Ddawg]

The coaches will figure it out and I don't think any of them like losing games and will have confidence that they can figure out ....

McMahon was peeved when he had to redshirt while Marc Wilson went about 12-1, but it all worked out fine. SInce McMahon never went better than 12-1, one could certainly argue it cost BYU nothing to let Wilson start that year and prodduced the benefit of getting an extra great year saving McMahon till later. It worked out ok for Jim, too. I lived in Chicago the year he won the Super Bowl for the Bears. 1986.

Go Cougs

There ya go!!!!!

[YBrit]

Whatev, I just know we wasted Ben Olson, and in turn he got wasted. Let's use Heaps strengths, give him somoething to improve and get determined to improve, and by 2-4 years, he'll be owing the conference.

[Mars]

There would also be value in red-shirting Jimmer Fredette this coming season, as then we'd have him next season. Doesn't mean that move isn't dumb. Heaps has dominated the position since stepping foot in Provo- why go with a lesser player in Nelson?

[Mars]

Sorry, the logic that "Nelson didn't bring up his numbers till the very, very end..."

...Is extremely accurate. Nelson added about 100 yards on 2 throws at the very end of spring camp, both in "show" situations for the public, both against the 3rd string DBs. It made a huge difference on his numbers (about 1/3 of his yards, almost half of his TDs).

[SpiffCoug]

Sorry, the logic that "Nelson didn't bring up his numbers till the very, very end..."

...Is extremely accurate. Nelson added about 100 yards on 2 throws at the very end of spring camp, both in "show" situations for the public, both against the 3rd string DBs. It made a huge difference on his numbers (about 1/3 of his yards, almost half of his TDs).

Again: So what? Did they not count? And the only "public" showing was the final spring practice. Couldn't I also argue that Riley performed extremely well when the "lights were on"? When there were people watching and eagerly evaluating both QBs, Riley came through for the team? It works both ways. Gee, why did much of Heaps stats come so early in camp when no one was watching and the DBs didn't know his tendencies so he was able to catch them by surprise?

Bottom line, the stats Nelson added COUNTED. Whether they came on two throws or 20. They still count, even if they "made a huge difference on his numbers."