Execution

mcgregor wrote:
After thinking about last night's game a bit more, I've decided that, like Bronco has stressed, this game was about execution. TCU executed. BYU didn't.



Bronco failed to execute by mentally preparing his team to play an athletically superior opponent



Robert Anae failed to execute by failing to properly utilize our strengths at the appropriate times



Max Hall failed to execute because he couldn't keep his offense on the field





TCU, on the other hand, executed



TCU's defense knew Max gets flustered, so they applied just the right amount of pressure without having to commit extra bodies



TCU's offense knew they needed to incorporate plays that had not been seen on film before



Gary Patterson knew that playing BYU is a 9-month ordeal

People disparage the term "execution" but it is probably the one thing that cannot be overlooked. And when it is perfected it leads to many many wins. If you want an example where execution beats athleticism just look at De La Salle H.S. They had few d-1 athletes but still had their little runs. And every year they went up against a team that was rated in the top five for d-1 type players (Polytech) and still beat them every year. And what was his secret? He said the boys preparation (including offseason), consistency, and execution. When they came to HI and pummeled St. Louis, the coach talked about how they practiced and practiced until they had almost perfect execution. So, you may not like what Bronco is selling, but here is a pretty good case study to back up what he is attempting to do.

imuakahuku wrote:

After thinking about last night's game a bit more, I've decided that, like Bronco has stressed, this game was about execution. TCU executed. BYU didn't.



Bronco failed to execute by mentally preparing his team to play an athletically superior opponent



Robert Anae failed to execute by failing to properly utilize our strengths at the appropriate times



Max Hall failed to execute because he couldn't keep his offense on the field





TCU, on the other hand, executed



TCU's defense knew Max gets flustered, so they applied just the right amount of pressure without having to commit extra bodies



TCU's offense knew they needed to incorporate plays that had not been seen on film before



Gary Patterson knew that playing BYU is a 9-month ordeal

People disparage the term "execution" but it is probably the one thing that cannot be overlooked. And when it is perfected it leads to many many wins. If you want an example where execution beats athleticism just look at De La Salle H.S. They had few d-1 athletes but still had their little runs. And every year they went up against a team that was rated in the top five for d-1 type players (Polytech) and still beat them every year. And what was his secret? He said the boys preparation (including offseason), consistency, and execution. When they came to HI and pummeled St. Louis, the coach talked about how they practiced and practiced until they had almost perfect execution. So, you may not like what Bronco is selling, but here is a pretty good case study to back up what he is attempting to do.

I don't think any of us are necessarily suggesting that the concept of "executing" be abandoned. There's just more to it than that.



You use De La Salle H.S. as an example. I'm quite familiar with them. Sure they execute well and that's the focus, but you also pointed out two other things that are critical to whether a team out executes an opponent.



First, the preparation that took place. You'd be hard pressed to find a H.S. that prepares and devotes as much attention to their football team as De La Salle. BYU on the other hand practices the least of any D1 college. Hard to out execute athletically superior teams when you practice significantly less than them.



Second, you don't get devoted H.S. kids willing to practice literally all summer and devote their entire lives to H.S. football if they aren't properly motivated and passionate about their sport. Again, this is something lacking at BYU. Are the players devoted at BYU, yes, but they are not motivated in a way that gets them to play to their full potential. They aren't motivated in a way that gets them to execute at a superior level to their competition. I've seen De La Salle play, there's more passion and fire on that team than BYU's and that passion and fire is the fuel De La Salle uses to out execute.

So the problem at BYU is preparation and passion or as DLSall coach and Bronco put it "buy in" to the system?

imuakahuku wrote:
So the problem at BYU is preparation and passion or as DLSall coach and Bronco put it "buy in" to the system?

That's how I see it, but losses are billed as a lack of execution, which on the surface is true. Sure, a lineman or Max may not have executed well in a particular game and it's easy to point at that and say, "We didn't execute," when it fact the loss is because we didn't prepare well, play our hardest or get our players' buy-in on the system.

Gunk wrote:

So the problem at BYU is preparation and passion or as DLSall coach and Bronco put it "buy in" to the system?

That's how I see it, but losses are billed as a lack of execution, which on the surface is true. Sure, a lineman or Max may not have executed well in a particular game and it's easy to point at that and say, "We didn't execute," when it fact the loss is because we didn't prepare well, play our hardest or get our players' buy-in on the system.

What does this mean if the team prepares well, plays their hardest and the players buy in to the system, and they STILL lose??? Which is going to happen every once in a while no matter how good the team and no matter how sold the players are on the system.



I think we are trying to to define the undefinable. What it comes down to is BYU got manhandled by two teams this year. BYU did not play to their full abilities in either game but I don't feel half as upset about the second loss. TCU would beat about any team out there. They were clearly the better team this year.



FSU?????? That one just hurts.

declocoug wrote:
I think we are trying to to define the undefinable. What it comes down to is BYU got manhandled by two teams this year. BYU did not play to their full abilities in either game but I don't feel half as upset about the second loss. TCU would beat about any team out there. They were clearly the better team this year.



FSU?????? That one just hurts.

I agree. FSU hurts but TCU looks like they can beat anyone including FLA, Ala, or TX. I hope they get into the NC game because I think they would win it. At the least they would represent much better than Iowa or Cinn would.

Seriously though, can we stop using this word? It makes everyone who says it sound like one of those nerds I remember from campus who wear coach's gear on gameday while watching the games in their apartment despite the fact they have never played or understood a down of football. It's an insult to sports competition everywhere to simplify a game as complex as football to "13klj;dfs8." When Bronco uses the word, it is merely coachspeak. In other words he is dumbing it down for the media. But when fans run wild with it and try to analyze everything in light of that explanation, it makes them look pathetically ignorant.

mizzoucoug wrote:
Seriously though, can we stop using this word? It makes everyone who says it sound like one of those nerds I remember from campus who wear coach's gear on gameday while watching the games in their apartment despite the fact they have never played or understood a down of football. It's an insult to sports competition everywhere to simplify a game as complex as football to "13klj;dfs8." When Bronco uses the word, it is merely coachspeak. In other words he is dumbing it down for the media. But when fans run wild with it and try to analyze everything in light of that explanation, it makes them look pathetically ignorant.

Before agreeing to your request, please do this thread's original poster the favor of pointing out where he was ignorant in his use of the word, and secondly, why he is so much more ignorant than you.



Just seems odd that you request fans to cease using a word employed by 100% of coaches in the game. It's like getting into a political discussion but refusing to allow anyone to use the word "freedom" because they are just too dumb to know what it really means.



Not trying to be antagonistic, it's just a horribly baffling request that obviously means a lot to you, since you've been insisting on it for 5 pages now.

mizzoucoug wrote:
But when fans run wild with it and try to analyze everything in light of that explanation, it makes them look pathetically ignorant.

Also, since several "fans" here have used this word, you are in fact calling them (including me) "pathetically ignorant." I enjoy this board because out of all the Cougar forums, this seems to be the place where posters are most respectful to their peers. You either use the phrase cheaply, or you fully mean it. Either way, I hope that we all continue the polite tone the moderators here have established.

Lets do our best to avoid referring to other fans, especially those on this forum in a negative fashion. I don't think that was anyone's intent here, but lets be sure to do out best to treat others with respect.



That being said, I don't have a problem with Bronco talking about Execution. I don't get a sense of 'coach speak' from Bronco. I think he does a pretty darn good job of calling it as he sees it. If he thinks the reason we didn't perform better was poor execution, I think we should try to understand and quantify what Bronco defines as execution.

hawkwing wrote:
Lets do our best to avoid referring to other fans, especially those on this forum in a negative fashion. I don't think that was anyone's intent here, but lets be sure to do out best to treat others with respect.

Agreed, people who call others names are complete idiots. ;)



I'm fine with Bronco being all about "execution," I just think that the issue some fans have with it is that it seems to be all he talks about. It doesn't seem to matter how we lose (poor defense, poor offense, poor pass rush, poor secondary, mistakes, turnovers, penalties, etc.) it's always "execution." I'm sorry, but that's a bit too vague.

He might as well come out and say "We lost the game because the other team scored more points."

Italics wrote:
Agreed, people who call others names are complete idiots. ;)

I knew I could count on you! :lol:

hawkwing wrote:
I think we should try to understand and quantify what Bronco defines as execution.

I like this point. We all have a perspective on what execution means or should mean.... But whatever our perspective is, Bronco's is the one that matters. As a fan, I just hope that his definition is something that can show consistent improvement ALONG with a 4 game win streak..... strike that FIVE GAME WIN STREAK :)

My apologies. I didn't mean to be insulting.

mcgregor wrote:

But when fans run wild with it and try to analyze everything in light of that explanation, it makes them look pathetically ignorant.

Also, since several "fans" here have used this word, you are in fact calling them (including me) "pathetically ignorant." I enjoy this board because out of all the Cougar forums, this seems to be the place where posters are most respectful to their peers. You either use the phrase cheaply, or you fully mean it. Either way, I hope that we all continue the polite tone the moderators here have established.

Calm down buddy. Don't be so sensitive. He is not calling you pathetically ignorant he is just using strong language to express his viewpoint. while this is not cougarblue we don't need to be oversensitive either.

Bronco mentioned recommitment today and I liked that. I am wondering what the difference is between execution and commitment other than one is saying and the other is doing. I am hoping the commitment part includes passion and yelling and stuff.

I'm just tired of words. Every time we play a good team, we lose, and then we hear vague references and subtleties about improvement and execution, and "credit to (winning team), they have a great head coach. He has them really moving in a good direction..."

cougsnspurs4life wrote:
I'm just tired of words. Every time we play a good team, we lose, and then we hear vague references and subtleties about improvement and execution, and "credit to (winning team), they have a great head coach. He has them really moving in a good direction..."

We want more ACTION, less TALK!

cougsnspurs4life wrote:
I'm just tired of words. Every time we play a good team, we lose, and then we hear vague references and subtleties about improvement and execution, and "credit to (winning team), they have a great head coach. He has them really moving in a good direction..."

Don't forget "teaching moment." That one bugs me most.

Gunk wrote:

I'm just tired of words. Every time we play a good team, we lose, and then we hear vague references and subtleties about improvement and execution, and "credit to (winning team), they have a great head coach. He has them really moving in a good direction..."

Don't forget "teaching moment." That one bugs me most.

OH YES! "teaching moment".....um, I am still waiting for the LESSON TO BE LEARNED.