Come Get Your Hot and Fresh Nelson Crow!!!

My take was this:



After the first quarter, I agreed with the CBS color commentator--QB controversy was over. Heaps was erratic, off the mark, making poor decisions, and Nelson was moving the team and energizing the stadium. However, as the whole game evolved, Heaps eventually settled in and moved the ball. He showed why this is a two-pony show.



The two-QB system worked tonight, but now that the cat is out of the bag, I question whether it can work. At this point I have serious doubts as to whether we stand a chance against FSU and TCU with this scheme. The offense never got into a rhythm that they could sustain across possessions. We have to remember that this was UW--a 6-6 team from last year with a QB that couldn't hit a bull moose in the butt with a bass fiddle and a defense greener than hawkwing's face on a boat ride. And we only beat them by 6 at home.



The team needs to figure out how to sustain rhythm in this scheme or pick their horse and ride it. I don't care if it's Heaps or Nelson, but if we need to pick one to keep momentum, either is better than both.

Cougarfan87 wrote:
So, if the recievers had done their job, Riley leads us to two touchdowns, and Heaps one touchdown and two field goals.

And if the kicker does his job, Nelson leads to two touchdowns and a field goal.



This is a fun, yet pointless game.

I say let's go with Nelson and red-shirt Heaps next year.

I thought Heaps looked pretty damned good for being a true freshman rotating series with another QB in his very first game. Nelson is just a winner, a warrior ... I like him a lot. He was running over people like he was a fullback. All in all I still think Heaps will be the starter after the 3rd game with Nelson getting significant playing time ( short 3rd downs, inside the 10 yard line, etc ... )

I think neither guy separated. Riley had 2 TD's, both with possessions starting on the UW side of the field. But he got it done when needed for the most part. Heaps led 2 longer drives, but both stalled out for FG's--once because Jake missed an open Wilson in the end zone on a bad throw. Both guys missed open targets on 3rd downs and both need to improve 3rd down efficiency. I think both guys deserves a shot at winning the job in game 2 v. AFA. I will say I liked seeing Jake take some shots down the field, something Riley just will not do, so for that reason, I want both to play. More for opponents to prepare and scheme for, and if one guy gets hot in a game, the coaches need to ride the hot hand. They are so different in skill set, it does work.

dmcougar wrote:
I still contend that this is a bridge system to break in Jake--and thank goodness for Nelson. In fact I really believe that a more situational system would be better.

I agree with both these points.



Nelson should be our redzone QB... anyone else notice that every time Heaps got us into the redzone, our offense called mostly running plays? Most of Jake's interceptions during practices were in the redzone, so that may explain it.



I do hope that we break in Heaps some more and he eventually takes over as starter. Nelson ran the offense well on Saturday, but as others have pointed out, sooner or later teams are going to stack the box against him, and I think he could struggle greatly against quicker, more athletic defenses.

snoscythe wrote:
We have to remember that this was UW--a 6-6 team from last year

Washington was 5-7 last year.

;ake marched the team down the field. We had 1st and goal or close to it and anae decides to run it up the gut twice whcih reesulted in a net loss. Then they finally called a play that might have worked and jake puts it in wilsons hands but he missed it. Bad play calls in the blue/red zone.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

urroner wrote:
I say let's go with Nelson and red-shirt Heaps next year.

And I say your crazy.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I have said it since the middle of the summer, I am suspect of Anae running two offenses, when I don't think he can completely run one. All these playcalling gaffes do not bode well for the cougars when we meet someone that can capitalize on having the ball more then we do.

jonnylingo wrote:
;ake marched the team down the field. We had 1st and goal or close to it and anae decides to run it up the gut twice whcih reesulted in a net loss. Then they finally called a play that might have worked and jake puts it in wilsons hands but he missed it. Bad play calls in the blue/red zone.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

With BYU's O-line it was brilliant play calling. Anae just forgot that the guys named Unga and Tonga weren't around anymore.

I also believe that game 1 is "mission accomplished" and going exactly as Bronco hoped and planned. THis is breaking in Jake perfectly--including running in the blue/red zone ot avoid Jake's weaknesses of INT's.

I watched the game today--always good to see that angle in addition to live, and at the end of the game Brandon Doman grabbed Jake in a jubilant headlock and pulled him away from the other players and talked in his ear. Now, it would be silly to buy any of this speculation wholesale, but I really wondered what Coach Doman said: "You are going to great things. Keep being patient. Dont force short passes and we are going to score alot of points in the future." Who knows, but it looked very much like a mentor to his pupil painting a very bright future.