We have to start Heaps ...

Lawboy wrote:
Nelson is NOT a BYU QB, and nothing anyone can tell me will prove otherwise, because his stats tell the story. Talked about this earlier this summer. but in Doman's great year for BYU, he passed 4 times to every 1 run. And people called him a running QB. Today Riley ran more than passed. I will repeat, a BYU QB ran more than he passed it. Sorry, but Riley is run first, and does not have the mental presence to be a throwing QB. I like his running ability, but not when he over uses it to the point a team can scheme him out with run blitzed to gaps, like AFA did today. Riley is basically a running back that can hrow it, not a QB that can run it. 20 runs, 19 passes and a bad loss.

Agreed. During that 4th & 2 (2nd half), everybody and I mean everybody knew Nelson was going to tuck and run. To sell a play like that, there must be a credible option to be able to throw and complete the pass. He just doesn't have that credible ability...you already know he's gonna run. To me (IMO), Nelson is more of a situational QB geared to be a threat inside the redzone, for instance. He's not a starting full-time BYU QB. Not allowing Heaps to come in during all that offensive stagnation simply robbed him of valuable game experience.

hawkwing wrote:
I completely disagree with the original poster and most of the responses in that Nelson can't throw.

I agree completely. Nelson can throw the ball. Unfortunately when he does throw, there aren't any cougars in the general vicinity.

coogeyman wrote:

Nelson is NOT a BYU QB, and nothing anyone can tell me will prove otherwise, because his stats tell the story. Talked about this earlier this summer. but in Doman's great year for BYU, he passed 4 times to every 1 run. And people called him a running QB. Today Riley ran more than passed. I will repeat, a BYU QB ran more than he passed it. Sorry, but Riley is run first, and does not have the mental presence to be a throwing QB. I like his running ability, but not when he over uses it to the point a team can scheme him out with run blitzed to gaps, like AFA did today. Riley is basically a running back that can hrow it, not a QB that can run it. 20 runs, 19 passes and a bad loss.

Agreed. During that 4th & 2 (2nd half), everybody and I mean everybody knew Nelson was going to tuck and run. To sell a play like that, there must be a credible option to be able to throw and complete the pass. He just doesn't have that credible ability...you already know he's gonna run. To me (IMO), Nelson is more of a situational QB geared to be a threat inside the redzone, for instance. He's not a starting full-time BYU QB. Not allowing Heaps to come in during all that offensive stagnation simply robbed him of valuable game experience.

Doman had credibility as a passer and therefore, he could do that with ease. Nelson is not Doman. I like the kid and think his attitude and emotion are fantastic, and I hate that he's getting killed (by myself included) by the fans, but AFA truly exposed the dude.

what was Jake's stats 2-6 for 15 yards and a pick? I am not convinced that Heaps is the answer either.

hawkwing wrote:
I completely disagree with the original poster and most of the responses in that Nelson can't throw.

I witnessed 5-6 "ducks" released from Nelson's very hand that confirm it. He had a fair shot to prove himself, and he stunk! If we go with Nelson consistently, we will win a maximum of 7 games this year.

fifthqb wrote:
what was Jake's stats 2-6 for 15 yards and a pick? I am not convinced that Heaps is the answer either.

Bingo. Also, not Nelson's fault that receivers refuse to catch. The obvious thing is that we have a problem on our hands. The solution, however, doesn't appear to be as obvious.

Schmoe wrote:

what was Jake's stats 2-6 for 15 yards and a pick? I am not convinced that Heaps is the answer either.

Bingo. Also, not Nelson's fault that receivers refuse to catch. The obvious thing is that we have a problem on our hands. The solution, however, doesn't appear to be as obvious.

I agree with Schmoe.

hawkwing wrote:

fifthqb wrote:
what was Jake's stats 2-6 for 15 yards and a pick? I am not convinced that Heaps is the answer either.

Bingo. Also, not Nelson's fault that receivers refuse to catch. The obvious thing is that we have a problem on our hands. The solution, however, doesn't appear to be as obvious.

I agree with Schmoe.

I have to respectfully disagree with all three of you as it works both ways. I can remember at least 2 drops that would have gone for first downs when Heaps was in the game. So please don't use that as an excuse. Besides WHO had a fumble all by himself? Give you one guess and it starts with a Riley.

Oh, and Heaps didn't have one sack on him when he was in during the first half so you can't use the line was terrible as an excuse as to why Riley was in the entire 2nd half. All any team has to do is load the box with Riley and as long as they have an offense they will win. IMHO, Jake can read the defense much faster than Riley and deliver the ball that much faster and that is why he wasn't touched. Riley on the other hand, is much to fast to tuck and run.

Heaps needs to start and Riley needs to come in on key situational downs in either a QB or RB/QB function.



I just have no clue why they held Heaps out unless they made a decision befor the game to play Riley all second half of this game and have Heaps play all the second half of the FSU game. I guess we see next week. :roll:

FWIW, I think the wind at the stadium today had as much to do with the decision to sit Heaps and the playcalling as anything. The wind was brutal with our passing game today.



I agree with sitting Heaps as well. We talked about this Friday on here--when you're behind and one guy is hot and the other is cold, you need to go with the hot hand. At the time the decision was made, Nelson was hot, Heaps was cold it was that simple. By the time it was obvious that we weren't going the win the game this afternoon with Nelson, we weren't going to win with Heaps either, so to that extent I have no problem with letting Nelson fester out there on the field and letting Heaps stew on the bench. Nelson probably learned a bit this afternoon about getting teammates involved, and Heaps probably got the message that he's going to have to start producing if he wants to continue splitting snaps.



As far as Heaps starting next week, I doubt it. You don't give a kid the starting job the week after you bench him for a performance with a PER in the 20s. Yes, Nelson was ineffective in the second half, but his ineffectiveness in the second half was still more effective than anything Heaps did. Calling for Heaps to start next week is simply an absurd knee-jerk overreaction.

Npliam wrote:
He is not a throwing quarterback. Our scheme requires a throwing quarterback. My opinion has nothing to do with him as an athlete or a quarterback in a different scheme.

Oddly enough, I think Nelson would be a great choice for quarterback if he played for Air Force. He'd fit right into that offense.

snoscythe wrote:
Calling for Heaps to start next week is simply an absurd knee-jerk overreaction.

I'm not calling for Heaps to start next week. I'm calling for him for start for the next four years. I'm pretty sure that is what everyone else is saying also.

snoscythe wrote:
FWIW, I think the wind at the stadium today had as much to do with the decision to sit Heaps and the playcalling as anything. The wind was brutal with our passing game today.



I agree with sitting Heaps as well. We talked about this Friday on here--when you're behind and one guy is hot and the other is cold, you need to go with the hot hand. At the time the decision was made, Nelson was hot, Heaps was cold it was that simple. By the time it was obvious that we weren't going the win the game this afternoon with Nelson, we weren't going to win with Heaps either, so to that extent I have no problem with letting Nelson fester out there on the field and letting Heaps stew on the bench. Nelson probably learned a bit this afternoon about getting teammates involved, and Heaps probably got the message that he's going to have to start producing if he wants to continue splitting snaps.



As far as Heaps starting next week, I doubt it. You don't give a kid the starting job the week after you bench him for a performance with a PER in the 20s. Yes, Nelson was ineffective in the second half, but his ineffectiveness in the second half was still more effective than anything Heaps did. Calling for Heaps to start next week is simply an absurd knee-jerk overreaction.

1) So you're saying it makes more sense to have someone with a poor arm throw into the wind than having someone with a strong and accurate arm throw into the wind? I don't follow you.



2) It's hard to believe that Nelson learned anything about involving his teammates after watching the number of times he opted to tuck and run rather than hand the ball off or pass to one of his receivers. Again, not sure I follow you. Are you saying that today's game was a good showcase for Nelson's abilities to involve everyone?



3) It doesn't make sense to start the most coveted high school quarterback in the country over a former backup who doesn't fit in with our offensive scheme?

No... I'll tell you what wouldn't make sense: Expecting Florida State to not have Nelson read like a book after three possessions. Benching Heaps when we've chosen not to redshirt him wouldn't make much sense, either.

Italics wrote:
1) So you're saying it makes more sense to have someone with a poor arm throw into the wind than having someone with a strong and accurate arm throw into the wind? I don't follow you.

I think the wind was a factor in the decision because it was obvious that neither quarterback was handling the wind well. I think Doman and Anae thought they'd have to win this game on the ground. The decision wasn't that Nelson could throw better in the wind, the decision was simply to not throw.

2) It's hard to believe that Nelson learned anything about involving his teammates after watching the number of times he opted to tuck and run rather than hand the ball off or pass to one of his receivers. Again, not sure I follow you. Are you saying that today's game was a good showcase for Nelson's abilities to involve everyone?

I'm saying that hopefully Nelson learned what doesn't work.

3) It doesn't make sense to start the most coveted high school quarterback in the country over a former backup who doesn't fit in with our offensive scheme?

No... I'll tell you what wouldn't make sense: Expecting Florida State to not have Nelson read like a book after three possessions. Benching Heaps when we've chosen not to redshirt him wouldn't make much sense, either.

Again, as poor as Nelson was in the second half, Heaps was even less effective in the first half. What he did in high school doesn't matter anymore. What has Heaps done to win the starting job in the last two weeks? That's what you need to be looking at. That's why it's an ignorant knee-jerk reaction to call for him to start.

Seriously, the wind had a lot to do with sitting heaps? Nelson was the hot hand? That's ridiculous.



Riley should be a situational back or switched to safet (we obviously need one).



Jake primary starter, nelson situational back. This is how it should have been at the beginning of camp. Heaps is at severe disadvantage in this switching off. Byu offense is about timing. Jake needs more reps with the receivers to establish that.



Two qb system is a failure. Our coaches have bitten of more than they can chew.



We had like 10 yards passing today. That was not byu football I saw out there.



Also when we are down2 or 3 touchdowns and time is limited you don't go with the runner, you go with the passer. Nelson was exposed today. He is limited.



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



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

snoscythe wrote:



1) The decision wasn't that Nelson could throw better in the wind, the decision was simply to not throw.



2) What he did in high school doesn't matter anymore. What has Heaps done to win the starting job in the last two weeks? That's what you need to be looking at.

1) That's the issue with having Nelson play. When you're down by multiple touchdowns in the fourth quarter, you don't opt to keep the ball on the ground. Nelson just doesn't seem to have what it takes to win the game for us in such situations.



2) Are you kidding me? Heaps has looked amazingly poised for being a true freshman - every announcer during our games has been raving about it. He's not going to get much better, though, by sitting on the bench and watching Riley fail to run any semblance of a classic BYU offense.

Italics wrote:

1) The decision wasn't that Nelson could throw better in the wind, the decision was simply to not throw.



2) What he did in high school doesn't matter anymore. What has Heaps done to win the starting job in the last two weeks? That's what you need to be looking at.

1) That's the issue with having Nelson play. When you're down by multiple touchdowns in the fourth quarter, you don't opt to keep the ball on the ground. Nelson just doesn't seem to have what it takes to win the game for us in such situations.



2) Are you kidding me? Heaps has looked amazingly poised for being a true freshman - every announcer during our games has been raving about it. He's not going to get much better, though, by sitting on the bench and watching Riley fail to run any semblance of a classic BYU offense.

With all of that poise, what's his efficiency rating? His completion percentage? How many touchdowns has he thrown? Again, Heaps hasn't shown anything that merits giving him the starting position. All the poise and mechanics in the world don't matter if you aren't getting the job done. You are seriously coming on here after today's all-star performance that netted him a pass efficiency rating of 21 and you are telling me he should start because he has "poise." Riley was bad, no doubt, but don't kid yourself into thinking Heaps has earned anything yet.

Heaps had 2 pass completions for 15 yards. He had 8 other snaps, except for a JJ run, he didn't move the ball at all.

hawkwing wrote:

I don't think Nelson would ever go down as one of the top QBs in BYU history, but to say he can't throw a ball further than 10 yards? That sounds a little internet Jim Rome, especially since he hit Chambers in the endzone on the hands from at least 30 yards out.

Into a 20 mph wind, no less.

snoscythe wrote:

snoscythe wrote:



1) The decision wasn't that Nelson could throw better in the wind, the decision was simply to not throw.



2) What he did in high school doesn't matter anymore. What has Heaps done to win the starting job in the last two weeks? That's what you need to be looking at.

1) That's the issue with having Nelson play. When you're down by multiple touchdowns in the fourth quarter, you don't opt to keep the ball on the ground. Nelson just doesn't seem to have what it takes to win the game for us in such situations.



2) Are you kidding me? Heaps has looked amazingly poised for being a true freshman - every announcer during our games has been raving about it. He's not going to get much better, though, by sitting on the bench and watching Riley fail to run any semblance of a classic BYU offense.

With all of that poise, what's his efficiency rating? His completion percentage? How many touchdowns has he thrown? Again, Heaps hasn't shown anything that merits giving him the starting position. All the poise and mechanics in the world don't matter if you aren't getting the job done. You are seriously coming on here after today's all-star performance that netted him a pass efficiency rating of 21 and you are telling me he should start because he has "poise." Riley was bad, no doubt, but don't kid yourself into thinking Heaps has earned anything yet.

That is a very myopic view. Look we got beat handily today and that will probably happen 3 more times this year too. Cut our losses and let Heaps develop. That is the long-term solution. What do we have to gain by giving Nelson reps this year? This team isn't good, so we might as well focus on developing key players. In other words it's time to bench Chambers, Nelson, and split JJ's reps with Juice until DiLuigi proves he can hold onto the freaking ball.

Sno, I usually respect your opinion. But what in heavens name do you consider to be a viable answer/alternative to this very poor performance? Any good lawyer can deconstruct anothers opinion, but it seems that you think we ought to stick with status quo.

Or maybe you believe like I do that Nelson will continue to be the sacrificial lamb of this young (and mediocre today) team for the next few games until even the girls flag football team can stop nelson bc its so prediictable--at which point even a freshman qb (who like Detmer) who will throw some pics, will be better than a running qb; but you get him back out there and keep letting him learn and gain momentum and confidence. And then, when things need to slow down for him, you put one-dimension Nelson out there for one series and hope the D is smart and quick enough to spank us like AF did today.