CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Let the Heaps era begin!!

by Cougarpoke · 9/13/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
Cougarpoke
Per Wrubell's tweet: Bronco, on Nelson's running: "effective, helps us maintain ball control and get 1st dns, (but) doesn't lead to pts without throwing as well"



The Nelson trick was fun while it lasted...lets get on with the passing game that BYU is used to and put Heaps in. Bring Nelson in for situational downs...and lets win some games. :angry:
S
SpiffCoug
And Heaps hasn't been leading the team to points either. Neither QB was good in any way shape or form against AF.



BOTH quarterbacks must become more efficient throwers. Riley was very efficient throwing against UW. Jake wasn't. Both were awful against the Falcons.



Passing efficiency is the single most important factor in winning games. ANY team that wants to win - even "rushing" teams - must throw the ball efficiently to win.
Q
QuarterbackU
kitic77 wrote:
And Heaps hasn't been leading the team to points either. Neither QB was good in any way shape or form against AF.



BOTH quarterbacks must become more efficient throwers. Riley was very efficient throwing against UW. Jake wasn't. Both were awful against the Falcons.



Passing efficiency is the single most important factor in winning games. ANY team that wants to win - even "rushing" teams - must throw the ball efficiently to win.


Riley has had his chances to learn to throw in this system and in games but has not committed to it. Jake has shown that he will throw the ball and can do so very well in our system but has not had the opportunity to learn the offense or play college football. That's the difference.
Y
Y 4 Ever
kitic77 wrote:
And Heaps hasn't been leading the team to points either. Neither QB was good in any way shape or form against AF.



BOTH quarterbacks must become more efficient throwers. Riley was very efficient throwing against UW. Jake wasn't. Both were awful against the Falcons.



Passing efficiency is the single most important factor in winning games. ANY team that wants to win - even "rushing" teams - must throw the ball efficiently to win.


Heaps had no chance against AFA. He had 6 passing attempts. just six. It's time for the Nelson party to end.
B
Brayden Green
Yeah, shame on Heaps for not leading his team to a TD in the 3 series that he saw (One of which ended in a fumble - NOT CAUSED BY HEAPS - and one drive stalling after a receiver gave up on a very catchable deep route ball)



Shame on Jake!



- On a more serious note: If Air Force can figure out mid-game to switch to a 4-3 and stack the box in the 2nd game, how do you think we are going to do when teams have weeks of gametape to prepare on? Riley was exposed, and reverted to the "happy foot, checkdown once and tuck baby, tuck" that a lot of us were warning against. Anyone with eyes saw this coming. Riley's run sets up his pass, but take away the run, and you have nothing. I like Riley, and thought he showed a lot of heart in the game.



BYU qb runs - 20

AFA qb runs - 9



We deserved to lose that game because of coaching, NOT because of Riley. He did exactly what we expected him to do.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
B
Brayden Green
And to be fair, when Heaps is in, we shouldn't be passing two out of three snaps. Balance, balance, balance.



Anae needs to pull his head out...
S
Schmoe
33311710 wrote:
And Heaps hasn't been leading the team to points either. Neither QB was good in any way shape or form against AF.



BOTH quarterbacks must become more efficient throwers. Riley was very efficient throwing against UW. Jake wasn't. Both were awful against the Falcons.



Passing efficiency is the single most important factor in winning games. ANY team that wants to win - even "rushing" teams - must throw the ball efficiently to win.


Heaps had no chance against AFA. He had 6 passing attempts. just six. It's time for the Nelson party to end.


Well, if we're just going on the AFA game, then 15% of Jake's passes were picks. But if you look at fall camp and both games, Nelson has still been consistent in getting us more points on the board. Even if JJ doesn't fumble and IF (a big IF) we do get a TD, that's still 1/3 for Heaps and 2/3 for Nelson up to that point. I don't know what the answer is, but the QB position is one of the least of my worries given all the other problems we had this weekend.
R
rblack
The attitude of some of these supposed BYU fans is :utard: ish. A quarterback leads your team to two touchdowns, the DEFENSE and SPECIAL TEAMS let the other team double us up on time of possession, he is resposible for one turnover (on the season) and you suddenly want to demand that the coaching staff start the true freshman that has failed to put the ball into the endone in the equivalent of 3 quarters of football against two defenses. The one that has a touchdown/interception ratio of 0/1. The one that had 15 yards passing in his quarter of play.

It would be more credible to demand to see Lark or Munns.

True, Riley had a bad game, but so did the WHOLE team. If BYU doesn't give the ball to the defense 3 times in the first half, it's a different game. If the defense had have figured out a way to stop them on 4th down, it's a different game. If the defense had have figured out how to consistently stop them at the line of scrimage, it's a different game. If the receivers had have caught what was passed to them, it's a different game. This game was not lost because Nelson was the Quarterback. Heaps didn't play well either, nor did the defense, nor did the special teams, nor did the receivers, nor did the offensive line. The coaches were out coached. The players were outplayed. It was ugly.

Now, BYU in all of Bronco's years has not played so badly in a game. However, they have had bad games. How have they responded? They make adjustments and get better. I will take the adjustments of Bronco and his staff over the demands of any individual or group of individuals on this board. He has won consistently. He has won when he wasn't expected to win. He has made adjustments that have turned the team around.

Remember when BYU went to Washington and almost lost to a horrible Washington team. Had Washington been Airforce, we would have seen a game similar to Saturday. How did he adjust. 59-0 over UCLA.

In 2007 BYU defense failed to show up at Tulsa. The offense couldn't compensate. Response 31-6 over Air Force.

Bronco has adjusted for 4 seasons. He has earned our confidence.

We need to stop vilifying the quarterback and start recognizing that we are blessed with the greatest coach in college football. He will make the adjustments.
S
SpiffCoug
BlueIsBetter wrote:
And to be fair, when Heaps is in, we shouldn't be passing two out of three snaps. Balance, balance, balance.



Anae needs to pull his head out...

Agreed. Anae has been less than stellar in his play calling through two games this year.
B
Brayden Green
A lot of Riley love... And I agree with all of the posts that Riley didn't lose us this game, the coaching and preparation (inluding pre-season) did.



But Riley sure as hell did nothing to win the game in the 3rd and 4th. We can talk about the defense getting rolled over all we want, but if you have 4 straight 3 and outs mid-way through the 3rd quarter, your defense is going to get tired against a team that pounds the ball like air force. When you keep the defense on the field, they are going to give up TD's (Especially when they didn't prepare or play some of the younger kids - A lot of the defense didn't have a sub all game). So talk all you want about the D losing the game and not Riley, but the fact is, his predictable tuck and run act helped the defense lose the game.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
S
SpiffCoug
No ONE single player, position group, or side of the ball lost the game. To assign blame to any one facet of the BYU program is inaccurate. This was a complete team failure from the head coach down through assistants, to sides of the ball to position groups to individual player. No one in that chain executed at a level necessary to win the game. No one played well enough to win the game. Everyone played poor and everyone contributed to the loses.
B
Brayden Green
kitic77 wrote:
No ONE single player, position group, or side of the ball lost the game. To assign blame to any one facet of the BYU program is inaccurate. This was a complete team failure from the head coach down through assistants, to sides of the ball to position groups to individual player. No one in that chain executed at a level necessary to win the game. No one played well enough to win the game. Everyone played poor and everyone contributed to the loses.


http://www.cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4869" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





Thought you would appreciate this, Kitic



Look at who the OP is... ;)
J
jonnylingo
Riley has no throwing game past 15 yards. Teams don't have to respect his passes. the Result? teams stacking the box and riley making one check and then running. that is why we scored zero points in the whole second half with riley at the helm. huge mistake to not put heaps in in my opinion.



heaps' performance cannot be judged fairly because he has not had the reps and snaps to succeed. he is about passing and he needs more reps with the receivers to get that timing down. nobody can doubt he is one of the best passers in college football. to even say that riley is betteror equal to him is ridiculous. give jake the reigns now and let him grow. by the end of the year he will be way better running our offense then this option offense we pulled out of our butts just for riley.



i agree that its not riley's fault. its the coahces who are to blame for that embarassing outing on saturday. but riley's limitations were exposed and now the coaches can move on. Bronco just need to swallow his hatred of all things freshman (TIC kind of) and let the talented freshman in our class see the field and gain some experience.
J
jonnylingo
kitic77 wrote:
No ONE single player, position group, or side of the ball lost the game. To assign blame to any one facet of the BYU program is inaccurate. This was a complete team failure from the head coach down through assistants, to sides of the ball to position groups to individual player. No one in that chain executed at a level necessary to win the game. No one played well enough to win the game. Everyone played poor and everyone contributed to the loses.


very true. Riley's two fumbles didn't help. luigi's two fumbles didn't help. chambers fumbled didnt help. stephenson's one yard punt didn't help, heaps' interceptions didn't help, bronco taking the week off didn't help, and have a two quarterback system didn't help.



problem is these problems we saw are not going to fix themselves in a week. the two qb system took so many reps away from whoever wins the starting position that it will take time now to get the offenses timing and the dropped balls issue fixed. but oh well, we take our lumps and learn from our mistakes.



i think we have learned a lot htis week and i expect that it was the beginning of the heap's era. shouldn't have started earlier though. now there is simply more pressure on jjake than if he was originally named the starter. mistakes will be more scrutinzed than before. also what does nelson do? he was a vocal leader who is now relegated to situational qb. does that cause chemistry problems.



the asnwer to that is no. both nelson and heaps have been amaizng through this whole fiasco. the coaches have done their best but screwed up. love this article that shows how awesome both qbs are:



http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/cougars/50269289-88/heaps-byu-half-quarterback.html.csp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
S
SpiffCoug
BlueIsBetter wrote:
No ONE single player, position group, or side of the ball lost the game. To assign blame to any one facet of the BYU program is inaccurate. This was a complete team failure from the head coach down through assistants, to sides of the ball to position groups to individual player. No one in that chain executed at a level necessary to win the game. No one played well enough to win the game. Everyone played poor and everyone contributed to the loses.


http://www.cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4869" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





Thought you would appreciate this, Kitic



Look at who the OP is... ;)

Yeah, I came home from Boston on Saturday at midnight, saw the score, didn't watch the game and then when I logged on here Sun afternoon, I pretty much just marked the forum read, so I didn't see this post.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
M
Mars
Schmoe wrote:
if you look at fall camp and both games, Nelson has still been consistent in getting us more points on the board. Even if JJ doesn't fumble and IF (a big IF) we do get a TD, that's still 1/3 for Heaps and 2/3 for Nelson up to that point. I don't know what the answer is, but the QB position is one of the least of my worries given all the other problems we had this weekend.

Come on. BYU ran a vanilla defense against Nelson all spring and fall, a base defense, no 8-men in-the-box run-stopping schemes. Riley is great against a brain-dead DC that refuses to scheme against him, but that's simply not reality.
S
Schmoe
Even so, Mars, he's still been more effective in actual games. I believe that Heaps is the future as much as the next blue-goggled homer, and he does need to get his reps, but all the Riley criticism is uncalled for. I was pretty sure that this would happen as soon as we had a loss, I just didn't realize that it would be so soon: people love to blame the qb, especially when the next guy in line is the golden child, even when the receivers were dropping balls, the D was lying down; taking plays off; and missing option assignments, and the coaches admittedly did a very poor job.
I
imuakahuku
Since when has evaluation become criticism. Watching the game you can see that he would check maybe two routes then tuck the ball and run. And to me that is the thing that proves he doesn't belong running the BYU offense full time. When the BYU QB tucks the ball while in the pocket he has just shown that he has no desire nor intention to throw the ball on that play. And that was the norm for Riley. That is why OC was so livid. It appeared all Riley was thinking was "dang! the LB's didn't vacate the middle so noone is open right over the middle, oh well I can run it". Add to that the fact that nearly everything he threw was quacking and you get a situational QB good to come in and run the wildcat. This is not criticism this is my evaluation. As for Lark I actually would have loved to see him come in to run things in the fourth if they were not going to put Heaps in. Anything would have been better than watching the Tuck and Run show.
S
SpiffCoug
Tucking and running too early is just a bad as hanging in the pocket and taking too long to go through all your progressions. Waiting and waiting for routes to develop is a good way to move backwards due to the pressure getting to the QB and being sacked.



One thing Riley is is decisive. It's a good trait in a QB. The problem is that he didn't throw the ball well against AF in the 2nd half. So his decisions to run weren't leading to points. Any QB must be effective in throwing the ball.



So far, we've had one game where Riley was effective throwing the ball. One game where he wasn't. We've yet to have a game where Jake has been effective throwing the ball. Riley can run all he wants, but he must use it as a compliment to his passing game. If not, then he comes ineffective and predictable.
S
Schmoe
imuakahuku wrote:
Since when has evaluation become criticism.


You don't have to personalize, Imua, I didn't say that all posters were giving unfair criticism, or even that most were, but many are implying that Riley is the reason that we lost the game (even if they aren't saying it). Look around board, even some of the thread topics themselves are unfair criticism of Riley. I agree with most of the evaluations of him (He tucks and runs too early, his arm is only ok, etc.) as I do with the evaluations of the wide receivers, defense, and so on.
Page 1 of 2
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.