Coach Hill is gone....

Okay, so Harmon tweets that he just spoke to Hill, and it is a firing. Instead of a forced step down. I wonder what else was in play... (and on a side note, is that why my thread got re-named? Or is it because threads were merged?)

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Okay, so Harmon tweets that he just spoke to Hill, and it is a firing. Instead of a forced step down. I wonder what else was in play... (and on a side note, is that why my thread got re-named? Or is it because threads were merged?)

Thread merge...sorry we are still learning how to do it with keeping the original thread name.



As far as Rocky coming...it is a pipe dream...Rocky hated the finicky fans of UNM...do some people really think that he would like BYU fans?

kiwibacon wrote:

Okay, so Harmon tweets that he just spoke to Hill, and it is a firing. Instead of a forced step down. I wonder what else was in play... (and on a side note, is that why my thread got re-named? Or is it because threads were merged?)

Thread merge...sorry we are still learning how to do it with keeping the original thread name.



As far as Rocky coming...it is a pipe dream...Rocky hated the finicky fans of UNM...do some people really think that he would like BYU fans?

No worries, I just didn't want to be in the wrong or be on the mod's bad sides... ;)



Once again, thanks for the moderation.

I say we open up the treasury and go after Dick Bumpas. Not only does he have an awesome name, second only to Dick Butkus but he has a great resume.



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

A LOT of players will be happy about this news.

Does this mean Pendelton is finally out of the dog house?

anyone else shocked by this?



Obviously our D this year has had more holes in it than a Ute PHD thesis, but it was less than a year ago that Hill was promoted, and the conversation we all had on this very board was how lucky we were to have him. And we wondered how long we could manage to keep such a coaching powerhouse like Hill and wondering how long it would be before we'd lose especially him to poaching schools.



He was the genius of the coaching staff, and our rising star. No one remembers this? How on earth does this change in only four games against the 5th hardest schedule in the NCAA? Like it's been mentioned, I don't see how this isn't Anae's job. Given our Defense injuries, and the number of offensive sputters, no defense can survive when it's on the field so often.



Can someone tell me why this is a good move?

Have you watched the Bend and Break defense in the last 2 years?



And it was 2 years ago he was promoted. Let's see... Pendleton sees significant playing time his freshman year = no holes this year at safety. Pendleton would be doing as good, if not better at safety than at linebacker. He didn't all the sudden become good with a position change. He is a great athlete. And remember that 2 years ago, was the year Scottie Johnson was playing CB, because we had no depth there (remember Howard??? :sick:) so we definitely could have used him.



Things like this, having talent, but not using it. And this year our guys have been out of position all year. I would rather see us blitz and have a chance at stopping the offense and lose if we give up a big play, than sit back and usher in 15 play, 8 minute long drives. Our defense is as bad as it has ever been. And yes, injuries don't help, but neither does having talent and not preparing and using it correctly.

byutx wrote:
A LOT of players will be happy about this news.

This statement says it all.



This isn't Bronco overlooking the issues at offense, it's removing another issue before it gets any worse.



As much as Bronco likes coach Hill, there have been few players outside of cornerbacks that got along with coach hill the past few years. Right now the players don't want to play for him, don't like playing for him, and won't play for him moving forward.



I've heard this from various players the last couple years, but when you're winning football games like we have, these issues are easier to suppress.



On a side note....... I'm a proponent of going after Kalani Sitaki at the end of the year. Not only is he a capable BYU alum, but he would reinforce the poly-pipeline that comes along with him. He's also a really nice guy and easy to get along with.



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

Wrubell's tweet:

Hill says he is "not bitter," but felt he was a "scapegoat"; says BYU had "no reason to fire me.

I fully agree. Hill is the scapegoat, and this is an awful, IMO. We have BIGGER problems than with the defense. And they're on OFFENSE.



BYU has played 52 games under Bronco, were our Defense held opposing QBs to a rating of 142 or worse. BYU's record in those games is 44-8 (.846). Three of those losses have come this year. Our defense is NOT the problem. Changing DEFENSIVE coaches will not change the FACT that our offense is AWFUL. That our passer rating on offense is 91.94. BYU has had 10 games under Bronco with a rating under 100 - and FOUR of them are this year. Our record is 3-7 in those games. In the three wins, we still had a better rating than our opponents in two of the games (Utah 09, 07) and the third win was a FCS team (Eastern Washington).



The solutions to our woes in 2010 will be found on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball. Among the OFFENSIVE coaches.



This is a bait and switch and I'm not falling for it. This is yet another bad decision by Bronco this year. He has yet to acknowledge that his offensive coaching staff is blowing this season. It is the offensive coaching staff that 1) didn't make a decision regarding the QB situation; 2) isn't holding receivers accountable for dropping passes; 3) isn't correcting the dropped passes; 4) isn't coaching the offensive line to improve; 5) isn't calling plays that are being successful and are leading to multiple 3 & Outs (12 through four games) and poor Time of Possession; and 6) do not seem able to find ways to correct the awful passer efficiency rating that is destroying our season.



If changes needed to be made, it was on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball.

kitic77 wrote:
Wrubell's tweet:

Hill says he is "not bitter," but felt he was a "scapegoat"; says BYU had "no reason to fire me.

I fully agree. Hill is the scapegoat, and this is an awful, IMO. We have BIGGER problems than with the defense. And they're on OFFENSE.



BYU has played 52 games under Bronco, were our Defense held opposing QBs to a rating of 142 or worse. BYU's record in those games is 44-8 (.846). Three of those losses have come this year. Our defense is NOT the problem. Changing DEFENSIVE coaches will not change the FACT that our offense is AWFUL. That our passer rating on offense is 91.94. BYU has had 10 games under Bronco with a rating under 100 - and FOUR of them are this year. Our record is 3-7 in those games. In the three wins, we still had a better rating than our opponents in two of the games (Utah 09, 07) and the third win was a FCS team (Eastern Washington).



The solutions to our woes in 2010 will be found on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball. Among the OFFENSIVE coaches.



This is a bait and switch and I'm not falling for it. This is yet another bad decision by Bronco this year. He has yet to acknowledge that his offensive coaching staff is blowing this season. It is the offensive coaching staff that 1) didn't make a decision regarding the QB situation; 2) isn't holding receivers accountable for dropping passes; 3) isn't correcting the dropped passes; 4) isn't coaching the offensive line to improve; 5) isn't calling plays that are being successful and are leading to multiple 3 & Outs (12 through four games) and poor Time of Possession; and 6) do not seem able to find ways to correct the awful passer efficiency rating that is destroying our season.



If changes needed to be made, it was on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball.

Disagree, we have been playing from behind all season long. We knew that we were going to struggle on offense with a new QB and running back and tight ends. The defense needed to be the strength of the team to carry us to wins. It hasn't happened I am glad they finally did something. Hill wasn't doing his job, they gave him the chance to do the play calling and he failed horribly. I hope Bronco can circle the wagons and start winning some games.

Bronco is doing his job. He is beginning the "Process" of righting the ship. This is a 1st step. More steps will come. Probably at the end of the season. I fully expect a change @ Offensive Coord. I will be really surprised if that does not happen. Bronco will move this team forward!!

8)

ByuIcoug wrote:
Disagree, we have been playing from behind all season long. We knew that we were going to struggle on offense with a new QB and running back and tight ends. The defense needed to be the strength of the team to carry us to wins. It hasn't happened I am glad they finally did something. Hill wasn't doing his job, they gave him the chance to do the play calling and he failed horribly. I hope Bronco can circle the wagons and start winning some games.

We can agree to disagree. But why are we playing from behind? Because our offense is flat out NOT getting it done. We have SIX field goals from inside 30 yards - that means the offense is stalling and not scoring touchdowns. Our offense has seven TDs and 25 punts. We have seven TDs and 12 three-and-outs. We have the worst passing rating we've ever had. We're a full 10 points worse than we were in 2003. Nearly 19 points worse than 2002 and 30 points worse than 2004 - the last time we had a losing record.



I too hope that Bronco can "circle the wagons and start winning some games." But that is not going to happen until ONE side of the ball starts playing better and that side is the OFFENSE.

They both need to go, Kitic. If Bronco had an offensive background, then Anae would be gone and Hill would be playing out his last year. I think it is just a matter of having a more readily found replacement for Hill. Just shows me that Bronco cares about winning games. Just because OC is more deserving doesn't take away fact that our defense has been bad the last couple years.



A defense that doesn't lose you games, but doesn't necessarily help you is only half the solution.



I look at it as Bronco taking the reigns back, which I like, and the BYU sports program being concerned about the fans and donors. Both are very good things.



Just because someone is going 95 mph, and you are only going 85 doesn't mean you still can't get pulled over for speeding.



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

BlueIsBetter wrote:
They both need to go, Kitic. If Bronco had an offensive background, then Anae would be gone and Hill would be playing out his last year. I think it is just a matter of having a more readily found replacement for Hill. Just shows me that Bronco cares about winning games. Just because OC is more deserving doesn't take away fact that our defense has been bad the last couple years.



A defense that doesn't lose you games, but doesn't necessarily help you is only half the solution.



I look at it as Bronco taking the reigns back, which I like, and the BYU sports program being concerned about the fans and donors. Both are very good things.



Just because someone is going 95 mph, and you are only going 85 doesn't mean you still can't get pulled over for speeding.



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

Good points. But who might be posing a great threat? The answer is probably BOTH, but I just think that if changes needed to be made, they should have been made on offense.



To carry your analogy, I'd say our defense is speeding towards a highly unsuccessful at 75 MPH, while our Offense is going along at 100+.

kitic77 wrote:
Defense isn't where our problems are! It on offense.

Are you certain?



1) Our offense was expected to struggle this year. Loss of Max Hall. Loss of Harvey Unga. Loss Dennis PItta. Loss of Andrew George. Brand new RB's. Brand new QB. Brand new TE's. ETC. ETC. ETC.



2) Our defense was expected to be better this year... perhaps even our strongest unit. This supposedly one of our faster, bigger, more physical defenses. Have we seen any progress?



I think you need to look at expectations, not actual performance. I know that sounds backwards, but think about it... we are doing LESS with MORE on defense. Anyone who expected the offense to be comparable at all to last years offense was strongly underestimating the youth and inexperience on the offensive side of the ball for us. We've been successful as we've been in recent history due to our offense. Defense has never been our strong point, and there hasn't been progress. Maybe this will change with a new defensive coordinator.

Italics wrote:

Defense isn't where our problems are! It on offense.

Are you certain?



1) Our offense was expected to struggle this year. Loss of Max Hall. Loss of Harvey Unga. Loss Dennis PItta. Loss of Andrew George. Brand new RB's. Brand new QB. Brand new TE's. ETC. ETC. ETC.



2) Our defense was expected to be better this year... perhaps even our strongest unit. This supposedly one of our faster, bigger, more physical defenses. Have we seen any progress?



I think you need to look at expectations, not actual performance. I know that sounds backwards, but think about it... we are doing LESS with MORE on defense. Anyone who expected the offense to be comparable at all to last years offense was strongly underestimating the youth and inexperience on the offensive side of the ball for us. We've been successful as we've been in recent history due to our offense. Defense has never been our strong point, and there hasn't been progress. Maybe this will change with a new defensive coordinator.

Yes, I am certain. We are at epic fail levels of passing efficiency. We are not scoring, we are not sustaining drives, we are not converting on third downs, we are not scoring TDs in the red zone. We are worse than inept on offense.



The defense has played well enough to win four games with just an average offense.

CougarClaw wrote:
anyone else shocked by this?



Obviously our D this year has had more holes in it than a Ute PHD thesis, but it was less than a year ago that Hill was promoted, and the conversation we all had on this very board was how lucky we were to have him. And we wondered how long we could manage to keep such a coaching powerhouse like Hill and wondering how long it would be before we'd lose especially him to poaching schools.



He was the genius of the coaching staff, and our rising star. No one remembers this? How on earth does this change in only four games against the 5th hardest schedule in the NCAA? Like it's been mentioned, I don't see how this isn't Anae's job. Given our Defense injuries, and the number of offensive sputters, no defense can survive when it's on the field so often.



Can someone tell me why this is a good move?

CougarClaw I do remember all this. I am shocked at the move. Very surprised it was Hill and not Anae.

kitic77 wrote:
Wrubell's tweet:

Hill says he is "not bitter," but felt he was a "scapegoat"; says BYU had "no reason to fire me.

I fully agree. Hill is the scapegoat, and this is an awful, IMO. We have BIGGER problems than with the defense. And they're on OFFENSE.



BYU has played 52 games under Bronco, were our Defense held opposing QBs to a rating of 142 or worse. BYU's record in those games is 44-8 (.846). Three of those losses have come this year. Our defense is NOT the problem. Changing DEFENSIVE coaches will not change the FACT that our offense is AWFUL. That our passer rating on offense is 91.94. BYU has had 10 games under Bronco with a rating under 100 - and FOUR of them are this year. Our record is 3-7 in those games. In the three wins, we still had a better rating than our opponents in two of the games (Utah 09, 07) and the third win was a FCS team (Eastern Washington).



The solutions to our woes in 2010 will be found on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball. Among the OFFENSIVE coaches.



This is a bait and switch and I'm not falling for it. This is yet another bad decision by Bronco this year. He has yet to acknowledge that his offensive coaching staff is blowing this season. It is the offensive coaching staff that 1) didn't make a decision regarding the QB situation; 2) isn't holding receivers accountable for dropping passes; 3) isn't correcting the dropped passes; 4) isn't coaching the offensive line to improve; 5) isn't calling plays that are being successful and are leading to multiple 3 & Outs (12 through four games) and poor Time of Possession; and 6) do not seem able to find ways to correct the awful passer efficiency rating that is destroying our season.



If changes needed to be made, it was on the OFFENSIVE side of the ball.

Agreed, agreed, and agreed. The O coaches need to be held accountable---but that won't happen until the head coach becomes accountable and therefore holds them accountable. Until Bronco lets us know that he knows the offense is the biggest problem, it is very hard to take him seriously.

No, the D hasn't been good enough in 4 games to keep last years offense in the games, let alone a new offense. When every opponent you play scores their opening drive against you, and teams score, in the first half more than they punt, you aren't doing your job.



Especially when you take into acct all the allegations of players not getting along with Hill and not wanting to play for him.



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