cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/index.php)
-   Football (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7)
-   -   Kind of ironic (http://www.cougarguard.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29901)

MikeWaters 11-27-2016 11:58 PM

Kind of ironic
 
That Taysom would go out like this.

Before the game, I thought to myself, would be ironic if he was hurt again in his last LES game. And that he might be carried out on a stretcher, and he would have this last moment of a thumbs up from the stretcher, and the crowd would cheer as he exited our lives forever.

It didn't quite happen like that.

I thought there was an element of class to the muted cheers for Mangum when he came in. Some respect for the fallen.

And thus ends the Taysom Hill era. It started with so much promise. It ended with so much ineptitude and mediocrity, that despite his alpha-looks and bearing, he became one of the most hated players in the history of cougarboard. Not for anything about his personal character, but merely for the fact of sucking. So hard.

This has to be one of the worst passing seasons for BYU in modern history.

If Detmer repeats this next year with Mangum the grumbling will turn into pitchforks and torches.

Think about this--BYU led the nation in takeaways. And yet couldn't turn that gift into something in terms of wins-losses.

Sagarin right now has BYU at #31, with the 67th toughest schedule.

The only G5 teams ahead of BYU in the Sagarin ratings: Western Michigan and Houston. Houston had the 75th toughest schedule.

That's not bad for a first season from an inexperienced staff. I think in particular the defense looks like it's well-coached. The same cannot be said for the offense. A lot of talent left on the table untouched.

Would be remiss not to give a tip of the hat to Jamaal Williams. He is the best RB for BYU in history. Of course he's the career rush leader. But what puts him over the top is his longevity and durability, his ruggedness. There's no doubt in my mind that he's better than Staley. And certainly better than Unga. I hope he gets some play in the NFL.

MikeWaters 11-28-2016 02:05 AM

Nacua will be missed. He brought toughness and swagger to the team. Great ball hawk.

Takenaka - I guess he is a senior too. Seems like yesterday I was reading about his signing. And now he is gone. Time sure goes by quick.

[just looked up Eric Takenaka's profile, he was a JC transfer, forgot about that part].

BlueK 11-28-2016 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 322662)
That Taysom would go out like this.


If Detmer repeats this next year with Mangum the grumbling will turn into pitchforks and torches.

Mangum is way better than Hill. Hill played with a lot of passion but he's a terrible passer. No excuses. His 116 passing efficiency over the season is good for #99 nationally. I know some will want to blame the new offense, but the reality is Hill has never been a good passer.

For Mangum, in limited action his PE was 182. I get it that his opposition was against the easier opponents, but given how he played last year, it's still pretty safe to say he's a much better passer. At least this way he has three weeks or so to get ready for the bowl game. Let's see what happens in that game. Wouldn't it be funny if suddenly the offense looked good? I don't think that's so far fetched. Having a QB who can't throw worth a spit is a huge disadvantage for an offense. And was it really Detmer's call to go with Hill, or was it Sitake's?

BlueK 11-28-2016 07:03 PM

Also, for what it's worth, I read over the weekend that BYU was 10-2 against the spread. That would seem to indicate they over-performed national expectations against their schedule.

Archaea 11-28-2016 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322664)
Mangum is way better than Hill. Hill played with a lot of passion but he's a terrible passer. No excuses. His 116 passing efficiency over the season is good for #99 nationally. I know some will want to blame the new offense, but the reality is Hill has never been a good passer.

For Mangum, in limited action his PE was 182. I get it that his opposition was against the easier opponents, but given how he played last year, it's still pretty safe to say he's a much better passer. At least this way he has three weeks or so to get ready for the bowl game. Let's see what happens in that game. Wouldn't it be funny if suddenly the offense looked good? I don't think that's so far fetched. Having a QB who can't throw worth a spit is a huge disadvantage for an offense. And was it really Detmer's call to go with Hill, or was it Sitake's?

I trust that Hill makes a full recovery. I was hoping he would stay healthy for the remainder of the season, but sadly he did not.

The main issue will be the line, but BYU won't be facing the best defenses in either Wyoming or SDSU. It will be interesting to see how the offense does.

MikeWaters 11-29-2016 12:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322664)
Mangum is way better than Hill. Hill played with a lot of passion but he's a terrible passer. No excuses. His 116 passing efficiency over the season is good for #99 nationally. I know some will want to blame the new offense, but the reality is Hill has never been a good passer.

For Mangum, in limited action his PE was 182. I get it that his opposition was against the easier opponents, but given how he played last year, it's still pretty safe to say he's a much better passer. At least this way he has three weeks or so to get ready for the bowl game. Let's see what happens in that game. Wouldn't it be funny if suddenly the offense looked good? I don't think that's so far fetched. Having a QB who can't throw worth a spit is a huge disadvantage for an offense. And was it really Detmer's call to go with Hill, or was it Sitake's?

I actually think it was Sitake's call. I think Sitake made a fool's promise to Hill that if he stayed, he would start every game. And he kept his promise.

MikeWaters 11-29-2016 12:13 AM

If Mangum plays well next year, the Taysomites will be patting themselves on the back about how Mangum had the opportunity to "learn the offense" as a backup. And now the coaching staff and the players are "on the same page." And how Taysom "took one for the team."

SeattleUte 11-30-2016 01:18 AM

Passing is not the point. Winning is. I think BYU made a huge mistake not hiring Coach K form Navy by any means available.

MikeWaters 11-30-2016 02:34 AM

Didn't he turn the job down? He probably wasn't willing to take a pay cut for the Lord, so to speak.

BlueK 11-30-2016 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 322674)
Passing is not the point. Winning is. I think BYU made a huge mistake not hiring Coach K form Navy by any means available.

Option football? No, thank you. It's not a given that playing that way would lead to winning at BYU. The game has changed. It hasn't worked for a very long time at any school other than Navy or Air Force. Hasn't even worked at Army. Former Navy coaches have tried it at other schools with little success. Better for him to stay where he's at and take the pay raise. Better for BYU to go a different direction.

Archaea 11-30-2016 08:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322677)
Option football? No, thank you. It's not a given that playing that way would lead to winning at BYU. The game has changed. It hasn't worked for a very long time at any school other than Navy or Air Force. Hasn't even worked at Army. Former Navy coaches have tried it at other schools with little success. Better for him to stay where he's at and take the pay raise. Better for BYU to go a different direction.

BYU might be a school that could make it work, but there would be bumps in the road that BYU's fanbase might not tolerate.

SeattleUte 11-30-2016 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322677)
Option football? No, thank you. It's not a given that playing that way would lead to winning at BYU. The game has changed. It hasn't worked for a very long time at any school other than Navy or Air Force. Hasn't even worked at Army. Former Navy coaches have tried it at other schools with little success. Better for him to stay where he's at and take the pay raise. Better for BYU to go a different direction.

That guy is such a stud he could modify his game as needed. He's a super coach like Meyer; what he's done at Navy is astounding. If Whit left I would love him at Utah; in fact I'd advocate for him in any way I could. He's better than Texas's new coach; he's accomplished much more. I'm really glad BYU got Sitaki instead.

BlueK 11-30-2016 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 322681)
That guy is such a stud he could modify his game as needed. He's a super coach like Meyer; what he's done at Navy is astounding. If Whit left I would love him at Utah; in fact I'd advocate for him in any way I could. He's better than Texas's new coach; he's accomplished much more. I'm really glad BYU got Sitaki instead.

8-4 and #32 in the sagarin this year is better than what you thought Sitake would do in his first year. If we played a QB who could throw even moderately well it could have been better than that.

SeattleUte 12-01-2016 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322682)
8-4 and #32 in the sagarin this year is better than what you thought Sitake would do in his first year. If we played a QB who could throw even moderately well it could have been better than that.

Yes, BYU has been better than I expected. But this is still Bronco's team. BYU players are unusually mature (they're older) and therefore disciplined, so I expect Bronco's good works to stick for a while. It's not unusual for a first year coach to have his best year that first year, e.g., Crowton. Let's what happens long term.

Regardless, Navy's coach would have been a home run hire. Waters, would BYU pay him less than Navy does? I think he didn't want to have BYU fans telling him to pass.

MikeWaters 12-02-2016 02:09 AM

for sure it would have been a pay cut for him to come to BYU. And for all his assistants.

BlueK 12-04-2016 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea (Post 322678)
BYU might be a school that could make it work, but there would be bumps in the road that BYU's fanbase might not tolerate.

With missions it would take at least five years to make it work here. You're right no one would tolerate that, least of all the fans who post on boards like this. Maybe the super casual fans who don't really care what happens.

Archaea 12-04-2016 03:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322698)
With missions it would take at least five years to make it work here. You're right no one would tolerate that, least of all the fans who post on boards like this. Maybe the super casual fans who don't really care what happens.

Like the Board of Trustees.

BlueK 12-04-2016 03:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea (Post 322701)
Like the Board of Trustees.

Ken N. was never offered. Let's not be ridiculous. The only thing that remotely made him a fit at BYU was his religion. Better to let him continue being who he is at Navy. It's possible for a really good coach not to be a good fit at a particular school. BYU recruiting to fit the triple option would be stupid and would waste even more LDS talent than we were under Bronco who thought the talent has to recruit BYU first or he wasn't even going to try. The system being put in place now is a great fit for what we can recruit well. We just happened to have the wrong type of QB for it this year.

Archaea 12-04-2016 03:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322702)
Ken N. was never offered. Let's not be ridiculous. The only thing that remotely made him a fit at BYU was his religion. Better to let him continue being who he is at Navy. It's possible for a really good coach not to be a good fit at a particular school. BYU recruiting to fit the triple option would be stupid and would waste even more LDS talent than we were under Bronco who thought the talent has to recruit BYU first or he wasn't even going to try. The system being put in place now is a great fit for what we can recruit well. We just happened to have the wrong type of QB for it this year.

And a crappy defensive line.

And no offensive line.

And no receivers. And Cahoon, who can't coach.

BlueK 12-04-2016 04:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea (Post 322703)
And a crappy defensive line.

And no offensive line.

And no receivers. And Cahoon, who can't coach.

Receivers irrelevant this year because Hill can't pass. They wouldn't have looked that bad with a QB who isn't an awful passer. Hill also made the line look worse than it was. No, I'm not a fan of running QB's who are terrible passers.

ChinoCoug 12-08-2016 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322677)
Option football? No, thank you. It's not a given that playing that way would lead to winning at BYU. The game has changed. It hasn't worked for a very long time at any school other than Navy or Air Force. Hasn't even worked at Army. Former Navy coaches have tried it at other schools with little success. Better for him to stay where he's at and take the pay raise. Better for BYU to go a different direction.

I tried asking him if BYU would let him run the triple option if he got hired. He said things never got that far.

MikeWaters 12-08-2016 10:36 PM

conversation:

"Will you accept a 50% pay cut?"
"No."
"For the Lord?"
"No."

Archaea 12-09-2016 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 322736)
conversation:

"Will you accept a 50% pay cut?"
"No."
"For the Lord?"
"No."

If you want people who did not grow up in Utah to stay active, make certain they don't work for the Church. The Church's attitude toward employment can be dispiriting. Ken obviously valued his great position at Navy more than a huge pay cut and limited facilities and recruiting options.

ChinoCoug 12-11-2016 05:24 AM

I'm not sure why you all think he stayed because of money.

He made $2.7M at Navy. Even BYU would easily match that.

SeattleUte 12-11-2016 05:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug (Post 322740)
I'm not sure why you all think he stayed because of money.

He made $2.7M at Navy. Even BYU would easily match that.

Here is the published figures. Coach K makes only $2 million at Navy. I don't know what BYU pays its coach because it's concealed. I don't know why BYU fans and Mormons stand for that authoritarianism. They should disclose wtf they pay the coach. Why are BYU fans so infantile as to tolerate this?

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

ChinoCoug 12-11-2016 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleUte (Post 322741)
Here is the published figures. Coach K makes only $2 million at Navy. I don't know what BYU pays its coach because it's concealed. I don't know why BYU fans and Mormons stand for that authoritarianism. They should disclose wtf they pay the coach. Why are BYU fans so infantile as to tolerate this?

http://sports.usatoday.com/ncaa/salaries/

There is enough outrage over the high*EST paid public employee in most states being the football coach (or basketball in states like Kentucky and Kansas).

Imagine when people learn the highest paid church employee is the football coach.

MikeWaters 12-12-2016 01:38 PM

I don't know...I think a lot or most Mormons would be more comfortable with a coach making 1.5 million per year compared to the President of the church collecting a cool 1.5 million per year.

ChinoCoug 12-12-2016 03:02 PM

Not this again.

Archaea 12-12-2016 04:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeWaters (Post 322746)
I don't know...I think a lot or most Mormons would be more comfortable with a coach making 1.5 million per year compared to the President of the church collecting a cool 1.5 million per year.

We are accustomed to seeing both. However, we expect the president of the Church to work for less.

I'd be cool with a coach making $3 Million if he were bringing us into the big time.

BlueK 12-12-2016 09:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archaea (Post 322749)
We are accustomed to seeing both. However, we expect the president of the Church to work for less.

I'd be cool with a coach making $3 Million if he were bringing us into the big time.

Non-sports fans, which comprise the vast majority of the public are horrified at this thought.

We can argue money, but I think Coach N was a bad football fit for BYU and both sides realized it. No argument about him being a good fit culturally. It wasn't money. It was just like when Lavell figured it out in time to turn down the Detroit Lions. I hardly think he would have done better than Sitake has, and he would have been like a fish out of water running something other than the option. Triple option coaches are a unique breed. Can you think of a single example of one of those over the last 30 years who even tried to run something else after they became entrenched in it, or of a triple option coach who was successful running it outside of the service academies since the 1980s?

BlueK 12-13-2016 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug (Post 322735)
I tried asking him if BYU would let him run the triple option if he got hired. He said things never got that far.

If something this basic about his offensive philosophy never came up there is no way they talked about money. Besides, it's the boosters and donors who pay most of the football coach's salary anyway, and not the school. If they can't come up with enough for Coach Ken N., blame the fans. I just think Sitake is a better fit anyway just from a philosophy of what makes sense football-wise for the school. Maybe that's right or maybe it's wrong. But I think it turned out ok for the first year installing a new system. We'll see what happens in the bowl game.

I think we have a good idea of what would have happened in this bowl game if Hill hadn't gotten hurt: either BYU loses a close one or wins a close one. He didn't blow anyone out this year or win comfortably unless it was a bad team. If BYU with Mangum wins by a couple of TDs against a pretty good Wyoming team that beat Boise State, to whom we lost, then I think it's pretty certain that's better than what would have happened with Hill.

ChinoCoug 12-13-2016 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueK (Post 322753)
Non-sports fans, which comprise the vast majority of the public are horrified at this thought.

We can argue money, but I think Coach N was a bad football fit for BYU and both sides realized it. No argument about him being a good fit culturally. It wasn't money. It was just like when Lavell figured it out in time to turn down the Detroit Lions. I hardly think he would have done better than Sitake has, and he would have been like a fish out of water running something other than the option. Triple option coaches are a unique breed. Can you think of a single example of one of those over the last 30 years who even tried to run something else after they became entrenched in it, or of a triple option coach who was successful running it outside of the service academies since the 1980s?

He said in his fireside talk that he was excited about the possibility of coaching at BYU because he can "use Taysom in our offense," i.e., Taysom would fit the triple option.


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.