[BlueK]

I think what we actually saw Saturday was that Sitake's approach to a game is more holistic than Bronco's: "I do my thing on defense and the OC does his thing on offense." I don't think we've seen anything like this in the near past. Some of Lavell's teams did it to some extent. It's similar to what Utah does however. The offense and defense went hand in hand together to beat Arizona and keep them from playing to their strengths. The close score notwithstanding, I was happy with that.

You can point out a few miscues on offense that kept us from scoring more points, but the overall scheme was successful. They gained yards, chewed up clock and kept our defense and Arizona's offense off the field. Arizona's offense is basically another GFGH scheme. The point of it is to wear the defense down by running a lot of plays. Arizona scored a lot of points last year in almost every game against a P12 schedule. So I don't think you can brush away the significance of taking them completely out of their style and forcing them to play away from what they are comfortable with, and holding them to very little yardage and only 16 points. We did exactly to Arizona what would have beaten a BYU team under Bronco and Anae, IMO. We'll see what happens, but I the approach of this staff is better suited to beating Utah than we have been in the past.

Detmer's offense in this game was designed to grind it out. But we did actually try to go deep at least 3 or 4 times. It's just that Hill and the receiver didn't connect on those. Had they done so I think BYU scores a lot more points. The longer pass plays I think is something they can still improve on, and I think they will. But Arizona's defense was trying to take that away and was playing zone to leave the shorter stuff open, which I think the offense did a reasonably good job against. Also, at the end of the game when it was necessary to move the ball down the field quickly we did.