Bronco--cougjunkie's post - Page 3 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Goatnapper'96 · 03-30-2007, 07:54 PM

[QUOTE=jay santos;68884]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

You are stretching to find fault and thus appear objective.

QUOTE]

The majority of the data points evaluating Bronco as a head coach his first 12 months were negative for me.

The majority (all?) of the data points I have evaluating Bronco as a head coach the last 12 months are positive.

My post doesn't reflect my stretch to be objective but the change I've had in him. Maybe it's me coming around to see that he was awesome the whole time. But I think there's some serious evidence to show he has improved significantly.

I think there is a human element and I think recognizing where the program was and at what point he was starting as a head coach, not to mention his offensive coordinator, is prudent when evaluating the 2005 season.

RockyBalboa · 03-30-2007, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay santos

So all those LDS guys grabbed by Utah and the Pac 10 that year sucked? We were very fortunate to pick up Dulan, but I don't think anyone including our coaching staff would have passed on most of the DL in that list for him.

Bronco was not giving off the vibe yet to recruits that he was as serious about football as he was the Honor Code. Props to him for changing his tone.

Where did I say those players sucked? I said it's simply not rational or logical to expect Bronco to pick up every single highly rated or otherwise LDS recruit. I also said that stars aren't always a very accurate indicator. If a 3 star player commits to a BCS school like USC...amazingly his star goes up one. The star rating is hardly an objective way in which to measure things. There are 25 scholies available sometimes...not 40.

Goatnapper'96 · 03-30-2007, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Where did I say they sucked? I said it's simply not rational or logical to expect Bronco to pick up every single highly rated or otherwise LDS recruit. I also said that stars aren't always a very accurate indicator. If a 3 star player commits to a BCS school like USC...amazingly his star goes up one. The star rating is hardly an objective way in which to measure things.

The issue with only using the LDS metric is that the players are so concentrated in OL/DL. If Bronco recruits the top 25 mormons every year, regardless of position, BYU will have 290 lb linebackers.

This is why losing Stanley Havili hurt bad. It is also why losing some of the kids Jay referenced in the trenches, in the immortal words of the hottest mother in a G-string who once lamented about the paucity of male snorkel blowing out her past weekend: "ain't no big thing."

RockyBalboa · 03-30-2007, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

The issue with only using the LDS metric is that the players are so concentrated in OL/DL. If Bronco recruits the top 25 mormons every year, regardless of position, BYU will have 290 lb linebackers.

This is why losing Stanley Havili hurt bad. It is also why losing some of the kids Jay referenced in the trenches, in the immortal words of the hottest mother in a G-string who once lamented about the paucity of male snorkel blowing out her past weekend: "ain't no big thing."

I agree that losing some of these kids isn't good, but we just simply aren't going to get every single one no matter how bad we want to.

Goatnapper'96 · 03-30-2007, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

I agree that losing some of these kids isn't good, but we just simply aren't going to get every single one no matter how bad we want to.

My point is other than Fua and Havili, I am not sure BYU really missed anyone. BYU attracted a glut of capable kids on both OL and DL in 2006.

RockyBalboa · 03-30-2007, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

My point is other than Fua and Havili, I am not sure BYU really missed anyone. BYU attracted a glut of capable kids on both OL and DL in 2006.

Defintely agree with you there.

BYU is now so loaded at the O-line, it would not surprise me to see a couple of really talented kids transfer elsewhere in the next few years to see some playing time.

Indy Coug · 03-30-2007, 08:07 PM

Measuring our recruiting classes by who we didn't land is a grossly flawed metric, IMO. The way you measure the quality of a recruiting class is

1. The % of players that produced and how much did they produce
2. Did it help provide the proper amount of positional and class balance to the program
3. How good was the team when they were upperclassmen (maybe that's just #1 being restated)

Several of the Bronco recruits have already produced, but at the current time, it's too early to definitively weigh in on 2005 and 2006, as the holdovers from the previous regime were very productive as upperclassmen in those years.

Insensitive PAP · 03-30-2007, 10:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay santos

So all those LDS guys grabbed by Utah and the Pac 10 that year sucked? We were very fortunate to pick up Dulan, but I don't think anyone including our coaching staff would have passed on most of the DL in that list for him.

Bronco was not giving off the vibe yet to recruits that he was as serious about football as he was the Honor Code. Props to him for changing his tone.

Compare the PT of our recruits versus the PT of the recruits we "didn't get". Compare the quality of the teams the young players played on. Compare production. To say the recruiting classes were not good after seeing a significant number of them actually play and contribute on a very good team is asinine.

jay santos · 03-30-2007, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Insensitive PAP

Compare the PT of our recruits versus the PT of the recruits we "didn't get". Compare the quality of the teams the young players played on. Compare production. To say the recruiting classes were not good after seeing a significant number of them actually play and contribute on a very good team is asinine.

K, you were the guy who said pre-2002 that 2001 would go down as the worst year of the Crowton era. So I'll take your commentary for what it's worth. Pipe up when you have something to say about UNLV's back up QB. Until then, run along.

Insensitive PAP · 03-31-2007, 12:33 AM

the one who gets the future wrong, or the one that gets the past wrong.

03-31-2007, 12:33 AM	#30
Insensitive PAP Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 293	Yeah who's the bigger moron. . . the one who gets the future wrong, or the one that gets the past wrong.

03-30-2007, 08:07 PM	#27
Indy Coug Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Between Iraq and a hard place Posts: 7,569	Measuring our recruiting classes by who we didn't land is a grossly flawed metric, IMO. The way you measure the quality of a recruiting class is 1. The % of players that produced and how much did they produce 2. Did it help provide the proper amount of positional and class balance to the program 3. How good was the team when they were upperclassmen (maybe that's just #1 being restated) Several of the Bronco recruits have already produced, but at the current time, it's too early to definitively weigh in on 2005 and 2006, as the holdovers from the previous regime were very productive as upperclassmen in those years.