To read more writings by The Editor, you can visit: collegefootballhaven12.blogspot.com
In adherence with standard protocol when the incumbent quarterback graduates, much of the attention in the BYU football world this offseason has focused on the battle for the starting quarterback. This year, however, the presence of Jake Heaps makes this battle much more intriguing. The Ben Olson episode adds a wrinkle as well. Of course, everyone seems to have an opinion on what will happen or what should happen.
THE POSSIBILITIES
1. Start Immediately. Matt Barkley did it last year for USC. Jimmy Clausen did it three years ago at Notre Dame. Ben Olson did not do it. He left on a mission, transferred, and BYU had three consecutive losing seasons.
If Heaps is going to start immediately it needs to be for one reason, and one reason only: he is better than Riley Nelson, James Lark, and Jason Munns and gives BYU the best chance to win now.
We have no guarantees that BYU would have been better if Olson started from 2002-2004. Yes, he had a lot of potential and promise, but we have to look at both sides of the story. He was also injury prone and a disappointment at UCLA. I don't know all the dynamics behind Olson's decision to transfer after his mission. I heard that he didn't like Crowton, but Crowton resigned at the same time Olson finished his mission. Although I hate to make judgments on people's character from afar, Olson's decision to transfer makes me wonder if he was the type of player that fits Bronco's system--one that works hard and is humble--or if he was just a spoiled rich kid. Neither Bronco, nor any BYU coach should let the fear of losing Heaps influence the outcome of the quarterback battle. If his pride is bruised that much because he doesn't get to start as a true freshman, then I seriously wonder if he has what it takes to be a great BYU quarterback.
Jimmy Clausen may be the first quarterback drafted in next month's NFL draft. That would be great for him, but that should have no influence over who starts at BYU next year. Look at the results of Clausen's career. Notre Dame went from a BCS bowl the year before to 3 wins in Clausen's freshman season. The next two years weren't much better (7-6, and 6-6 without a bowl game). Now he is gone, leaving a year of eligibility on the table. Notre Dame invested in its top quarterback recruit and got nothing in return. Is that what BYU and its fans want? Of course, Heaps is not destined to follow in Clausen's path. My point is that using Clausen to argure for Heaps to start as a true freshman is an empty argument.
The jury is still out on Matt Barkley. However, we do have one year to look at. USC's string of seven consecutive Pac-10 championships was snapped.
Let me say it again, the only reason Jake Heaps should start next year is if he gives BYU the best chance to win because he is better than the other three competitiors.
2. Redshirt and go in a mission. This would put him back on campus for 2013. At that point, Nelson and Lark will be gone, and Munns will have one year of eligibilty left. Not much different than the situation today. Presumably, though, he won't have two other hot prospects to compete with three years from now. If he finds himself deep on the depth chart, or if Ross Apo, Zac Stout, and some of the other players in his recruiting class all decide to go on a mission as well, he might see a mission as the best option for his life and his playing career.
Return missionaries did not have much success in the 1980s and 90s, but John Beck and Max Hall have shown that RMs can be successful quarterbacks.
3. Redshirt and have three years of eligibility after Riley Nelson graduates. If Heaps does not start, redshirting is in his best interest, barring a season ending injury at some point to Nelson. I would want to play as much as possible in my career, so if I can lose one year of eligibility as a back up and start three, that option would be a no brainer for me.
The injury scenario is interesting. Let's stick with the hypothetical of Nelson as number 1, but Heaps ends the competition number two. Subsequently, the redshirt is put on Heaps. Nelson plays well, but not outstanding, for 4 games when he suffers a season ending injury. Does Heaps give up the redshirt to start the rest of the season, or let the number three play? Suppose that number three shines and takes the starting job from Nelson for 2011, and for the rest of his years of eligibility. Well, Heaps could still go on a mission. If his mind is made up that he won't go on a mission, then I say he takes the redshirt off. Either he will shine and win the starting job himself, or Nelson will resume that spot for his senior year and Heaps can use his redshirt the next year. (Kind of like 1978 when Marc Wilson and Jim McMahon split time, but in 1979 McMahon redshirted while Wilson played his final year.)
In reality, until the season kicks off September 5, and a depth chart is established, all of this speculation is meaningless. However, for what it's worth, my opinion is that the best case scenario for Heaps would be to redshirt this year, regardless if a mission is in the future or not, and be content to be the back up for one additional year. He shoult still work his guts out and study till his head hurts for these two years. History shows that quarterbacks who wait two years after high school before they start are very successful. LaVell Edwards did not have to sacrifice Steve Young's career so that Robbie Bosco could win a national championship as a junior. Ty Detmer beat out Sean Covey only after a redshirt year and a year as a back up. That didn't stop him from winning the Heisman Trophy. Yes, John Beck survivied the rigors of playing early, but Matt Berry did not.
In adherence with standard protocol when the incumbent quarterback graduates, much of the attention in the BYU football world this offseason has focused on the battle for the starting quarterback. This year, however, the presence of Jake Heaps makes this battle much more intriguing. The Ben Olson episode adds a wrinkle as well. Of course, everyone seems to have an opinion on what will happen or what should happen.
THE POSSIBILITIES
1. Start Immediately. Matt Barkley did it last year for USC. Jimmy Clausen did it three years ago at Notre Dame. Ben Olson did not do it. He left on a mission, transferred, and BYU had three consecutive losing seasons.
If Heaps is going to start immediately it needs to be for one reason, and one reason only: he is better than Riley Nelson, James Lark, and Jason Munns and gives BYU the best chance to win now.
We have no guarantees that BYU would have been better if Olson started from 2002-2004. Yes, he had a lot of potential and promise, but we have to look at both sides of the story. He was also injury prone and a disappointment at UCLA. I don't know all the dynamics behind Olson's decision to transfer after his mission. I heard that he didn't like Crowton, but Crowton resigned at the same time Olson finished his mission. Although I hate to make judgments on people's character from afar, Olson's decision to transfer makes me wonder if he was the type of player that fits Bronco's system--one that works hard and is humble--or if he was just a spoiled rich kid. Neither Bronco, nor any BYU coach should let the fear of losing Heaps influence the outcome of the quarterback battle. If his pride is bruised that much because he doesn't get to start as a true freshman, then I seriously wonder if he has what it takes to be a great BYU quarterback.
Jimmy Clausen may be the first quarterback drafted in next month's NFL draft. That would be great for him, but that should have no influence over who starts at BYU next year. Look at the results of Clausen's career. Notre Dame went from a BCS bowl the year before to 3 wins in Clausen's freshman season. The next two years weren't much better (7-6, and 6-6 without a bowl game). Now he is gone, leaving a year of eligibility on the table. Notre Dame invested in its top quarterback recruit and got nothing in return. Is that what BYU and its fans want? Of course, Heaps is not destined to follow in Clausen's path. My point is that using Clausen to argure for Heaps to start as a true freshman is an empty argument.
The jury is still out on Matt Barkley. However, we do have one year to look at. USC's string of seven consecutive Pac-10 championships was snapped.
Let me say it again, the only reason Jake Heaps should start next year is if he gives BYU the best chance to win because he is better than the other three competitiors.
2. Redshirt and go in a mission. This would put him back on campus for 2013. At that point, Nelson and Lark will be gone, and Munns will have one year of eligibilty left. Not much different than the situation today. Presumably, though, he won't have two other hot prospects to compete with three years from now. If he finds himself deep on the depth chart, or if Ross Apo, Zac Stout, and some of the other players in his recruiting class all decide to go on a mission as well, he might see a mission as the best option for his life and his playing career.
Return missionaries did not have much success in the 1980s and 90s, but John Beck and Max Hall have shown that RMs can be successful quarterbacks.
3. Redshirt and have three years of eligibility after Riley Nelson graduates. If Heaps does not start, redshirting is in his best interest, barring a season ending injury at some point to Nelson. I would want to play as much as possible in my career, so if I can lose one year of eligibility as a back up and start three, that option would be a no brainer for me.
The injury scenario is interesting. Let's stick with the hypothetical of Nelson as number 1, but Heaps ends the competition number two. Subsequently, the redshirt is put on Heaps. Nelson plays well, but not outstanding, for 4 games when he suffers a season ending injury. Does Heaps give up the redshirt to start the rest of the season, or let the number three play? Suppose that number three shines and takes the starting job from Nelson for 2011, and for the rest of his years of eligibility. Well, Heaps could still go on a mission. If his mind is made up that he won't go on a mission, then I say he takes the redshirt off. Either he will shine and win the starting job himself, or Nelson will resume that spot for his senior year and Heaps can use his redshirt the next year. (Kind of like 1978 when Marc Wilson and Jim McMahon split time, but in 1979 McMahon redshirted while Wilson played his final year.)
In reality, until the season kicks off September 5, and a depth chart is established, all of this speculation is meaningless. However, for what it's worth, my opinion is that the best case scenario for Heaps would be to redshirt this year, regardless if a mission is in the future or not, and be content to be the back up for one additional year. He shoult still work his guts out and study till his head hurts for these two years. History shows that quarterbacks who wait two years after high school before they start are very successful. LaVell Edwards did not have to sacrifice Steve Young's career so that Robbie Bosco could win a national championship as a junior. Ty Detmer beat out Sean Covey only after a redshirt year and a year as a back up. That didn't stop him from winning the Heisman Trophy. Yes, John Beck survivied the rigors of playing early, but Matt Berry did not.
Comments
Post a Comment