Sorry, but Hill was simply a BAD QB in that game. Terrible. He got better as the season went on, but he was not a good QB yet when we played that game. He did get his legs under him soon after, but it took a few more games before he was even an average passer. We also had a bad Oline. We were also running a brand new offense that would have seemed weird to the players compared to what they had run in the past. We hadn't had a chance to try it in a real game yet. Then the weather was crazy. Then despite that, we still pretty much dominated the game and UVa had to have a couple of other crazy things fall in their favor just to get the chance to win.

None of those things should apply this time, and everyone here knows it. So just for the sake of being a pessimist some are just falling back on "history" as their argument, as if that word stands alone.

But BYU will win this game and it won't be close because BYU is improved and UConn absolutely sucks. Yes, I know Virginia didn't win many games last year, but they were underacheivers with some nice talent playing a tough schedule. UConn doesn't have close to the same talent and were a bad team last year against an easy schedule. No comparison.

Sure, I suppose you could fall back to the argument that the reason Hill and the Oline were crappy is because it's a Bronco coached team in the first game on the east coast as a favorite on the vegas line during a full moon or whatever other gobbledygook you want to throw into it. I prefer to look at the indivudual components of the performance we saw and then judge on what's the same or different. This year all reports are that the line is playing much better. There wasn't much positive said about them in camp last year. Hill isn't a brand new starter and isn't coming off a knee injury. The offense is no longer brand new. We ahve better receivers even with injury and suspensions.

Other than Bronco being the same coach and the time zone, I don't see that many comparisons to last year.