If I'm being honest, one of the themes that bugs me most about BYU football lately is the idea that they can't get creative with different schemes (on both sides of the ball, really). We keep hearing about the need to "simplify" the playbook so that the level of "execution" matches what they want to run.

My question is this: why does this continue to be a problem? Consider the following:

- These guys attend BYU, so they aren't/shouldn't be dummies
- Most of the players came from good, established HS programs
- Many were highly recruited
- Most (if not all) have dedicated themselves to the sport for YEARS

Is it really that these guys are struggling with the "basics"? Is it that the coaches have unreasonable expectations? Is it really just a chemistry/repetitions issue (coupled by the missionaries-coming-and-going issue)? Is it just injuries forcing players to play out of position and need an easier way to succeed in their new role(s)? Are the players being recruited really just not good enough to run average or above-average schemes? Or is it just bad coaching?

This isn't an attempt to blame the players...or really the coaches. There must be something I don't understand, not having played the game at their level. But it's odd to me that I keep hearing things like how (1) Anae can't/won't expand the playbook, (2) Howell can't trust his guys to run what he wants, (3) blitz packages need to be simpler to be effective, (4) Taysom's read-option game plan can't include more variety to be less predictable, (5) Stewart needs a simpler game plan to be effective, (6) blocking schemes for the OL can't be very inventive, (7) the WRs need to run simpler routes, and so on...

I know the team's failures are more magnified to me because I'm a fan, but it seems that the vast majority of other teams across the country seem to be able to overcome these challenges. So what's the deal at BYU?

Rant over. (Thanks).