We were just as close to losing USC, Boise and Tennessee as we were to beating USF, Toledo, SDSU and Hawaii.

The fact that theoretically, if everything goes our way, we are capable of winning 10 games is a really dumb hill to stand on. Of course any team is theoretically capable of winning every game if things go their way. But that’s not how it works in reality.

If you are going strictly off of relative TALENT, we shouldn’t have gone .500 in our 8 competitive games because we were more talented than only 3 (USU, Hawaii, SDSU). We had absolutely no business beating USC and Tennessee according to our relative talent levels, and we should have lost to USF and Toledo (especially since they were both road games across time zones). That we didn’t go 3-5 in those 8 games speaks to the caliber of coaching.

The broader issue I’m speaking to is the inflated view of BYU football that some fans and, apparently, the administration takes: that you can sign less talented players, hire lower paid coaches to coach them, put them in an environment that requires they spend a significantly larger part of their time staying eligible, and support them with fewer S&C, recruiting, and development resources and then magically expect them to go out and win 10 games. It’s irrational.

At some point we need to stop thinking “if only the coaches would____” and start realizing that the program is producing exactly what it’s designed and resourced to produce and either the design/resourcing needs to change or we need to get comfortable with 5-7 wins per year.