“The game boiled down to Arizona’s mistakes, including two critical, back-to-back turnovers by Fifita that helped give BYU a 24-7 lead.” - si.com

Change the numbers and the name, but this quote is fresh for four games running. Joel Klatt said it twice “eerily similar to Kansas State.”

I think BYU keeps getting underestimated because people believe turnovers = luck. But Jay Hill’s defense is perfecting the art. No one would have dared predict that BYU would win because they could manufacture an interception at will, but that is precisely how the Baylor game went down. The coaching staff (and the players perfectly executing) predicted they would get picks that played out in the start and end of that game.

In the postgame interview Glasker explained, again, that his interception was a function of coaches putting him in the right place at the right time.

Are we seeing the emergence of a defensive innovation in football, where something like an interception could be reliably predicted game by game?

Jay Hill’s masterpiece is unfolding before us in a way that could, if it continues, literally change the way football is played, watched and evaluated. It’s like a Moneyball moment in here.

I’m curious if he could even do this against his former boss (Whittingham). If so, would the media types finally start writing about BYU’s wins as takeaways instead of giveaways?

I don’t fault them and I’m not complaining about them, I actually love the underdog role it gives us for them not to see what’s going on. But after three games in a row where the same thing had happened, I’m surprised they haven’t taken stock yet.