Putting this on Tuiaki means that we're full on into witch-hunt territory now.

This team has a lot to be critical about, but the defense is WAY down on the list.

This is an incredibly biased and flawed analysis worthy of a political analysis from either CNN or Fox News.

Let's look at this from another side:

• Teams in top 10 in average best starting field position: Utah State, Fresno State, Georgia Southern, Temple, Marshall - Not exactly a high indicator of college football powerhouses.  But most of those teams have top ranked return men.
• BYU's ranking in Off. Yards/Possession - 94th.  Ranking in Def Yards/Possession - 45th.  So, your assessment is that BYU doesn't move the ball, but allows FEWER yards per possession than average, and Tuiaki is the leading reason why their starting field position is worse than average?  Really?
• BYU is 99th in Kickoff returns with an average of 18 yards.  Hmmm - you don't think that MIGHT have a bigger role to play instead of some strange Tuiaki correlation?  JUST FAIR CATCH OR TAKE A KNEE and BYU adds 7 yards to their average kick return.  Add 7 yards to your average field position and BYU is in the top quartile instead of the bottom.

And the data says:  SURPRISE!! - average starting field position is more likely to be a indicator of the strength of your kickoff team than an indictment on your defense.   And one other big surprise - guess what else BYU is really bad at - punt returns, 92nd in the country.  If we really believe that ASFP is so important, why don't we start looking there and re-title the post:

"The problem with Ed Lamb's special teams units isn't very subtle, it's obvious, and it's VERY impactful to the team".

Seriously, can we back off the Tuiaki criticism until he earns it?