BYU is in a narrowing quarterback competition between freshman Bear Bachmeier and sophomore McCae Hillstead, with offensive coordinator Aaron Roderick dissecting every rep in practice to decide which signal-caller gives the Cougars the best chance to win.
The evaluation covers every standard quarterback trait, from height and weight (Bachmeier at 6-2, 225 pounds; Hillstead at 5-9, 195) to arm strength, poise, football IQ, mobility, leadership, and decision-making. Yet the most critical factor many coaches harp on is clear: avoiding turnovers. Coaches want a quarterback who won’t force risky throws in pressure moments, who can sense pressure and manage it, and who understands where his receivers will be against various coverages.
The downside of overemphasizing mistake avoidance is real, too. Harsh scrutiny on every miscue can rattle a talented player and alter the way he plays, muting the instincts that make him effective. That balance—giving a quarterback freedom to operate while keeping the risk of costly mistakes in check—is a delicate art that BYU has discussed with its own history in mind.
The conversation isn’t new to BYU lore. There’s the well-known cautionary tale about Steve Young early in his BYU days, where a legendary coach’s approach—whether apocryphal or not—sent a message about staying confident after a mistake and not letting fear dictate play. The point, if the anecdote rings true, is that confidence and composure can outpace nerves, even when a turnover has just occurred.
Analytics reinforce the message: winning the turnover battle often translates to winning games. Studies show that a one-turnover differential correlates with strong win rates, and larger differentials yield even higher success. BYU’s 2024 turnover margin finished at plus-8, ranking 24th nationally, with 14 interceptions and 22 takeaways on defense. That balance helped propel an 11-2 record, though a handful of costly interceptions—especially in the losses to Kansas and Arizona State—illustrated how the margin can sting in key moments. The comparison to 1990, when Ty Detmer’s big-number season included a high interception count alongside prolific production, underscores that even great offenses carry risk, but the overall efficiency matters most.
Looking ahead, there’s a sense BYU might lean more on its ground game at times, placing greater emphasis on a quarterback who can lead and organize an offense while capitalizing on pivotal downs, particularly third-and-5 or longer. The right fit will be the one who can guide the attack, maintain possession, and deliver when it matters most.
The decision will come down to which quarterback demonstrates the best combination of leadership, decision-making, and calm under pressure—along with the ability to protect the football. Bachmeier’s size and potential versus Hillstead’s mobility and timing could both be valuable as BYU builds a versatile offensive approach. The player who best fits the offense, handles the mental part of the game, and helps the team win the turnover battle is the likely starter.
If BYU can marry smart risk-taking with precise execution, the quarterback competition could become a strength, not a liability, for a program aiming to sustain success. The path to the starting job will be paved by consistency—practice by practice, rep by rep, and moment by moment in high-pressure situations. The hopeful takeaway is simple: BYU has two capable options, and the decision hinges on who best maximizes the team’s strengths while keeping turnovers in check.