The CardBoard

Author Topic: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer  (Read 8838 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline BobK

  • Daily editor
  • ******
  • Posts: 3683
  • Reputation: 148
  • I love YaBB 1G - SP1!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #30 on: January 11, 2017, 12:46:39 pm »
 First of all Burns might well be thinking Masters first pay for It by playing football 2nd.    Good for him.

Re read what full metal said.  It's the calls at the line of scrimmage that takes time. 

We seem to have two decent walk ons.   Of course we rail birds are like the dinosaur

Offline OutsiderFan

  • Daily editor
  • ******
  • Posts: 4409
  • Reputation: 1
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #31 on: January 11, 2017, 01:51:37 pm »
The most Occam's Razor explanation for Burns transferring is that Costello will beat him out and Chryst will at worst be the backup in 2017.

This is a good thing for Stanford football, and maybe even Ryan Burns.  He can probably grad transfer to an Ivy, yes?

Offline fullmetal

  • Supreme Court Justice
  • ********
  • Posts: 12443
  • Reputation: 55
  • Make room in the cupboard for one more Cup.
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #32 on: January 11, 2017, 02:13:19 pm »
I think there are many programs who would give him a schollie for a brain dump on how the Stanford Football program operates.  It's less kosher if Burns transfers within the conference and gives his new school all the signals, code words, etc...

Offline Boston Card

  • Tech mogul
  • *******
  • Posts: 9103
  • Reputation: 116
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #33 on: January 11, 2017, 02:58:24 pm »
Wilner really could have used a capable editor on that story.

He writes:

Quote
Stanford quarterback Keller Chryst will have knee surgery and miss at least six months as the result of an injury suffered in the Sun Bowl, according to multiple sources.

and then

Quote
Senior Ryan Burns, who replaced Chryst in the Sun Bowl (and started the first seven games of the season) is expected to leave Stanford...

"is expected to leave Stanford" is just about the most weaselly formulation you can come up with, especially in light of the previous quote that was attributed to "multiple sources".  Was the info that he is expected to leave Stanford based on the same (or other) "multiple sources"?  If so, he should say as much.  Is it complete speculation on his part, given a patina of legitimacy with the formulation "...is expected to..."

I don't mind uninformed speculation on the part of reporters, but it ought to be labeled as such by the reporter.  On the other hand, if it comes from a source or sources who may know, then that should be communicated.

Also, he later writes, "Everything about the incident — from his immediate reaction and the in-game treatment by the medical staff to the prognosis and the delay in having surgery (to let swelling subside) – suggests a torn anterior cruciate ligament." (this I believe is correct) EXCEPT, in the very next paragraph, he writes "Sources said Chryst, a junior, will miss at least six months from the time of surgery, which would peg his return to late July or the first half of August, at the earliest." which, would be very optimistic for an ACL injury (7 - 9 months is more typical).  It's not inconceivable, but Adrian Peterson's return from an ACL injury suffered on December 24th 2011 by the first week of the NFL season (Sept. 9) was considered to be a quick outlier (though, being fair, Peterson suffered a torn ACL and MCL).

I am struggling to put all the info together, and to be honest, I am a bit surprised that Burns would leave, given that he is more than likely the only health experienced quarterback on the roster.  Obviously, I can think of reasons why he would not:

  • Chryst's injury is not as bad as feared, and the six months is a fairly firm date (unlikely, since he hasn't had the surgery).
  • A realistic assessment (either his own) or by the coaches has let it known that Costello is the likely starter in Sydney.  Maybe Costello has produced a Luck-like redshirt season,w here everyone expects he will be the next big thing at QB for Stanford, though I think if that were the case we would have all heard about it.
  • Burns is down on the staff or Stanford, based on having lost the starting position, or because of his own assessment of his regression over the season (possible), or because of a conflict.
  • Other reasons (wanting to be closer to home, for example)

Still, better writing by Wilner would have offered a little bit more information to inform the speculation.

If he is indeed grad transferring, best of luck to him.

BC
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 04:12:38 pm by Boston Card »

Offline winflop

  • Tree
  • *****
  • Posts: 2462
  • Reputation: 19
  • Go Stanford!
Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #34 on: January 11, 2017, 03:46:07 pm »
None of this struck me as surprising, but good to have confirmation.  Wouldn't surprise me if Chryst requests a medical redshirt for the whole season but we probably wouldn't see that request until fall camp.

http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/01/11/stanford-vanishing-quarterback-depth-keller-chryst-out-at-least-six-months-ryan-burns-to-transfer/

Let the Costello era begin!

Offline Treebound

  • Dolly
  • ****
  • Posts: 560
  • Reputation: 6
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #35 on: January 11, 2017, 03:48:10 pm »
Come on BC,
It's Wilner that we're talking about.  Unfortunately, he's all about click bait now and the journalism has gone out of the window.     I seldom read his column any more.  It's generally not worth the time. :P

Offline Boston Card

  • Tech mogul
  • *******
  • Posts: 9103
  • Reputation: 116
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #36 on: January 11, 2017, 04:13:47 pm »
Of course we rail birds are like the dinosaur

Extinct since practices closed?

BC

Offline DC 86

  • Dolly
  • ****
  • Posts: 585
  • Reputation: 26
  • Go Stanford!
Re: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #37 on: January 11, 2017, 04:15:19 pm »
Wouldn't surprise me if Chryst requests a medical redshirt for the whole season but we probably wouldn't see that request until fall camp.
NCAA athletes are on a five year clock that starts when they begin their college careers. A sixth year is only granted if an athlete misses two years due to injury or other factors outside of their control, i.e. if they are granted two medical redshirts during that five year window. Since Chryst already redshirted his freshman year for non-medical reasons he won't benefit from a medical redshirt next season. He eligibility expires after the 2018 season, regardless of whether he misses the 2017 season.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 04:20:43 pm by DC 86 »

Offline thunder_chik

  • Dolly
  • ****
  • Posts: 675
  • Reputation: 14
  • All Right Now!
Re: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #38 on: January 11, 2017, 04:20:51 pm »
It doesn't surprise me that Burns may be exploring his options, including a grad transfer.  Anu Solomon, the AZ QB, is transferring to Baylor for his final year of eligibility.  If Chryst isn't ready to play the 2017 season, and Costello doesn't appear ready or gets injured, we'll be in a tight spot.  Maybe we need to be exploring the possibility of a grad transfer QB... ;)
Rinconadan

Offline Boston Card

  • Tech mogul
  • *******
  • Posts: 9103
  • Reputation: 116
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #39 on: January 11, 2017, 04:28:41 pm »
What is the resistance to simplifying the playbook to get the best players playing and contributing ASAP?

"Simplifying the playbook" would mean installing an offense that is dependent on the QB making a single key to determine the play (like a read option).  WE have some plays like that, but our offense is based on reading the entire defense.  The number of plays, while impressive, is really not as dramatic as it sounds, since we run the same play from multiple formations.

The complexity comes from reading the defense, recognizing the alignment and adjusting the call at the line of scrimmage to the play that gives us the best chance to succeed.  When you have a QB who can do it well, it works spectacularly (as in 2010, 2011, and 2015).  When you don't have a QB who can execute it well, we struggle offensively (2012, 2014, 2016).

But if you have an offense based on reading keys for an inexperienced QB, you can't just switch to a pro style offense the next year.

BC

Offline jacketree

  • Tree
  • *****
  • Posts: 2060
  • Reputation: 29
  • I went down to the crossroads....
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #40 on: January 11, 2017, 04:42:53 pm »
I think it is so funny that some people STILL think a Freshman QB could come in and handle the calls of our offense.  Guys-its not ever going to happen.  Bloomgren isn't going to dummy down the playbook.  And if you think a frosh QB could handle it then you are mistaken.  And if we did play a frosh with a limited set of plays...we won't win

Burns may not have a home yet.  Just means he will explore see if he finds a fit and/or maybe not play ala Crower.

It is interesting timing that we will only have one QB in Costello until Chryst is an option.  What if Costello is the starter game 1 and 2...gets entrenched....does Chryst consider transferring to uncles Wisconsin program?  This plot will thicken in the next 9 months...should be interesting Cardboard material

It may need to happen and pronto.  This "utter disaster" someone mentioned in the thread could be as disastrous as Chryst's ACL really does take 10 months to heal, not six; and Costello tweaks an ankle or gets sick for a game or can't find his helmet or .....

OF has been (rightly) beating this drum for months if not longer.  Any playbook so complicated that a) it takes 3-4 years to master or b) can't function when simplified so that someone can master it during spring and summer training is a playbook that needs a major edit.  All playbooks require reads at the LOS, even in high school. Why is ours so difficult, apparently, to master unless the QB is Andrew Luck or a 3rd year Kevin Hogan, might be a problem when Andrew Luck and 3rd year Kevin Hogan aren't on campus.  RS and true frosh start all the time at other programs; why does Stanford have to be so different?  Always need a backup plan; maybe it is a couple of walk-ons with playbook mastery, but maybe circumstances are different going into this particular spring and summer with all the experience wrapped up in an injury and transfer.

Good luck to Burns whatever he decides to do. He has won infinitely more games than most of us on the board.
Yeah, I just stare at my desk, but it looks like I'm working….I'd say in a given week I probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work. – Peter Gibbons

Offline fullmetal

  • Supreme Court Justice
  • ********
  • Posts: 12443
  • Reputation: 55
  • Make room in the cupboard for one more Cup.
Re: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #41 on: January 11, 2017, 05:24:31 pm »
jacketree--maybe you play Davis Mills.  Shaw should be force feeding him information on the latest trends in college defensive paradigms as soon as legally possible, if not the whole playbook.  And if Mills is that good, we won't be seeing him after his RS Soph yr anyway.

Offline Card Fan in OR

  • LSJUMB member
  • ***
  • Posts: 304
  • Reputation: 12
  • Go Stanford!
Re: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #42 on: January 11, 2017, 05:28:36 pm »
I'm with Outside Fan (and jacketree) on this one.

Quote
What is the resistance to simplifying the playbook to get the best players playing and contributing ASAP?

And, what if Costello is hurt?  Do you play a lesser talented walk-on so you don't have to play the True Frosh who has elite talent and potential? 

The hope is that the walk-on actually is an adequate stand-in, but if he isn't, do you flush your season down the toilet just to preserve your - overly - complicated offense?

+10.

"Simplifying the playbook," whether a good long-term decision or not, does not have to be permanent, but if we are precluding our best players from playing--especially at times when we may really need their talent--simplifying the playbook sounds like a really good option to me.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 05:31:37 pm by Card Fan in OR »

Offline donkey687

  • LSJUMB member
  • ***
  • Posts: 289
  • Reputation: 11
  • Go Stanford!
Re: Chryst out 6+ months, Burns to transfer
« Reply #43 on: January 11, 2017, 05:32:40 pm »
Not all frosh are created equal.  Some high school programs run spread and simple offenses and some run complex pro style offenses. Some highly rated high school QBs are highly rated due to their superior athleticism and arm strength and some are highly rated due to their cerebral nature and ability to make good quick decisions. Some QBs have professional coaches and years of training before stepping on campus.  I don't know where Mills stands but Rosen was certainly capable running an offense as a freshman and not just UCLA's offense.  The premise that no frosh could ever start at QB for Stanford is ludicrous.  Not many can but there are exceptions. We may have one. 

Offline Goose

  • LSJUMB member
  • ***
  • Posts: 281
  • Reputation: 26
  • Go Stanford!
Re: QB Situation
« Reply #44 on: January 11, 2017, 05:36:38 pm »
It may need to happen and pronto.  This "utter disaster" someone mentioned in the thread could be as disastrous as Chryst's ACL really does take 10 months to heal, not six; and Costello tweaks an ankle or gets sick for a game or can't find his helmet or .....

OF has been (rightly) beating this drum for months if not longer.  Any playbook so complicated that a) it takes 3-4 years to master or b) can't function when simplified so that someone can master it during spring and summer training is a playbook that needs a major edit.
If you are arguing that it should be possible, in general, to have a playbook that "someone" can master during summer (no spring for Frosh, mostly) and play adequate football in the fall, I think you should become a coach. Arizona had to do that this year. Ask them how that turned out, with the 5 plays he could actually execute.
Quote
All playbooks require reads at the LOS, even in high school. Why is ours so difficult, apparently, to master unless the QB is Andrew Luck or a 3rd year Kevin Hogan, might be a problem when Andrew Luck and 3rd year Kevin Hogan aren't on campus.  RS and true frosh start all the time at other programs; why does Stanford have to be so different?
We aren't. Andrew Luck started as a RS frosh. Kevin Hogan played 4 years, and I am pretty sure he became a starter as a red-shirt, although he didn't start out the year as a starter. The coaches play the guy they think can do the best job. I am sure that, if Costello is hurt, and the walk-ons are no good, if Mills is healthy, he will play. It the comes down to deciding if Mills is better (with his limited playbook) than a not as talented guy with a better grasp. It is that simple. I am sure Shaw will give the walk-ons every chance. He won't pick Mills first unless it is absolutely clear he is the best choice. If you look at the history with Luck, supposedly JH was going to start him and Luck himself kind of talked him out of it. Look at Under Stanford Control (again) this year. They didn't choose Darnold right off the start. Experience and study does matter. It is not a sole determinant, but it counts.
Quote
Always need a backup plan; maybe it is a couple of walk-ons with playbook mastery, but maybe circumstances are different going into this particular spring and summer with all the experience wrapped up in an injury and transfer.
It could be so. We all hope Costello is the "real-deal", Chryst recovers early, and Mills is a healthy and precocious player who can get a year to develop. But if the first two aren't true, I absolutely assure you that Shaw will play Mills if need be. It won't be optimal, but may be necessary.