Stanford-Cal game thread - Printable Version

Stanford-Cal game thread - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Stanford-Cal game thread (/thread-13083.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - martyup - 11-19-2016

We couldn't sack Webb.Â Not once in the entire game.Â Why?

[Image: Colin.gif]

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - rastaman85 - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 07:30 PM)martyup link Wrote:We couldn't sack Webb.Â Not once in the entire game.Â Why?

Webb is a big, strong, veteran, NFL prospect QB with a quick release. Cal ran a billion screens to RB's and WR's, and quick hitters to WR's. Tough to get a lot of sacks in that situation.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - French Rage - 11-19-2016

(11-19-2016, 05:45 PM)needle link Wrote:Three kal defenders had C-Mac dead to rights. But he slips them all and zooms in 90+ yards for the score.

Greatness.

The best of it was, it looks like his fake resulted in one of the Cal defenders blocking the other two!

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - JohnR34231 - 11-20-2016

(11-19-2016, 07:01 PM)HisKneeWasDown link Wrote:Yikes isn't calling time outs. I think we're done!!!

I was surprised he didn't try to get the ball back. I know the chances were remote, but a quick strike and an onside kick and who knows? Maybe he was cold and wet and just wanted to get the thing over with.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - larkinforever - 11-20-2016

(11-19-2016, 07:03 PM)CompSci87 link Wrote:[quote author=martyup link=topic=16136.msg179932#msg179932 date=1479607296]
[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=16136.msg179930#msg179930 date=1479607157]
If I were a coach and one of my players came up flexing after making a play when we were still down significantly, he would receive a firm talking-to.

I think that was an INT.Â
[/quote]

Simultaneous catch seemed like a defensible call.
[/quote]

Only thing that surprised me there was that they didn't at least review it. Or, is that one not reviewable?

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - terry - 11-20-2016

(11-19-2016, 01:25 PM)HisKneeWasDown link Wrote:Forecast clear for kickoff...

https://weather.com/weather/radar/interactive/l/USCA0087:1:US?layer=radarConus&zoom=8

That has to be the worst weather forecast of the year.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - BostonCard - 11-20-2016

So, JJ Arcega-Whiteside had his second consecutive 100 yard receiving game, which wouldn't seem like that big a deal except he's the first Stanford WR to do so since Mark Bradford in 2007.

BC

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - stupac2 - 11-20-2016

(11-20-2016, 08:32 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:So, JJ Arcega-Whiteside had his second consecutive 100 yard receiving game, which wouldn't seem like that big a deal except he's the first Stanford WR to do so since Mark Bradford in 2007.

BC

Was anyone expecting him to be the breakout WR this year? I think everyone was expecting it to be Irwin, who has been oddly unproductive and had some key drops.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-20-2016

(11-20-2016, 09:06 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Was anyone expecting him to be the breakout WR this year? I think everyone was expecting it to be Irwin, who has been oddly unproductive and had some key drops.

Irwin's the leading receiver this year. I'd put his troubles -- whatever they are -- on the rest of the passing offense's.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - BostonCard - 11-20-2016

Raise your hand if you predicted that Michael Rector would be our third leading receiver.

BC

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-20-2016

That being said, on Arcega-Whiteside -- he's had one of the most impressive freshman years for a receiver in the Harbaugh/Shaw era. Here's the leaderboard:

Austin Hooper: 499 yards, 2 TDs
Michael Rector: 431 yards, 3 TD
Ty Montgomery: 350 yards
Arcega-Whiteside: 344 yards, 5 TDs
Bryce Love: 250 yards 1 TD
Zach Ertz: 190 yards, 5 TD
Trent Irwin: 150 yards, 0 TD
Greg Taboada: 136 yards, 2 TD
Eric Cotton: 128 yards, 1 TD
Anthony Wilkerson: 47 yards
Stepfan Taylor: 43 yards
Ty Gaffney: 39 yards
Barry Sanders: 36 yards
Remound Wright: 35 yards
Levine Toilolo: 27 yards (injury-shortened)
Kodi Whitfield: 13 yards
Andrew Luck: 11 yards
Devin Cajuste: 7 yards
Jordan Pratt: 2 yards

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - JJJ - 11-20-2016

(11-20-2016, 09:58 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:That being said, on Arcega-Whiteside -- he's had one of the most impressive freshman years for a receiver in the Harbaugh/Shaw era. Here's the leaderboard:

Austin Hooper: 499 yards, 2 TDs
Michael Rector: 431 yards, 3 TD
Ty Montgomery: 350 yards
Arcega-Whiteside: 344 yards, 5 TDs
Bryce Love: 250 yards 1 TD
Zach Ertz: 190 yards, 5 TD
Trent Irwin: 150 yards, 0 TD
Greg Taboada: 136 yards, 2 TD
Eric Cotton: 128 yards, 1 TD
Anthony Wilkerson: 47 yards
Stepfan Taylor: 43 yards
Ty Gaffney: 39 yards
Barry Sanders: 36 yards
Remound Wright: 35 yards
Levine Toilolo: 27 yards (injury-shortened)
Kodi Whitfield: 13 yards
Andrew Luck: 11 yards
Devin Cajuste: 7 yards
Jordan Pratt: 2 yards

Where's Christian McCaffrey???

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - 82lsju - 11-20-2016

(11-20-2016, 10:14 PM)JJJ link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=16136.msg180069#msg180069 date=1479704282]
That being said, on Arcega-Whiteside -- he's had one of the most impressive freshman years for a receiver in the Harbaugh/Shaw era. Here's the leaderboard:

Austin Hooper: 499 yards, 2 TDs
Michael Rector: 431 yards, 3 TD
Ty Montgomery: 350 yards
Arcega-Whiteside: 344 yards, 5 TDs
Bryce Love: 250 yards 1 TD
Zach Ertz: 190 yards, 5 TD
Trent Irwin: 150 yards, 0 TD
Greg Taboada: 136 yards, 2 TD
Eric Cotton: 128 yards, 1 TD
Anthony Wilkerson: 47 yards
Stepfan Taylor: 43 yards
Ty Gaffney: 39 yards
Barry Sanders: 36 yards
Remound Wright: 35 yards
Levine Toilolo: 27 yards (injury-shortened)
Kodi Whitfield: 13 yards
Andrew Luck: 11 yards
Devin Cajuste: 7 yards
Jordan Pratt: 2 yards

Where's Christian McCaffrey???
[/quote]

17 receptions for 251 yards and 2 TDs

http://www.espn.com/college-football/player/_/id/3117251/christian-mccaffrey

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - fullmetal - 11-20-2016

Whoo, let's see if I can remember my memories of the game from yesterday as well as talking points from reading through the thread just now--

a. No sacks on Webb--yeah Webb is good, and good enough to avoid those/throw the ball away early enough.Â And the Stanford defense is too smart to earn late hit/roughing the passer penalties.Â Which brings me to...

b. Designed delayed screens killed us.Â I remember at least three of them that ate up something like 15 yds each.Â If anything, we were too eager to go for the sack and failed to notice three burly blockers plus a speedy receiver/back heading the other way unimpeded...

c. CMac is amazing.Â If only our QBs had the vision and sense for the game that he does.Â I don't know how he comes back next year except as a magnanimous donation of a year of his life to the hopes and joys of Stanford football fans.Â I expect his NFL career to successfully follow in the footsteps of Sproles, random Patriots scatback, etc.

d. Chryst looks like a raw version of Hogan, minus the touch on the deep ball.Â Which is to say, good enough.Â Not sure why he overthrows, but he's capable of impressing by the bowl game if he focuses during his December practice weeks.

e. Rector should be credited with the penalty yardage that he draws from opposing defenses.

f. Didn't anyone else hear Webb curse at his receiver during a miscommunication/bad pass in the red zone for kal?Â Any details?

g. If kal's receivers could catch consistently, the game would have been much closer.Â The Stanford defense benefited from some drops.

h. kal's offense was hard to tackle, apparently.Â To their credit, they came to play.Â Unfortunately for them, so did CMac.

i. The kal onside kick didn't even travel 10 yards.

j. I don't think that was simultaneous possession in the endzone.Â I'm pretty sure Stanford had the ball first...they should look at whose shoulders were closer to the QB.Â But that's a referee judgment call, I suppose.

k. I'm surprised there was that much trouble in communication between the head referee and Shaw when it came to penalty declining situations.Â I don't think I've ever seen so much pantomiming before in my life :)

l. #99 for kal was a great pass-catching fullback.Â I'm not sure why Stanford can't keep a few plays like that featuring a mobile Ogre with hands.

m. I hope JJAW's shoulder/arm is okay :( He did not look too well after the big play down the left sideline.Â (Note: Chryst can hit those deep throws...sometimes!)

n. GaryT, I saw you!

o. Win streak at 7--next year is the big one!

p. Why was it hard to consistently defend the run?Â kal really pulled out the stops and was able to move the ball at times.Â

q. Great overall performance.Â Rice is the taper to the season now, and the team should use the long prep before the bowl announcements to work on fundamentals and get healthy.Â Fry Rice!

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-21-2016

(11-20-2016, 04:30 PM)terry link Wrote:[quote author=HisKneeWasDown link=topic=16136.msg179731#msg179731 date=1479587141]
Forecast clear for kickoff...

https://weather.com/weather/radar/interactive/l/USCA0087:1:US?layer=radarConus&zoom=8

That has to be the worst weather forecast of the year.
[/quote]

Yes. Yes it was.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - HisKneeWasDown - 11-21-2016

(11-20-2016, 11:23 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:b. Designed delayed screens killed us.Â I remember at least three of them that ate up something like 15 yds each.Â If anything, we were too eager to go for the sack and failed to notice three burly blockers plus a speedy receiver/back heading the other way unimpeded...

I've never played, but one always wondered what's going thru a D-lineman's head. "Ooh, that dumb O-Lineman just left me unblocked with a clear path to the QB <drool>" I'm guessing it's always his job to just rush/contain the QB. So maybe it's up to the linebackers to sniff out a screen?

Quote:f. Didn't anyone else hear Webb curse at his receiver during a miscommunication/bad pass in the red zone for kal?Â Any details?

No but I noticed on that play one receiver ran to the flat and one team deep and Webb thru right between them. Clearly one of the WRs ran the wrong route.

Quote:l. #99 for kal was a great pass-catching fullback.Â I'm not sure why Stanford can't keep a few plays like that featuring a mobile Ogre with hands.

I miss Owen Marecic.

Quote:m. I hope JJAW's shoulder/arm is okay :( He did not look too well after the big play down the left sideline.Â (Note: Chryst can hit those deep throws...sometimes!)

That was scary. It looked like he was shaking out his arm while jogging to the sideline, as if it were just a stinger. Hopefully nothing bad.

Quote:p. Why was it hard to consistently defend the run?Â kal really pulled out the stops and was able to move the ball at time

Yeah that was weird. I thought Bear Raid was a passing attack? I was surprised at how balanced it looked, although looking at their stats it was just 90 yards rushing. Maybe when you defend cal you just sell out against the pass?

Quote:Fry Rice!

I hope this isn't a trap game....

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - fullmetal - 11-21-2016

I remember Mike Leach's Air Raid teams and some of Kelly's Oregon spread teams lining up with more distance between the OL (line splits), which would give the RB more room to run.Â I'd need to see Stanford's and kal's line splits to make a judgment.Â But I think kal's RB also seemed pretty short (and quick) and might have been harder to see/track down.

There's pretty much no chance that Rice pulls out a road upset against Stanford.Â Rice lost to Western Kentucky this season--badly.Â It would take a deliberate lack of effort for the offense not to pile on the CMac stats against Rice.Â Plus Rice has never faced anyone like CMac, my choice for best collegiate football player last year and possibly this year too.Â (I saw him listed as #4 on someone's "list.")

What worries me is that JJAW hurt his arm twice during this game, but if it hasn't been mentioned by the team, then I guess all's well.

Can't wait to set the BG win streak record next year ;)

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - CTcard - 11-21-2016

(11-20-2016, 11:23 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:b. Designed delayed screens killed us.Â I remember at least three of them that ate up something like 15 yds each.Â If anything, we were too eager to go for the sack and failed to notice three burly blockers plus a speedy receiver/back heading the other way unimpeded...

My first thought on those plays was, "Well - Dikes watches film".
Oregon also was very successful on those plays as we consistently either didn't recognize them or nobody had responsibility for the back. Of course it might not be film, it may be just what cal does - I haven't watched them enough to know.

We did finally get them on one of those towards the end - Barton blew one up while he was on his personal mini-tear.

Quote:c. CMac is amazing.Â ... I don't know how he comes back next year except as a magnanimous donation of a year of his life to the hopes and joys of Stanford football fans.Â I expect his NFL career to successfully follow in the footsteps of Sproles, random Patriots scatback, etc.

Well, if he comes back it won't be because he doesn't have opportunities, it will be more along the lines of Luck returning because he wants to be with his mates and get a degree. I have never heard Christian make a comment indicating what he might wish to do - have heard his Dad indicate that a player should consider going when they have a shot.

Quote:d. Chryst looks like a raw version of Hogan, minus the touch on the deep ball.Â

To me, the feel for the team is quite different with Chryst versus Hogan. Not quite sure why, I can see lots of details where they are similar.
The one thing I would note, in his first year Hogan was terrible on the deep ball and completed most of his passes within about 5 yards of the LOS. Year 2 that changed dramatically, in 2013 it almost seemed that the deep ball was his most common throw.

Quote:i. The kal onside kick didn't even travel 10 yards.

Yes, but at least at the time I was thinking that Stanford touched it first, which would negate the <10 yards thing.
Haven't rewatched yet, so not certain.

Quote:m. I hope JJAW's shoulder/arm is okay :( He did not look too well after the big play down the left sideline.Â (Note: Chryst can hit those deep throws...sometimes!)

Was rather concerned to see him limp off twice favouring that arm. On the other hand, I think he ended up on the field again later on (though again not sure).

Quote:p. Why was it hard to consistently defend the run?Â kal really pulled out the stops and was able to move the ball at times.Â

Cal ran for 90 yards at 3.8 yards per pop. Not bad when you are focussed on stopping the passing game.

But cal was able to move the ball most times. It was not a stellar outing for our defense. In particular, our usually reliable tackling seemed to disappear. I guess the cal players got slippery when wet like the ball.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - washingtonismoney - 11-21-2016

A big part of the problem was the third string ILBers -- I believe they were on the field for 21 of Cal's 31 points. Unfortunately I don't have a way of easily researching this, but it seems like the opposing offense is way more likely to score when the Branch/Perez combo is out there.

Re: Stanford-×ÉÉ game thread - needle - 11-21-2016

Quote:Â Unfortunately I don't have a way of easily researching this, but it seems like the opposing offense is way more likely to score when the Branch/Perez combo is out there.

Not writing to single out any players in particular, but this has been the oddest thing. I'm not sure I've ever seen a team play a whole season rotating inside linebackers this way, three distinct pairings with each on the field for a single possession. It seems like an experiment that has gone on far too long, though I see an overall uptick in Barton's play that perhaps will lead to his emergence next year as a bonafide starter.