The CardBoard
Bloomgren to Rice? - 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: Bloomgren to Rice? (/thread-15169.html)

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

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - CornFed - 12-13-2017

Also my first year at Stanford.  Randy Vataha had the quickest cut to the sideline I can ever remember seeing.  Throughout the game Plunkett would hit him over and over on that move and then there would come the inevitable pump fake and Vataha would turn it up.  Ralston had a sense of drama in his play-calling.  It was the most fun season I have ever had as football fan.

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - Hulk01 - 12-13-2017

Perhaps the most notable feature in that offense was its reliance on the running backs as receivers.  Howie Williams and Bubba Brown combined to average over five catches a game, and Brown averaged almost 18 yards a reception, a still almost unheard-of number for a running back.

And the QBs ran a lot.  Plunkett and Bunce combined averaged almost nine carries a game,

And finally, a vivid memory is how often we threw the swing pass to the tight side of the field, and at a time when the hash marks were even closer to their respective sidelines.  No one else used that play; it appeared to make no sense.  But it worked.

Vataha was a great leaper, hence the sobriquet, Randy the Rabbit. 


Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - JohnR34231 - 12-13-2017

(12-13-2017, 07:48 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:1969 was my first year at Stanford, so football is a vivid memory.

1.  My first game, the players got a nice cheer when they arrived on the field, but our band got a bigger one.
2.  We crushed the Northwest teams: three shutouts out of four.
3.  The playbook was thick with swing passes and bombs downfield.  Plunkett's bombs landed in the receivers' hands like butterflies.  He was remarkable to watch
4.  Lost to top ten Purdue with AA QB Mike Phipps by three (tw0?) and to top five U$C and star TB Clarence Davis on a last-minute, length of the field drive and field goal.  Tied UCLA and their star QB Gary Beban after missing a long, last second field goal.
5.  Other than Plunkett, the star that year was the Greatest Dolly of All Time, Cathleen Caballero.  Think Catherine Zeta-Jones.

Beban was gone from UCLA by 1969. 1967 was his last year.
Interesting that the player who made the winning catch from Phipps (Greg Fenner) ended up at Stanford Biz School and was a Silicon Valley executive for a number of years.

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - Phogge - 12-13-2017

One slight correction. Beban won the H in 1967. I believe the UCLA QB in '69 was Dennis Dummit.
I still think the '69 team was better than either of the RB teams.

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - JohnR34231 - 12-13-2017

(12-13-2017, 08:53 AM)Phogge link Wrote:One slight correction. Beban won the H in 1967. I believe the UCLA QB in '69 was Dennis Dummit.
I still think the '69 team was better than either of the RB teams.

Yeah, the '69 team was three plays away from being undefeated (and untied). The two point conversion pass against Purdue, the field goal by U$C, and the blocked field goal against UCLA.

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - Mick - 12-13-2017

(12-12-2017, 06:22 PM)teejers1 link Wrote:I consider myself very complimentary of Shaw in all of what he does head-coaching-wise, save one area (which happens to be one of the most visible to Joe Fan on game day).  But I guess when you're a vocal critic in one area, the Absolute Defenders are inclined to interpret comments in other areas through a different strainer.

As for the "riding the wave" comment which you term a backhanded compliment, do you not think Stanford is exceptionally hot right now?  Do you not think that Stanford got very warm (if not hot), football-wise, under Harbaugh?  Do you not think Shaw has done an admirable job recruiting in this warm/hot period to keep it so?  [As an aside, there are folks on TOS who bitch and moan about his recruiting, too . . . which I don't really get].

And to be very clear, I think Shaw is the kind of guy with the disposition and human-interaction skills that can keep the "hotness" going much longer than can the mercurial/tiring Harbaugh.  And I know which man I'd rather have coaching Stanford (hint:  it's not Harbaugh).

That about covers it.  Backhand, forehand, whateverhand.


Along those lines, I think it is a metaphysical certitude that Harbaugh will leave Michigan before Shaw leaves Stanford.

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - jacketree - 12-13-2017

Oh no, the 2001 offense was really good; I just don't understand what is so insanely different about it [scheme] to justify the pining in some (one?) quarters we read here.

I think 2001 was Willingham's best team by far, and the team consistently put up really big scores.  (Point Teejers.) Here are the total points in order; and the margins of victory, also in order, noting the two lists don't correlate by game. (That latter point is important in the grand scheme of things too.)

51              +27
51              +23
49              +16
48              +14
41              +10
39              +7
38              +7
35              +5
28              +4
21              -6
17              -10
14              -14

We should probably compare best to best.  I'm not sure what the consensus is on Shaw's best squad, and I'm tempted to use 2011 because I remember abject domination of games.  Some might say it is too soon after Harbaugh, so should we use 2015?  Let's just do this year, because both coaches are in their seventh season and the seasons are remarkably similar outside of the new divisional format and title game.  9-3 in 2001; 9-3 after 12 games in 2017. Even the general level of competition isn't that different.

62            +55
58            +42
49            +24
38            +18
34            +10
30            +8
24            +3
23            +3
21            +1
17            -3
17            -3
15            -18

2017 was capable of more dominant games than 2001 showed.  Offense plays into defense and ST and vice versa.  2017 was also capable of getting bogged down on offense more than 2001 showed.

Lastly I ended up watching the 2001 game against #5 UCLA on Youtube last night.  Honestly, it felt a little like watching the UW game this year.  There was even a backward pass (clearly backward in 2001) that UCLA housed to open the scoring.  Almost the same play they ran this year against USC, just to the other side.  So still scratching my head about what "going back to that offense" really means.  Just more plays every game?  Pretty close to the same stuff.  Granted they didn't use Ogre back then.  Still think that is Harbaugh being too cute.  Or maybe that was always a Shaw thing.

And just to round it out here is the list for 2011 with the same 12-game rule, since I was curious. Damn. Maybe someone slipped a digit and we should pine for the "2011 offense".  Hey Tavita was around for that, right?

65            +54
57            +44
56            +41
48            +30
45            +30
44            +27
44            +26
38            +25
37            +8
31            +7
30            +3
28            -23




Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - terry - 12-13-2017

(12-13-2017, 07:01 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=lex24 link=topic=18293.msg218110#msg218110 date=1513148571]
I remember 69. Plunkett. Vatsha. Bob Moore. Bubba Brown. Howie Williams Jackie Brown Hillary Shockley. Jack Lassiter. Jeff Siemon.. Don Parish. Dave Tipton. Pete Lazitich. John Sande. A great team. I still remember listening to Don Klein call Ron Ayalas FG. I burst into tears. 11.  But then in ‘70- “Plunkett Keeps His Promise.”  My all-time favorite Chron/Examiner Sports headline.

So tell us a little more. To us young'uns that is basically just a list of names.

Were the Rose Bowl teams the next two years really much better, or just better at picking their spots?
With all that offense, was the defense a problem? (Maybe not - I see they got three shut outs)
[/quote]

Stanford's 1969 offensive statistics benefitted by running a lot of plays. That offense averaged 84.1 plays per game, easily the most in Stanford history. That allowed the offense to rack up a lot of yards. As a point of comparison, Stanford's Andrew Luck offenses (2010 and 2011) averaged 70.3 and 71.9 plays per game. This year's offense averages 60.2 plays per game.

I'm not sure whether the high number of plays in 1969 was due to fast pace of play, different rules about stopping the clock, or what. Did Plunkett call his own plays? If so, maybe he was really quick at getting plays called and getting the ball snapped. The 1968 and 1970 offense rank 2nd and 6th in Stanford history in plays per game, so all of the Plunkett teams ran a relatively high number of plays.

Measured by yards per play, the 1969 offense would rank #10 in Stanford history at 5.8 yards per play. Stanford's top offenses in yards per play are:

2011  6.8
2010  6.7
2015  6.6
2009  6.5

The 1999 offense averaged 6.3 yards per play. The 2001 offense averaged 5.8 yards per play.

The statistical leaders in 1969:

Rushing
Bubba Brown - 588 yds, 4.6 yds/att
Howie Williams - 494 yds, 4.3 yds/att
Jackie Brown - 209 yds, 4.1 yds/att

Passing
Jim Plunkett - 197-336, 2,673 yds, 20 TD, 15 int

Receiving
Bob Moore - 38 rec, 476 yds
Randy Vataha - 35 rec, 691 yds
Jack Lasater - 34 rec, 515 yds
Howie Williams - 30 rec, 314 yds

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - Duck Tears - 12-13-2017

Turn and face the strange: Your 1969 Stanford Football ticket information (per that year's media guide)

Reserved Season tickets: $25

Non-Reserved Family Plan Season: $20 (2 adults, up to 3 children, either end section)

Non-Reserved Per-game: $3 (for UCLA, San Jose State, Washington Oregon).

Reserved Per-game: $5 (for all home games except Cal)

If you watched the wild 1969 Big Game in person, you paid $6.

Ticket Agencies: Stanford's Department of Athletics, Roos/Atkins stores, Macy's, Carroll & Bishop, the Book Mark In Fremont Hub Shopping Center, among others.

Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes...


Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - Hulk01 - 12-13-2017

Terry, thanks for the digging.

College football games used to have more plays.  The 2008 rule changes--to a running 40 second play clock and only brief stoppages on out-of-bounds plays--sped up the clock and cut down on the number of plays.  And back in Plunkett's day, a 55% completion percentage was pretty good, which meant there were a lot of incomplete passes to stop the clock.  In 1969. Stanford and its opponents averaged over 29 incomplete passes a game.  This year, that number was just over 22.

My memory, too, is that huddles were shorter and Plunkett didn't take much time before the snap.  if so, that sped up our pace and led us to running more plays, too. 

Re: Bloomgren to Rice? - CowboyIndian - 12-13-2017

I believe Plunkett also called his own plays.