On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . .

On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - 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: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . (/thread-14322.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - BostonCard - 09-18-2017

You can't have it both ways.Â If the coaches are going to get blamed for bad seasons, then they ought to get credit for the good ones.

And ultimately the coaches are responsible.Â If we have a QB deficiency, then they had to do a better job in recruiting and/or developing a QB.Â But if they have a once-in-a-lifetime running back, an outland trophy winner, and an NFL back-up quality quarterback... well the coaches deserve credit for recruiting and or developing them too.

My point is that it is clearly possible for Shaw/Bloomgren/Pritchard to coach a dynamic, efficient offense.Â So clearly the offensive philosophy is not incompatible with these desirable traits.Â It is also fair to note that the offense's deficiencies in bad years.Â As I said earlier in this thread, I think to the extent possible we should see what can be done to limit the downside during our bad offensive years.

More broadly, did we have an outlier of a year in 2015, or do we just have an offensive that produces a lot of variance in results (years where it is phenomenal and years where it is putrid).Â And how much of the "peak" would we be willing to give up in order to have a higher trough?

BC

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - Snorlax94 - 09-18-2017

Well, I would say I agree a tiny bit with this thread, but generally, would have deep concerns about following its recommendations. Though I would add, every time a team loses across the country, fans on the fan boards are going to howl, and recommend different play calls, that heads roll, etc etc. And I complain also, so while I think it's perfectly naturally to be critical (we are fans, and it's Monday), I am a bit more subdued.

I have two primary concerns about the suggestions (replacing so many coaches):
1) We will get outbid. While Stanford consistently ranks as the #1 fundraising university for its general funds, we are well-aware that other colleges and conferences consistently rake in way more sports cash from TV deals and stadium attendance. My recollection is that Big 10 and SEC schools may be pulling in the range of $10-$20M more per year from TV deals, and some conferences seem to pull in about 20-40,000 fans per game more than the Pac-12, which, at $100 a ticket, could be another $20M a year (plus their fans donate a lot more for those seats!). Plus, Stanford also seems much more committed to its breadth of sports; for example, it seems to spend more than many complying with Title IX. Sure, Washington, USC, and at times Oregon seem to do fine, but I bet their athletic departments get more money. Or, let's say the #1 O Line coach from the NFL, the #1 D Line coach from the NFL, the #1 quarterbacks coach from the NFL and the #1 O Coordinator from the NFL all suddenly decided they'd like to spend their remaining days coaching in college. And let's say Michigan, Alabama, Texas A&M and Stanford all start bidding. How many do you think we'd get?

Sometimes, Stanford will be able to spend more on a particular opportunity, but in general, I think we have to accept that for the foreseeable medium-term future, we are going to have to make do with a little less $ than SEC, Big 10, possibly Big-12 and some other large public schools. (Many of you would immediately point out we just lost to a Mountain West school. Yes, and if we went under .500 against a broad sampling of MW schools, then I would have to agree with you).

2) Given our financial constraints, there is a fine balance that has to be struck. I think most programs with our situation and resources wouldn't be able to hire a superstar every time. And while I would agree that the data indicates Stanford O has under-performed its talent lately, let's say Bloomgren left. I don't know if we could necessarily have a better O coordinator and O line coach. They probably exist out there, but great offensive line coaches (and great O coordinators) are in brobdingnagian demand. Schools and NFL teams work hard to keep the good ones happy. I don't think it's a slam dunk that we necessarily get someone better. And while Stanford has often looked to its own ranks to promote an assistant when a coordinator leaves (and some have complained), cultures that promote from within have greater continuity, they can have more loyalty, and they can help attract better lower-level coaches (because of the possibility of promotion).

Anyway, Stanford gets another coach this off-season, so there will be an opportunity to re-balance. If I remember correctly, did Shaw say he'd get an O-Line coach? So, we'll see.

I would add, one area where Shaw has yet to prove himself is to show his ability to completely build up a staff. He's done it piecemeal over the years, and we've gotten very little glimpse into it because he promotes from within so much. Over time (and in the middle of a season, I would argue, is a bad time) we will see what he can do. And part of a top manager's job over time includes recruiting great hires, managing existing hires, and, when necessary, firing weak performers. That is part of being a manager. Over time, I am hopeful Shaw will grow in these areas and become a strong personnel leader, but he didn't need this as much early-on because he inherited such a strong staff (from, admittedly, an exceptional -- but insane -- organization-builder).

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - Hulk01 - 09-18-2017

'I can't b---- to watch my DVR to verify but while in the stadium it seemed like SDSU had 2nd and 3 almost every time, while we had 2nd and 9.'

Our average second down was second and 8.1.Â Theirs was second and 6.2.
But they had many more second downs:Â 25 to our 13.

Our average third down was third and 5.7Â Theirs was third and 8.1.

BC, To Make Shaw`s System Successful When The Opponents Are Undermanned - AncientCityIndian - 09-18-2017

you could play a QB with one leg.

To defeat a good team with talent close to or superior to your own, you need a mobile QB to get away from the stacked box.Â

Rocky Long recruited the right type of QB who could roll away from the pressure and kill us (21 of 29).Â We had an immobile QB and plays not designed to go out of the box on rollouts.Â They held the ball 41 minutes+ because they could make 1st downs.Â Our QB stayed within the tackle box and got pressured all night and was singularly and decidedly inaccurate (9 of 20, many key throws missed when it really counted)

Long understands Shaw`s O better than Shaw and won this game when the QB was recruited years ago and when he created the proper game plan.

We were successful when we had mobile QB`sÂ (Luck and Hogan) .Â Our opponents are getting better and even if we have better talent as we did by far on Saturday, we willÂ lose if Shaw insists on running a 1960`s offense in the year 2017 and being outcoached due to a stubborn belief that he can overpower the opponent when he cannot.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - BostonCard - 09-18-2017

Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Re: BC, To Make Shaw`s System Successful When The Opponents Are Undermanned - Goose - 09-18-2017

(09-18-2017, 03:38 PM)AncientCityIndian link Wrote:We were successful when we had mobile QB`sÂ (Luck and Hogan) .Â Our opponents are getting better and even if we have better talent as we did by far on Saturday, we willÂ lose if Shaw insists on running a 1960`s offense in the year 2017 and being outcoached due to a stubborn belief that he can overpower the opponent when he cannot.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - AncientCityIndian - 09-18-2017

I only remember one designed play where our QB was to rollout.Â I believe SDSU ran 6 or 7.

Re: BC, To Make Shaw`s System Successful When The Opponents Are Undermanned - BostonCard - 09-18-2017

(09-18-2017, 04:07 PM)Goose link Wrote:[quote author=AncientCityIndian link=topic=17429.msg201419#msg201419 date=1505774328]
We were successful when we had mobile QB`sÂ (Luck and Hogan) .Â Our opponents are getting better and even if we have better talent as we did by far on Saturday, we willÂ lose if Shaw insists on running a 1960`s offense in the year 2017 and being outcoached due to a stubborn belief that he can overpower the opponent when he cannot.

I think you destroyed your own argument in consecutive sentences. Shaw was the coach in those "mobile QB" years. Both Chryst and Burns we both supposed to be good runners, particularly Burns, so it is not that we aren't looking for mobile guys. I think it is pretty clear that Chryst isn't mobile ATM. Probably, he is not healthy, but I don't know for sure. If the QB isn't running, it isn't because we don't want to. In fact, we have subbed Burns in to do just that.
[/quote]

There is a difference between putting a QB in for designed run plays (either where he is a blocker, as Burns was against SDSU) or as the runner (as he did against USC, if I recall) or in a read option, versus having a QB move out of the pocket for the purposes of a throw.Â I agree we have not seen much in the way of roll outs, and Chryst hasn't done much to scramble or move around either in the pocket or out of the pocket in response to pressure.Â The only play I remember was the bootleg touchdown pass to JJ Arcega Whiteside against USC.

That aside, I don't think that the coaches are not moving Chryst because they want a pure pocket passer to be in there.

BC

Re: BC, To Make Shaw`s System Successful When The Opponents Are Undermanned - Goose - 09-18-2017

(09-18-2017, 04:17 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:That aside, I don't think that the coaches are not moving Chryst because they want a pure pocket passer to be in there.

BC

I agree with that. I think putting Burns in is a feeble attempt at getting some kind of run threat from the QB. He did complete one pass as I recall. Not the same as a passer who can evade the sack and scramble if he has to, but probably all we have ATM.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - phxfan - 09-18-2017

(09-18-2017, 03:52 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Only a fool plays said quarterback to start the season.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - BostonCard - 09-18-2017

(09-18-2017, 07:43 PM)phxfan link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17429.msg201423#msg201423 date=1505775139]
Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Only a fool plays said quarterback to start the season.
[/quote]

I don't know that I would go so far as to call our coaching staff and our orthopedic surgeons fools, but I did think the recovery time was a bit hurried, given the injury.

BC

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - JohnR34231 - 09-19-2017

(09-18-2017, 07:43 PM)phxfan link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17429.msg201423#msg201423 date=1505775139]
Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - OutsiderFan - 09-19-2017

Joe Thornton PLAYED in the Stanley Cup playoffs with a torn ACL.Â He had surgery and is now skating in Sharks training camp.Â It seems ACL recovery has taken a few leaps forward in recent years.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - oldalum - 09-19-2017

FWIW, Vandy's former QB (older brother of UW's current backup I believe) played and won 3 games with a torn ACL a few years ago. IIRC he only missed the end-of-season bowl game because he wanted to have surgery early enough to have a chance of being drafted. I suspect the knee brace that is used post-surgery to protect the ACL from being re-torn is what limits mobility the most. Soccer players like USWNT's Rapinoe, who don't wear the rigid brace that I see Chryst wearing, seem to have excellent mobility and speed post-ACL surgery.

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/austyn-carta-samuels-went-3-0-on-torn-acl/

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - phxfan - 09-19-2017

(09-19-2017, 01:49 AM)JPRI link Wrote:[quote author=phxfan link=topic=17429.msg201462#msg201462 date=1505788994]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17429.msg201423#msg201423 date=1505775139]
Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - Mick - 09-19-2017

(09-19-2017, 07:27 AM)oldalum link Wrote:FWIW, Vandy's former QB (older brother of UW's current backup I believe) played and won 3 games with a torn ACL a few years ago. IIRC he only missed the end-of-season bowl game because he wanted to have surgery early enough to have a chance of being drafted. I suspect the knee brace that is used post-surgery to protect the ACL from being re-torn is what limits mobility the most. Soccer players like USWNT's Rapinoe, who don't wear the rigid brace that I see Chryst wearing, seem to have excellent mobility and speed post-ACL surgery.

https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/2013/austyn-carta-samuels-went-3-0-on-torn-acl/

It's because he was a Bell and tough as WCAL nails...Â :P

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - JohnR34231 - 09-19-2017

(09-19-2017, 10:01 AM)phxfan link Wrote:[quote author=JPRI link=topic=17429.msg201480#msg201480 date=1505810960]
[quote author=phxfan link=topic=17429.msg201462#msg201462 date=1505788994]
[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17429.msg201423#msg201423 date=1505775139]
Our QB is also 9 months removed from an ACL tear.Â Even under the best of circumstances, that will decrease a QB's mobility.

BC

Only a fool plays said quarterback to start the season.
[/quote]

Unless you are a medical expert who has closely followed Keller Chryst's case, that strikes me as a bit of a reckless statement to make.
[/quote]

I'm not talking about just a medical decision, it's also a football decision making your statement incorrect.Â KC is clearly not ready to play yet.Â In 5-6 weeks maybe but for now we lost a winnable game and may lose more of them.
[/quote]

Oh I see. You attended all the preseason practices and clearly saw that KC was not ready to play.
He did fine in the first two games. The third was a game from hell for him, but stuff happens.

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - Hurlburt88 - 09-19-2017

I do suspect the coaches are hesitant to call running plays for KC right now due to the injury;Â I also suspect that they really feel he is our best option.Â What I now sincerely hope for is opening up the playbook and demonstrating success . . . as in my prediction this week, would be nice simply to "regress to the mean" on offense

Re: On mirrors, deck chairs, and things that go bump in the night . . . - VFRing98 - 09-19-2017

Last year's Colorado game was unwatchable. I sat in the blistering sun for the pre-Harbaugh years, and CU felt every bit as bad as that. It is baffling that Shaw and his staff is capable of creating such clunkers with some regularity, when they are also capable of creating offensive gems (though maybe with less regularity). Shaw's offenses are crazy and maddening.

I agree with the sentiment of Teejers' post. I feel, irrationally, that we should win every game with the talent we have. More realistically, I feel that we should be in every game. It's clear to me that it will be a good game this year if it's a competitive one.

Heard from a friend who works with some former players. Perhaps it's instructive that they are not blaming the coaching staff for the poor start. Surely their perspective has more value than mine, but I find it hard to agree.