Post-game thoughts - 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: Post-game thoughts (/thread-16326.html)

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - ADPinWDC - 09-02-2018

Some studio pundits say with WASH crunched by AUBN that Pac12 is OUT of Playoffs. Now STAN or USC need to run the table.
Many in Media do not believe any Pac12 team will finish with 1 loss or better. And NDAM survived MICH, so they are in the hunt.
Let's see how teams move from here... Starting Pecking Order for Bowl slots after Week 1:
ROSE: WASH vs B1G runner-up (OHST or WISC) 
ALAMO: USC vs OKST (Big12) 
HOLIDAY: STAN vs NORW or IOWA (B1G)... NEBR? with Scott Frost.
SUN: UTAH vs LOUV (ACC) 
SF BOWL: OREG vs B1G middling 
CHEEZ-IT (was Cactus): WAST vs BAYL (Big12) 
ARIZ BOWL: AZST vs SDSU(MWest) 
VEGAS: CAL vs FRES
Both USC and STAN get a shot at NDAM, which hurts or helps Pac12 -- if NDAM wins both of those, then Pac12 is OUT for sure. Beating Our Lady burnishes the resume. For Cardinal to move up, we need to beat USC, OREG, NDAM, and then WASH. If we do then ROSES. Tall order with 3 of those on the road, but we like 'em tough. Stanford opened a 4 point Home Dog to Brush-heads.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - Hulk01 - 09-03-2018

Regarding the post that we might have benefited from running more fullback sets

We ran seven plays with a standard (no Ogre) fullback set:

2, 6, 1, -4, -1, 1, 1.

Seven plays, six yards.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - OutsiderFan - 09-03-2018

Really? Talking about bowl game projections after one freaking week?  Who freaking cares?

The Pac-12 is not out of playoff contention. That notion is as dumb as claiming any player is out of the Voldemort running already. Only more than 90% of the season remains to be played.  Arizona State has a big game against Michigan State this week.  Colorado has a big one at Nebraska.  Let's see how those games play out before burying the Pac-12.  Though UCLA plays at Oklahoma and that would typically be a legit measure of the best teams of the Big and Pac, not so much this year it would seem.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - Velodoc - 09-03-2018

After re-viewing game on TV, the O-line did open primary holes (not obvious to me watching the game live)...but the holes were filled quickly by hard-hitting, sure-tackling safeties. As a previous poster said, SDSU "sold out" to stop our run and, owing to a new flexibility by DS (or TP), lost big-time to our passing game.  

I'm optimistic that our O-line is pretty damn good.  Do need better blocks (or even screens) by certain WR's, though.  I think our doubts about O-line will be erased after the SC game.  

It's going to be a good year.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - cardcrimson - 09-03-2018

(09-02-2018, 10:37 PM)ADPinWDC Wrote:  Some studio pundits say with WASH crunched by AUBN that Pac12 is OUT of Playoffs.

Crunched by Auburn? Washington should have won that game, their first three drives in the second half went in the redzone, two inside the ten, I think. Three points. A fumble by Browning on an attempted pitch, a missed field goal, and a field goal after a touchdown was called back because a stupid pick play by the receiver. Three points on three drives.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - JPR36 - 09-03-2018

(09-03-2018, 08:25 AM)Velodoc Wrote:  After re-viewing game on TV, the O-line did open primary holes (not obvious to me watching the game live)...but the holes were filled quickly by hard-hitting, sure-tackling safeties. As a previous poster said, SDSU "sold out" to stop our run and, owing to a new flexibility by DS (or TP), lost big-time to our passing game.  

I'm optimistic that our O-line is pretty damn good.  Do need better blocks (or even screens) by certain WR's, though.  I think our doubts about O-line will be erased after the SC game.  

It's going to be a good year.

I have a feeling U$C is also going to sell out to stop Love and put their best CB against JJAW in hopes that he will be able to cover him one on one. Hopefully he can't, or if he can we will have success going to our other receivers.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - CTcard - 09-03-2018

(09-03-2018, 08:42 AM)JPR36 Wrote:  I have a feeling U$C is also going to sell out to stop Love and put their best CB against JJAW in hopes that he will be able to cover him one on one. Hopefully he can't, or if he can we will have success going to our other receivers.

I suspect that $C won't do so, at least not to the extent SDSU did. 

First of all, $C has a long history of playing two deep safeties (as do we). 
Secondly, I would suspect that $C believes that they can stand up to us, man on man. SDSU clearly didn't think so. 

I just watched a bit of last year's game. $C was playing us mostly straight up, with of course a tendency for the safeties to be looking into the backfield. And that was last year when we had a more suspect QB and pass game. 

I suspect we'll see two-deep safeties on standard downs most of the time, perhaps occasionally one of the two often crashing down pre-snap.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - winflop - 09-03-2018

Washington was by no means "crunched" nor was Auburn's win "decisive" as described an ESPN studio host. UW's awful red zone execution cost them the game.

The game was played in a supposedly neutral site that was <200 miles from Auburn and where about 10% of the tickets were available to UW.

That being said, for a Pac-12 team to make the playoff it will need to be 12-1 at worst. And even then it's not a sure thing.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - BostonCard - 09-05-2018

Nice breakdown by Stanford football about the protection Hogan Costello got:

Quote:San Diego State’s #18 tries to bull rush senior running back Bryce Love, but watch how Bryce stones him without giving up any ground. (It does not make the box score, but this was Bryce’s best pass protection game of his career—hands down.) Next watch sophomore left tackle Walker Little, whose defender stunts to try and find an open pass rush lane. Walker does exactly what he is supposed to do, pushing the defender to junior left guard Devery Hamilton, and the Aztecs have nowhere to go.

And this is JJ (I think on the two-point conversion)



The defender doesn't stand a chance in that play.

Trivia question from the newsletter: Stanford has five former tight ends in the NFL.  Name them.


BC

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - washingtonismoney - 09-05-2018

Hogan, eh? I mean I'd rather play for Stanford than the Browns...

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - BostonCard - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 12:05 PM)throwaway Wrote:  Hogan, eh? I mean I'd rather play for Stanford than the Browns...

Stanford's offensive line is better than the Brown's.  But Hogan is now playing for the Broncos.

BC

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - CTcard - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 11:53 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Nice breakdown by Stanford football about the protection Hogan Costello got:
…
And this is JJ (I think on the two-point conversion)
The defender doesn't stand a chance in that play.

That TD was the prettiest play that Stanford ran in the entire game I think. The pass protection is covered in your quotation. It hard to get a good view on the TV footage, but JJAW ran an excellent route, faking the SDSU guy out of his shoes to end up almost 10 yards open on a 20 yard route. Costello delivered an excellent ball, which was fairly easy given the cleared path given by the OL but he did place the ball just over the retreating LBer and right into JJ's numbers (who jumped, but didn't have to).  

The two point conversion was the epitome of the JJAW box out, like the late TD versus OSU last year. 
My 10 year old watched with me and laughed at that play, saying it looked like when he was trying to defend me but was simply too small to get around me. So, literally a man amongst boys.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - OL84 - 09-05-2018

My two big concerns:

Our ILBs got crushed on straight up run plays.  BO had some great highlights but did not come off blocks up the middle.  Fortunately, Lance saw it early and adjusted, bringing more heat and more bodies in the box.  From there on we handled their O.

My personal pet peeve:  The O line did not block as badly as the Love numbers would suggest.  Look at the formations, D front and down and distance of those plays.  They played their Aztec D with a freeman up the middle and he filled enormous holes opened by the line.  Shaw ran against numbers, once again.  It's satisfying when it works but mind-numbing when it doesn't.   SDSU dared us to ran at those fronts and we kept doing it, just as in prior years.  Shaw admitted post-game he was "stubborn" about running it and then went to the pass game.  But it's not just run vs. pass.  It's using sets and personnel to make the D defend the whole field.  While our pass game eventually made them pay for running the Aztec safety and LBs at the line, the number of times we hit our head against the wall was truly remarkable.  Against better pass defenses we will need to run from more diverse sets and circumstances.  For some support, see SI's post-game take:

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/09/01/stanford-san-diego-state-jj-arcega-whiteside-bryce-love

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - BostonCard - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 04:16 PM)OL84 Wrote:  My two big concerns:

Our ILBs got crushed on straight up run plays.  BO had some great highlights but did not come off blocks up the middle.  Fortunately, Lance saw it early and adjusted, bringing more heat and more bodies in the box.  From there on we handled their O.

My personal pet peeve:  The O line did not block as badly as the Love numbers would suggest.  Look at the formations, D front and down and distance of those plays.  They played their Aztec D with a freeman up the middle and he filled enormous holes opened by the line.  Shaw ran against numbers, once again.  It's satisfying when it works but mind-numbing when it doesn't.   SDSU dared us to ran at those fronts and we kept doing it, just as in prior years.  Shaw admitted post-game he was "stubborn" about running it and then went to the pass game.  But it's not just run vs. pass.  It's using sets and personnel to make the D defend the whole field.  While our pass game eventually made them pay for running the Aztec safety and LBs at the line, the number of times we hit our head against the wall was truly remarkable.  Against better pass defenses we will need to run from more diverse sets and circumstances.  For some support, see SI's post-game take:

https://www.si.com/college-football/2018/09/01/stanford-san-diego-state-jj-arcega-whiteside-bryce-love

OL, I appreciate your thoughts, but doesn't the fact that SDSU defended the run with cover 0 even on clear pass situations (third and long) when we had clear pass formations (3 and 4 wide receiver sets, no fullback), suggest that we weren't going to get SDSU to "cover the whole field" even when it was clear we were going elsewhere?  I mean, if you subtract the ballcarrier and the quarterback, plus four wide receivers in one-on-one coverage, then we are left with four offensive linemen trying to block seven players, none of whom showed much of a concern with retreating into pass coverage.

I think the only thing we could do to get them to defend the whole field is to keep passing until they dared us to run it, and they never did.  You can rightfully criticize Shaw for not turning to the pass earlier in the game, but I don't think spreading the field and running out of pass formations would have helped much.

BC

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - Goose - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 05:20 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  I think the only thing we could do to get them to defend the whole field is to keep passing until they dared us to run it, and they never did.  You can rightfully criticize Shaw for not turning to the pass earlier in the game, but I don't think spreading the field and running out of pass formations would have helped much.

BC

You are exactly correct. Rocky Long is a smart coach. He knew that there was exactly one way that SDSU could win. That was to play cover 0 always and hope we couldn't execute in the passing game. Last year, it worked. Chryst couldn't hit open guys and JJAW didn't play, as I recall. If they play us more "conventionally", it opens up the run, which is what we want to do anyway. So, play cover 0, run blitz, and hope that if we pass, either their blitz becomes a pass blitz and gets there or we can't execute. Last year, they played somewhat more conventionally part of the time and Love got a TD. This year, they weren't even going to let that happen. It didn't. That strategy almost worked. If our defense hadn't played way better than I think many of us feared, we could have lost the game, or it could have been much closer anyway. What would have happened if we had last years passing game? Not pretty to think about. We didn't adjust rapidly, which we probably should have. I think it was somewhat disbelief, as in "They can't play cover 0 all the time. We will pop one soon". Well, yes they could.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - newguy - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 04:16 PM)OL84 Wrote:  Our ILBs got crushed on straight up run plays.  BO had some great highlights but did not come off blocks up the middle.  

our inside linebackers did indeed get crushed on straight up run plays.
for me, this is a major concern against Southern Cal.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - AcesUp - 09-05-2018

(09-05-2018, 11:53 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  Trivia question from the newsletter: Stanford has five former tight ends in the NFL.  Name them.

BC

Hewitt - Colts
Hooper - Falcons
Schultz - Dallas
Ertz - Eagles
Toilolo - Lions

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - Leftcoast - 09-06-2018

What happened to Fleener?  Should be room for him somewhere if New Orleans has moved on, right?

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - CompSci87 - 09-06-2018

(09-06-2018, 01:41 AM)Leftcoast Wrote:  What happened to Fleener?  Should be room for him somewhere if New Orleans has moved on, right?

Lingering concussion symptoms. I imagine he may retire. Not with a team currently.

---

RE: Post-game thoughts - Hulk01 - 09-06-2018

I've rewatched the game and strongly disagree re our linebackers: I did not see them getting crushed.  They were congesting one gap and leaving the other open. 

Gap issues and some missed tackles by our defensive backs: those seem fixable.  Getting overpowered would be another, bigger, problem.

---