Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - 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: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... (/thread-15314.html)
+- 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: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... (/thread-15314.html)
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - martyup - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:36 PM)Stymie link Wrote:Hubris leads inevitably to nemesis. The last time I saw that at Stanford was the Donald Kennedy fiasco.
Whose hubris?
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - martyup - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:36 PM)Stymie link Wrote:Hubris leads inevitably to nemesis. The last time I saw that at Stanford was the Donald Kennedy fiasco.
Whose hubris?
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - shinsengumi - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:36 PM)cardcrimson link Wrote:[quote author=Durty Nelly link=topic=18444.msg219632#msg219632 date=1514525637]
2 point loss. Way too much negativity. Had the chance to drive and win it. Injuries and SEC officials did not help.
Sorry. We were up by 18. No excuse to blow a lead like that, especially as we were completely dominating them. What happened? Their players got better all of a sudden?
[/quote]
TCU made better adjustments. They cleaned up their execution.
Our D reverted to the form that led to them being ranked in the bottom third in nation. Costello was off (why was he wearing a glove on the throwing hand - injury?). Healthy Walker Little was missed (separate note - AT Hall was jumping early on every snap, but never called)
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - shinsengumi - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:36 PM)cardcrimson link Wrote:[quote author=Durty Nelly link=topic=18444.msg219632#msg219632 date=1514525637]
2 point loss. Way too much negativity. Had the chance to drive and win it. Injuries and SEC officials did not help.
Sorry. We were up by 18. No excuse to blow a lead like that, especially as we were completely dominating them. What happened? Their players got better all of a sudden?
[/quote]
TCU made better adjustments. They cleaned up their execution.
Our D reverted to the form that led to them being ranked in the bottom third in nation. Costello was off (why was he wearing a glove on the throwing hand - injury?). Healthy Walker Little was missed (separate note - AT Hall was jumping early on every snap, but never called)
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
Not sure speed was really the problem. Stanford can keep up with Huskies, Ducks, blah blah blah. We've heard this idea before and it's been pretty silly whenever it's been raised. Check the 40 times of Skov or Chase Thomas and get back to me on speed. The problem is and was:
1) Not enough good linemen
2) Subpar tackling
If 1) isn't corrected by 2019 or so, there are big problems. Stanford started recruiting good linemen, in bulk, starting with Swann's class and things should work themselves out at that position by then. Usually linemen need time to mature so I wouldn't expect early miracles. But the pipeline is, theoretically, in fine shape.
2), on the other hand, is confounding. The defensive backs are capable of playing better than we've seen. Roughly the same crew was really good (when healthy) in 2016. They're a year older, but not a year better. Sometimes these things happen and I suppose they might progress to the mean. The linebackers were victimized by the poor coaching decision to shift Alfieri from outside linebacker, where he was very productive, to inside linebacker, where apparently he couldn't beat out Jordan Perez. (I know Alfieri was injured today, but still.) Add to that Sean Barton's injury and things became inconvenient.
So I expect some things will be better about the 2018 defense, and some things worse. My guess is that the improvements and declines will roughly even out and the unit will be mediocre again in 2018, at which point we'll blame David Shaw's handling of the offense all over again.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
Not sure speed was really the problem. Stanford can keep up with Huskies, Ducks, blah blah blah. We've heard this idea before and it's been pretty silly whenever it's been raised. Check the 40 times of Skov or Chase Thomas and get back to me on speed. The problem is and was:
1) Not enough good linemen
2) Subpar tackling
If 1) isn't corrected by 2019 or so, there are big problems. Stanford started recruiting good linemen, in bulk, starting with Swann's class and things should work themselves out at that position by then. Usually linemen need time to mature so I wouldn't expect early miracles. But the pipeline is, theoretically, in fine shape.
2), on the other hand, is confounding. The defensive backs are capable of playing better than we've seen. Roughly the same crew was really good (when healthy) in 2016. They're a year older, but not a year better. Sometimes these things happen and I suppose they might progress to the mean. The linebackers were victimized by the poor coaching decision to shift Alfieri from outside linebacker, where he was very productive, to inside linebacker, where apparently he couldn't beat out Jordan Perez. (I know Alfieri was injured today, but still.) Add to that Sean Barton's injury and things became inconvenient.
So I expect some things will be better about the 2018 defense, and some things worse. My guess is that the improvements and declines will roughly even out and the unit will be mediocre again in 2018, at which point we'll blame David Shaw's handling of the offense all over again.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:41 PM)shinsengumi link Wrote:Our D reverted to the form that led to them being ranked in the bottom third in nation. Costello was off (why was he wearing a glove on the throwing hand - injury?). Walker Little was missed (separate note - AT Hall was jumping early on every snap, but never called)
Costello injured his thumb against SC, and Walker Little played some, though perhaps not the majority of the snaps.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:41 PM)shinsengumi link Wrote:Our D reverted to the form that led to them being ranked in the bottom third in nation. Costello was off (why was he wearing a glove on the throwing hand - injury?). Walker Little was missed (separate note - AT Hall was jumping early on every snap, but never called)
Costello injured his thumb against SC, and Walker Little played some, though perhaps not the majority of the snaps.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - JohnR34231 - 12-28-2017
For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - JohnR34231 - 12-28-2017
For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - Stymie - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:38 PM)martyup link Wrote:[quote author=Stymie link=topic=18444.msg219636#msg219636 date=1514525790]
Hubris leads inevitably to nemesis. The last time I saw that at Stanford was the Donald Kennedy fiasco.
Whose hubris?
[/quote]
Those who start off every time they wake up and think "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most invulnerable of them all."
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - Stymie - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:38 PM)martyup link Wrote:[quote author=Stymie link=topic=18444.msg219636#msg219636 date=1514525790]
Hubris leads inevitably to nemesis. The last time I saw that at Stanford was the Donald Kennedy fiasco.
Whose hubris?
[/quote]
Those who start off every time they wake up and think "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most invulnerable of them all."
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - TRD - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:43 PM)JPRI link Wrote:For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Frustrating but not surprising. Depth is always a challenge for Stanford (given the recruiting challenges). When injuries pileup on D, opponents score.
I'm OK with KJ going into next year, assuming Dave Mills doesn't beat him out in spring camp.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - TRD - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:43 PM)JPRI link Wrote:For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Frustrating but not surprising. Depth is always a challenge for Stanford (given the recruiting challenges). When injuries pileup on D, opponents score.
I'm OK with KJ going into next year, assuming Dave Mills doesn't beat him out in spring camp.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - jacketree - 12-28-2017
They vomited what should have been at least a 21 point lead, which should have played right into their style, so some temporary negativity is warranted. We can do the orange slices later. I mean 5 losses is really not that great of a season. And they didnt lose to world beaters including TCU.
Truth be told, Stanford was a good team this year, but not a very good team. Depth is really an issue, more so than just 3 or 4 years ago. Long way from the playoff.
That said, I will cease to care about this exhibition game as soon as my 4 am airport run tomorrow.
Kinda glad they lost to SC now. Buckeyes would delimb them.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - jacketree - 12-28-2017
They vomited what should have been at least a 21 point lead, which should have played right into their style, so some temporary negativity is warranted. We can do the orange slices later. I mean 5 losses is really not that great of a season. And they didnt lose to world beaters including TCU.
Truth be told, Stanford was a good team this year, but not a very good team. Depth is really an issue, more so than just 3 or 4 years ago. Long way from the playoff.
That said, I will cease to care about this exhibition game as soon as my 4 am airport run tomorrow.
Kinda glad they lost to SC now. Buckeyes would delimb them.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - JohnR34231 - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:45 PM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=JPRI link=topic=18444.msg219647#msg219647 date=1514526189]
For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Frustrating but not surprising. Depth is always a challenge for Stanford (given the recruiting challenges). When injuries pileup on D, opponents score.
I'm OK with KJ going into next year, assuming Dave Mills doesn't beat him out in spring camp.
[/quote]
What I found frustrating was not so much the defense. At least they held TCU to a field goal on the last drive. It's we got the ball at the end only having to get in field goal range and couldn't even get a first down.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - JohnR34231 - 12-28-2017
(12-28-2017, 10:45 PM)TRD link Wrote:[quote author=JPRI link=topic=18444.msg219647#msg219647 date=1514526189]
For the second straight game, when things were on the line, we just couldn't get it done.
Frustrating.
Frustrating but not surprising. Depth is always a challenge for Stanford (given the recruiting challenges). When injuries pileup on D, opponents score.
I'm OK with KJ going into next year, assuming Dave Mills doesn't beat him out in spring camp.
[/quote]
What I found frustrating was not so much the defense. At least they held TCU to a field goal on the last drive. It's we got the ball at the end only having to get in field goal range and couldn't even get a first down.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
Mills isnt going to beat out KJ because hes not going to be healthy until the fall.
Re: Alamo Bowl Game Thread: Let's.... - washingtonismoney - 12-28-2017
Mills isnt going to beat out KJ because hes not going to be healthy until the fall.