Stanford vs. Washington 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 vs. Washington Game Thread (/thread-12783.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: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread (/thread-12783.html)
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - jacketree - 09-30-2016
Harbaugh threw up some stinkers early on but not this bad and with this much talent.
Not sure why Burns is still out there.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - jacketree - 09-30-2016
Harbaugh threw up some stinkers early on but not this bad and with this much talent.
Not sure why Burns is still out there.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
The way UW is playing, they may be in the playoffs and we may have a shot at the ROse Bowl.
But not if we play like this against anyone.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
The way UW is playing, they may be in the playoffs and we may have a shot at the ROse Bowl.
But not if we play like this against anyone.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - dabigv13 - 09-30-2016
Wow. C-mac is just so good.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - dabigv13 - 09-30-2016
Wow. C-mac is just so good.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - stupac2 - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:16 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174244#msg174244 date=1475291695]
This is not worth arguing about, but from snap to initial contact was 2.52 seconds. That's ample time.
That's enough time for a slant and that's about it.
BC
[/quote]
On 4th and 2 a slant is a really good play...
Honestly, I think that's one of my big problems with our offensive design, it seems like we don't really scheme our guys open for those quick throws. If the run game isn't working we're completely incapable of using the short pass game to replace it, and I can't see any reason for it.
Also, without McCaffrey how bad does this game look?
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - stupac2 - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:16 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15827.msg174244#msg174244 date=1475291695]
This is not worth arguing about, but from snap to initial contact was 2.52 seconds. That's ample time.
That's enough time for a slant and that's about it.
BC
[/quote]
On 4th and 2 a slant is a really good play...
Honestly, I think that's one of my big problems with our offensive design, it seems like we don't really scheme our guys open for those quick throws. If the run game isn't working we're completely incapable of using the short pass game to replace it, and I can't see any reason for it.
Also, without McCaffrey how bad does this game look?
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
Wow, McCaffrey somehow got that first down.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
Wow, McCaffrey somehow got that first down.
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - North Woods - 09-30-2016
At least McCaffrey doesn't have any quit in him.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - North Woods - 09-30-2016
At least McCaffrey doesn't have any quit in him.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
Incredibly risky throw on fourth down but I shouldn't underestimate McCaffrey.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
Incredibly risky throw on fourth down but I shouldn't underestimate McCaffrey.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
It was the only throw that Burns had. McCaffrey was the checkdown option; everyone else was covered (or Burns didn't see them).
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - BostonCard - 09-30-2016
It was the only throw that Burns had. McCaffrey was the checkdown option; everyone else was covered (or Burns didn't see them).
BC
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - Baysmen - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:23 PM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:Total collapse. But sometimes this is what needs to happen to transition to the next group of recruits in the coming years. This is what it must have felt like when Utah went into Oregon last year - least this loss wasn't at home.
Sad for McCaffrey because any hopes are pretty much done.
Guys hate to be the bearer of bad news, my wife works with Foster's mom and he said he's on the fence. UW has been on him hard, selling the potential of the program. According to mom, "he will know a lot more after tonight." Good news for us...
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - Baysmen - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:23 PM)Trevmiesterj link Wrote:Total collapse. But sometimes this is what needs to happen to transition to the next group of recruits in the coming years. This is what it must have felt like when Utah went into Oregon last year - least this loss wasn't at home.
Sad for McCaffrey because any hopes are pretty much done.
Guys hate to be the bearer of bad news, my wife works with Foster's mom and he said he's on the fence. UW has been on him hard, selling the potential of the program. According to mom, "he will know a lot more after tonight." Good news for us...
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:24 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Honestly, I think that's one of my big problems with our offensive design, it seems like we don't really scheme our guys open for those quick throws. If the run game isn't working we're completely incapable of using the short pass game to replace it, and I can't see any reason for it.
Yes I agree with this. Shaw and Chip Kelly are buddy buddy, and one thing Kelly's offenses do well is the quick-hitting passing game. Maybe they could brainstorm.
Re: Stanford vs. Washington Game Thread - ThePassionOfTheChryst - 09-30-2016
(09-30-2016, 08:24 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Honestly, I think that's one of my big problems with our offensive design, it seems like we don't really scheme our guys open for those quick throws. If the run game isn't working we're completely incapable of using the short pass game to replace it, and I can't see any reason for it.
Yes I agree with this. Shaw and Chip Kelly are buddy buddy, and one thing Kelly's offenses do well is the quick-hitting passing game. Maybe they could brainstorm.