The CardBoard
Stanford - ND discussion - 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 - ND discussion (/thread-10765.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6

Stanford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-23-2015

Hey everyone, back from last year, looking for an update on Stanford this year if you guys are up for some general discussion.  Been an interesting year for both teams.  Haven't seen a ton of Stanford, manage to catch most of a few games though.  I know ND is not a favorite around here, but hopefully this discussion goes well...

So any major news for the team, injuries? returning from injuries? 
From what i have seen, stanford is a very strong, physical team, obviously.  Christian McCaffrey is no doubt an awesome player.  I have always had mixed feelings on Hogan, he seems like a great individual, but his skills have been wildly inconsistent. 

For ND, this has been a team that has played at both ends of the spectrum.  They have looked better than i have ever seen at times, and at others... looked like a middle of the pack team.  They moved the ball with ease against a #2 or 3 defense in the country, but had 5 turnovers, 3 in the red zone, and put the ball on the ground 3 more times, if they just hold on to the ball, that game gets out of hand in a hurry, but instead they let BC hang around.  I wouldn't count on the turnovers happening again.

The defense centers around jaylon smith, he is crazy good.  Outside of him though they are very average physically.  They do play very disciplined though.  We have some weaknesses in the secondary.  I wouldn't read too much into the loss or Russell, i mean it’s not good to lose a starter and he is incredibly athletic,  but to me he has largely underperformed this year and I don’t think the drop off will be significant.  He often got beat on double moves or anything across the middle, I think getting some new people out there who are depending on their mental ability instead of their physical may actually be a boost, but we will see.  The defensive line is very solid, but nothing jaw dropping.  Sheldon day is quick, but a little undersized.

For the offense, obviously there is Fuller.  He is incredibly quick.  He has been a little bit quiet the last 2 games, but he is capable of breaking free at any time.  The other receivers run very good routes, trust their QB are quick and athletic.  I don’t know if any of them are NFL guys, but there are a lot of very good receivers, so it makes it difficult to cover them all.  Offensive line is hard to figure out, at the beginning of the year their strength was run blocking and were weak at pass blocking, that has seemed to flip flop the last few games.  Kizer at QB has blown me away this year.  He does sometimes make freshman mistakes, but he has the pocket awareness of a senior, and makes great moves in the backfield.  He can run well, not going to just blow buy you, but you have to account for him running.  His arm is good, not great.  I think he can make any throw, just some aren't quite as quick as you would like.  The newest running back is fast, runs a little upright, but he hits the hole fast, just doesn’t always make the correct cut.  His pass blocking skills need some improvement

Like I said when I started, ND is hard to figure out. They are 10-1, Stanford will be the 6th team they have played with a winning record, and they have beat 4 of them so far.  If they beat Stanford there will be a good chance that they will beat 4 teams with at least 9 wins.  For most of the game, they have looked good to great against Texas, Georgia tech, mass, navy, usc, pitt.  medium against Clemson, temple and wake and bad against boston college and virginia.  They have had a ton of injuries as most of you have heard.  I think they will be down 8 starters since fall, and they have had 2 starters transfer in the spring.  If you back to the spring, they are now playing their 3rd string QB and 4th string RB.

I think it will be a close game, 7 pts or less, obviously ill go with ND to win, but don’t blame any Stanford fan for thinking they are gonna win (would just question any blow outs either way lol)

30-24 ND

Thanks for the chat!


Re: Standford - ND discussion - BostonCard - 11-23-2015

To me Notre Dame hasn't been impressive, but it has found a way to win and continue winning, despite a pretty bad injury situation.  I think neither team has beaten a team of the caliber of the other, so it will be a great game.

Both our starting cornerbacks are banged up and their status for the game won't likely be known until tomorrow (and possibly until gameday).  Going up against Will Fuller if they are not full strength scares the cr*p out of me.  OTOH, without Prosise (I believe listed as questionable, but I've never heard of a one-week recovery from a high ankle sprain), ND might be a bit less multi-dimensional.

As for Stanford, we played awful against Northwestern and, thankfully, haven't played this poorly since.  We had a great stretch from mid-September to mid-October (really since the second half of the UCF game, but theya re winless), playing a great game at USC, easily beating OSU, crushing Arizona, and easily beating UCLA.  The last four games haven't been as well played, with a very tight game against WSU (that we won on a missed FG as time expired), the loss against Oregon, and a tougher than expected win against Cal, where our defense struggled to stop the Bears.

I think we need to bring our A game against Notre Dame.  The game scares me.  My head says ND by 35-31 or so; my heart says we pull it off 42-28.

BC

Re: Standford - ND discussion - OutsiderFan - 11-23-2015

It's hard for me to stomach watching ND play.  They are Stanford's #1 recruiting rival; any player who can get into Stanford can  go to ND, but not every player who goes to ND can get into Stanford.  Not to mention the fact Stanford should have beat ND the last two games in South Bend.  Those losses were brutal.

That said, I thought ND was the #1 team until the Clemson loss.  But it's really hard to judge how good Clemson is considering they have played what, 7 teams who have won less than 4 games and are FCS?  It's kind of a joke that they are ranked #1 given they have really only had two games against teams with a pulse and so many cupcakes. Conversely, Stanford has played 7 teams with 6+ wins. No wonder Stanford has 2 losses and Clemson none...

Still, Stanford by all rights should be 10-1 and this should be #3 vs. #5 this weekend.  But two fumbled snaps in the 4th quarter against a very good Oregon team were too much to overcome.  Stanford too missed a 2pt conversion that would have sent a big game to OT like ND did at Clemson. 

As for the match-up, Stanford will probably be the most physical team ND plays this year, though BC is probably a close second and a pretty good tune-up.  Against Ca.l, Stanford was good enough to win with a vanilla game plan and no risk taking.  That won't be the case this weekend.  To me, Hogan determines the outcome.  If he plays well, Stanford wins.  If not, they lose.  Stanford's defense will give up some yards but not that many points.  Stanford's best CB, Senior Ronnie Harris was out against Ca.l and hopes to return this week.  One would think he is needed in this game because he's probably the only Stanford CB who can effectively cover Fuller consistently.  Stanford has more offensive weapons this year than any time in recent memory, but CMac is clearly the focus of the offense. 

This game should be for a playoff berth, IMO.  If ND wins, they should be in.  If Stanford wins, and next week, they should be in. Would you agree?



Re: Stanford - ND discussion - stupac2 - 11-23-2015

The thing about the BC game is that they're a top-5 defense but a bottom-5 offense (#5 and #127 by FEI, respectively). So moving the ball against them is a good sign, but that's the sort of team that really shouldn't be in the game in the 4th quarter against a top team. 5 turnovers explains that part, but I wouldn't so sure that we're unlikely to see that again, that's not Kizer's first multi-interception game and it also wasn't ND's first multi-fumble game (though the other was in the hurricane against Clemson so maybe that gets a pass). Temple hung around a lot longer than they should've partly thanks to turnovers. In fact, ND has played in 5 close games (<9 points difference) and in all but one had a negative turnover margin. The other one was the game against Virgina where ND was +1 but still somehow within 7 at the end.

So that will probably be important for this game. (If you're curious how Stanford's done, we have 4 negative-margin games, our two losses and then two blowout wins.)

You asked about injuries, other have mentioned that our top two corners are banged up, that's about it (at least for new ones, we lost a DL for the year in our first game). As OF said, that could be a very big deal against Fuller, if we don't get them back he could have a very big day.

Barring a bunch of turnovers (or other mistakes by one of the teams) this game ought to be a close one, with Stanford having a small edge because we're at home. If Procise is out, though, I'm not sure how ND moves the ball since we'll sell out to stop the pass. Is that a concern? I looked the other day and ND's rushing leaders are Procise, Adams, Kizer, then Zaire. Is the RB depth so bad that the QB who's been out for the past 9 games is really the #4 rusher? If he's out, can Adams shoulder the load alone? Does ND have bodies to put out there?

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - FarmDad.01 - 11-23-2015

[font=times new roman][size=10pt]To paraphrase one of Chevy Chase's SNL taglines: Is Lennay Kekua still dead?

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - TrumpCard - 11-23-2015

Thanks for stopping by.  It should be a good game, as usual. 

Stanford has some holes on the roster this year, as you would expect from using only 77 of the 85 available scholarships.  The problems appear mostly on defense.  There isn't a legitimate NT, though there are some good DEs that rotate into the NT position.  The starting SS is a converted QB and he's been only okay.  On the other hand, Stanford has some guys who are among the elite in the country at their respective positions, especially on offense.  The RB is possibly the top in the nation.  The left side of the OL is dominant.  The TEs are outstanding.  Add an outstanding "game manager" at QB, and you get an offense that has moved the ball very well.  I understand that your team has a very good front seven, so I expect the battle up front on that side of the ball to be very interesting.

Two questions for you:
(1) Is Onwualu going to play, and if not, is that loss significant?
(2) How does your team look on the road?  The stats look worse, but that could just be a function of the quality of the opposition.



Re: Stanford - ND discussion - fullmetal - 11-23-2015

I think Notre Dame is beatable from their performances against Temple and Boston College.  It's the performances against Clemson and U$C that worry me. 

Northwestern figured out our offense pretty early on, and WSU/Oregon sort of copied that scheme with pretty good success.  If Notre Dame can do the same and sell out to stop the run, we're going to have to rely on David Shaw's faith in the passing game (and hopefully Good Hogan will show up) in order to win.  If Notre Dame collapses our zone blocking and plugs the gaps, I think Stanford might be done.

I don't know whether we'll see another heart-attack-inducing reprisal of the bend-don't-break defense this weekend that we saw against kal, but if Notre Dame's receivers are as dangerous as kal's, then the answer will probably be yes given that the threats are somewhat similar.  Kizer's mobility will hurt a little more, but if we're giving up the underneath, Kizer won't have to run at all to pick up first downs.  We'll dare Kizer to stay perfect...and hope that Stanford's offense can do the same.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - yvonne - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 03:42 PM)FarmDad.01 link Wrote:[font=times new roman][size=10pt]To paraphrase one of Chevy Chase's SNL taglines: Is Lennay Kekua still dead?

She's even more dead than Generalissimo Franco.

Re: Standford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 02:59 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:To me the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends hasn't been impressive, but it has found a way to win and continue winning, despite a pretty bad injury situation.  I think neither team has beaten a team of the caliber of the other, so it will be a great game.

Both our starting cornerbacks are banged up and their status for the game won't likely be known until tomorrow (and possibly until gameday).  Going up against Will Fuller if they are not full strength scares the cr*p out of me.  OTOH, without Prosise (I believe listed as questionable, but I've never heard of a one-week recovery from a high ankle sprain), ND might be a bit less multi-dimensional.

As for Stanford, we played awful against Northwestern and, thankfully, haven't played this poorly since.  We had a great stretch from mid-September to mid-October (really since the second half of the UCF game, but theya re winless), playing a great game at Under Stanford Control, easily beating OSU, crushing Arizona, and easily beating UCLA.  The last four games haven't been as well played, with a very tight game against WSU (that we won on a missed FG as time expired), the loss against Oregon, and a tougher than expected win against Low APR U, where our defense struggled to stop the 59ers.

I think we need to bring our A game against the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends.  The game scares me.  My head says ND by 35-31 or so; my heart says we pull it off 42-28.

BC

They have been impressive at times and not so much at others.  I agree with you in thinking this is going to be a great game.  I will definitely be interested in following the report on your corners, that could be significant.  The thing with stopping fuller is using strength to hit him at the line, its hard to run step for step with him, but his upper body is a little weaker, so if you can jam him, you can stop him.  Also, i am calling it now, he will most likely upset you with a push off on a big catch.  He has largely gotten away with it, im not always sure how, but he does love to give a little separation push on deep throws.

I think that they will still have a decent running dimension with Kizer and Adams.  I cant imagine at all that Prosise will play.  Adams is a really really good talent, just young.  He can make big plays but makes freshman mistakes.

I think if either doesn't bring their complete A game they will be in trouble, because both sides have dangerous weapons.  This game has scared me since about week 4 or 5.

Are you going to the game?

Re: Standford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 03:05 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:It's hard for me to stomach watching ND play.  They are Stanford's #1 recruiting rival; any player who can get into Stanford can  go to ND, but not every player who goes to ND can get into Stanford.  Not to mention the fact Stanford should have beat ND the last two games in South Bend.  Those losses were brutal.

That said, I thought ND was the #1 team until the Clemson loss.  But it's really hard to judge how good Clemson is considering they have played what, 7 teams who have won less than 4 games and are FCS?  It's kind of a joke that they are ranked #1 given they have really only had two games against teams with a pulse and so many cupcakes. Conversely, Stanford has played 7 teams with 6+ wins. No wonder Stanford has 2 losses and Clemson none...

Still, Stanford by all rights should be 10-1 and this should be #3 vs. #5 this weekend.  But two fumbled snaps in the 4th quarter against a very good Oregon team were too much to overcome.  Stanford too missed a 2pt conversion that would have sent a big game to OT like ND did at Clemson. 

As for the match-up, Stanford will probably be the most physical team ND plays this year, though BC is probably a close second and a pretty good tune-up.  Against Ca.l, Stanford was good enough to win with a vanilla game plan and no risk taking.  That won't be the case this weekend.  To me, Hogan determines the outcome.  If he plays well, Stanford wins.  If not, they lose.  Stanford's defense will give up some yards but not that many points.  Stanford's best CB, Senior Ronnie Harris was out against Ca.l and hopes to return this week.  One would think he is needed in this game because he's probably the only Stanford CB who can effectively cover Fuller consistently.  Stanford has more offensive weapons this year than any time in recent memory, but CMac is clearly the focus of the offense. 

This game should be for a playoff berth, IMO.  If ND wins, they should be in.  If Stanford wins, and next week, they should be in. Would you agree?

I think ND is better than Clemson, but the "moment" of the game got to them in the first 5 minutes.  Clemson was up 14-0 right away, after they calmed down, it was a very close game.  ND had trouble with holding on to the ball in the rain, Clemson didn't and that was difference.  I mean with a 14-0 lead right away and 4 second half ND turnovers, ND was a 2pt conversion away from sending it to overtime.

Is that 7 teams with 6+ wins include Notre Dame, or is that up to this game?  stanford will be ND's 6th team with 6+ and they very well could be there 5 with 9+ if pitt can beat Miami.  that to me shows both teams have had to play tough week in and week out and you are going to get a loss along the way doing that, its hard to take that kind of beating every week. So props to you guys for your schedule as well.  IMO you guys get a ton of props for playing ND and Northwestern out of conference while playing inside a power 5 conference.

I was really disappointed by that Oregon loss, besides it hurting ND's SOS, i was really looking forward to a top 5 match up to end the year, just as a fan.  I think as a complete team it is easily the most physical team for ND.  Clemson had a pretty physical D and BC hit harder than anyone i have seen, every tackle had a good solid "pop" to it. But i don't think they have played as physical of an offense this year. 

i agree Hogan will determine this game,  What does your gut say about him in this game?  I dont want to claim to know to much, ive probably seen him in 6 games the last 2 years, but sometimes it seems like the moment gets to him...

I full expect McCaffrey is going to break at least one big play for a TD, its just a given with ND, lol, but im hoping we can limit that to just 1, but it is doubtful.

I am hoping that if ND wins they can hold of (or jump depending on how tonight goes) Oklahoma , but i unfortunately think that stanford is going to be left out regardless, even though i would like u guys to beat Iowa, Oklahoma and give you a 50/50 on clemson/msu depending on injury situation.

Side question, do you honestly feel that Shaw is a set in stone coach for now and the future of stanford, or do you think a change will be necessary to win it all?  i have always had mix emotions on him.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 03:29 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:The thing about the BC game is that they're a top-5 defense but a bottom-5 offense (#5 and #127 by FEI, respectively). So moving the ball against them is a good sign, but that's the sort of team that really shouldn't be in the game in the 4th quarter against a top team. 5 turnovers explains that part, but I wouldn't so sure that we're unlikely to see that again, that's not Kizer's first multi-interception game and it also wasn't ND's first multi-fumble game (though the other was in the hurricane against Clemson so maybe that gets a pass). Temple hung around a lot longer than they should've partly thanks to turnovers. In fact, ND has played in 5 close games (<9 points difference) and in all but one had a negative turnover margin. The other one was the game against Virgina where ND was +1 but still somehow within 7 at the end.

So that will probably be important for this game. (If you're curious how Stanford's done, we have 4 negative-margin games, our two losses and then two blowout wins.)

You asked about injuries, other have mentioned that our top two corners are banged up, that's about it (at least for new ones, we lost a DL for the year in our first game). As OF said, that could be a very big deal against Fuller, if we don't get them back he could have a very big day.

Barring a bunch of turnovers (or other mistakes by one of the teams) this game ought to be a close one, with Stanford having a small edge because we're at home. If Procise is out, though, I'm not sure how ND moves the ball since we'll sell out to stop the pass. Is that a concern? I looked the other day and ND's rushing leaders are Procise, Adams, Kizer, then Zaire. Is the RB depth so bad that the QB who's been out for the past 9 games is really the #4 rusher? If he's out, can Adams shoulder the load alone? Does ND have bodies to put out there?

i agree with you, it shows a lot for our offense, but not a lot for our defense, now the turnovers is what kept them in it, so hopefully that doesn't happen again.  Kizer's only other multi interception game was temple, he had 2 and both of those were ones that were kind of flukey in that it hit off of the receivers chest and went straight up the air for a pick kind of stuff, so you can't really put that on him, but i would say you could probably count on 1 from him in this game.  I give a slight pass for the fumbles in the Clemson game only becomes Clemson only put the ball on the ground once and they had to play in the same weather. 

Like i said before, im not concerned with having to be one dimensional on the pass.  The RB depth is very thin.  Our second string transferred/was academically ineligible, our first string went down against taxes on his 4th carry, procise was converted in the spring due to lack of depth as a practice only thing, and then he did so well they decided to keep him.  He has had a bulk of the carries and when hes not in, it has been adams.  So they have had 5 outside of QBs, but due to injuries are now down to 2.  I think adams can carry the load, just not quite as good as Procises could have.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 03:42 PM)FarmDad.01 link Wrote:[font=times new roman][size=10pt]To paraphrase one of Chevy Chase's SNL taglines: Is Lennay Kekua still dead?

lol i hope so... man i don't know if he will ever live that down...

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 11:01 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:I think the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends is beatable from their performances against Temple and Boston College.  It's the performances against Clemson and U$C that worry me. 

Northwestern figured out our offense pretty early on, and WSU/Oregon sort of copied that scheme with pretty good success.  If the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends can do the same and sell out to stop the run, we're going to have to rely on David Shaw's faith in the passing game (and hopefully Good Hogan will show up) in order to win.  If the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends collapses our zone blocking and plugs the gaps, I think Stanford might be done.

I don't know whether we'll see another heart-attack-inducing reprisal of the bend-don't-break defense this weekend that we saw against kal, but if the University of Dead Fake Girlfriends's receivers are as dangerous as kal's, then the answer will probably be yes given that the threats are somewhat similar.  Kizer's mobility will hurt a little more, but if we're giving up the underneath, Kizer won't have to run at all to pick up first downs.  We'll dare Kizer to stay perfect...and hope that Stanford's offense can do the same.

Thats why they are hard to figure out, but i think they have played more games at a higher level then games not.  I am worrying down the stretch that Kizer is putting to much pressure on himself to be perfect, when he was first thrown in there he just went out and played, after the bye week its seems as if he is trying to be perfect and he is just getting farther and farther from it.  But he is very calm in big situations and is very good at avoid blitzes and using his mobility to open things up across the middle.

Im not sure if ND can afford to sell out against the run, just don't know if they are strong enough on the outside... but we will see.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - NDIrish - 11-24-2015

(11-23-2015, 03:53 PM)TrumpCard link Wrote:Thanks for stopping by.  It should be a good game, as usual. 

Stanford has some holes on the roster this year, as you would expect from using only 77 of the 85 available scholarships.  The problems appear mostly on defense.  There isn't a legitimate NT, though there are some good DEs that rotate into the NT position.  The starting SS is a converted QB and he's been only okay.  On the other hand, Stanford has some guys who are among the elite in the country at their respective positions, especially on offense.  The RB is possibly the top in the nation.  The left side of the OL is dominant.  The TEs are outstanding.  Add an outstanding "game manager" at QB, and you get an offense that has moved the ball very well.  I understand that your team has a very good front seven, so I expect the battle up front on that side of the ball to be very interesting.

Two questions for you:
(1) Is Onwualu going to play, and if not, is that loss significant?
(2) How does your team look on the road?  The stats look worse, but that could just be a function of the quality of the opposition.

(1) i do not think he will, at this point they are getting so thin every loss is significant.
(2) they have been a mixed bag on the road, good enough to win, but not always great, but i never felt like (other than the first 2 min of the clemson game) being on the road was a factor because the same mistakes were made at home.


Re: Stanford - ND discussion - OutsiderFan - 11-24-2015

On Hogan:

I made a post on here a few weeks ago about my concern with Hogan being he has never led a game winning, final drive for Stanford, and I feared that was going to cost Stanford dearly this year.  That kind of pull from the fire performance was needed against Oregon.  Though he did lead the TD drive, he couldn't get the needed 2pt conversion to send it to OT.  And he did fumble away two snaps in the 4th quarter, one of which cost 3 pts, the margin in the game.  Nothing would make Stanford fans happier than to see Stanford be the team that has the final minute, game winning drive in this series for once.  But based on the fact he's never done it, I'm skeptical Hogan can do it.  Stanford just doesn't do well in close games, as I segue to Shaw...

David Shaw is 49-13 as a head coach at Stanford.  I think 9/13 of those losses are by 7 points or less, and Stanford had no business losing probably 6 or 7 of those 10, including the last two at South Bend (sorry).  If you look at his record and how competitive his teams are, he's phenomenal.  Of course, they do tend to have one game every year they just spit the bit.  This year was Northwestern.  The two years before that it was Utah.  The year before that it was UW.  You can afford one loss, but Stanford has been losing 2-games a year under Shaw, and one to a team he really should have beaten. 

Yes, it would be nice to have had one year where he didn't get that horrible loss, because Stanford would have been in the BCS title game or playoff without them, but... Is it really realistic to think Stanford can do better than this?  I mean the recruiting restrictions this program faces make even this performance remarkable when you really think about it.  But now even with those restrictions, the recruiting is getting to Top 10 in country territory. 

Most Stanford fans wish Shaw would be a little more daring with his play calls and game management, and I wish the passing game was more sophisticated, but I think we really need to see what happens with the next couple QBs to really judge too much.  As much of a winner as Hogan is, he has a slow release and that makes him ineffective against pressure.  There is a sentiment around here that if Stanford had the receiving weapons and a great pure passer, the offense might be a bit more dynamic against teams that load up to stop the run.  We'll see because these types of players are beginning to come into the program. 















Re: Standford - ND discussion - CTcard - 11-24-2015

(11-24-2015, 07:19 AM)NDIrish link Wrote:They have been impressive at times and not so much at others. 

"They" = und, yes?

So, what do you think und's best performances have been this season?

While you obviously have watched them more closely than I, from my view, in the sense of overall control of play vs quality opposition, und's best performances have probably been the loss to Clemson and the blow-out of Navy.

Clemson is obviously good, and after the first two Clemson drives, und really controlled the overall sense of play. The TO margin did them in.

The issue with Navy is that is is hard to judge their quality. UND is the only Power 5 team they have played, and they got whupped pretty handily there. But for und it was a pretty convincing win over a team that can be hard to play.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - CTcard - 11-24-2015

(11-24-2015, 08:27 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:  Stanford just doesn't do well in close games, as I segue to Shaw...

In one score games, Stanford under Shaw has gone 16-10 (2-1 in 2011, 8-2 in 2012, 4-3 in 2013, 1-3 in 2014, 1-1 in 2015).

If there is any evidence either direction in that record, it is that Stanford does well in close games.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - stupac2 - 11-24-2015

(11-24-2015, 08:07 AM)NDIrish link Wrote:But he is very calm in big situations and is very good at avoid blitzes and using his mobility to open things up across the middle.

At this point, this plus Fuller is what worries me about this game. We've already seen what happens when a mobile QB who is hard to bring down and can throw accurately on the run plays against this defense, and it's not pretty (well, if you're a Stanford fan anyway). The upside, I think, is that Oregon's receivers are better as a whole than ND's. Fuller is probably the best on either team, but Oregon is deep and ND doesn't seem to be. Also, if ND is without Procise, Oregon's running threat is more potent, so we don't need to commit quite as much to the run, especially on passing downs.

Still, that worries me. We haven't been great at bringing down QBs this year and it's already bitten us once, I wouldn't be shocked to see it happen again.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - OutsiderFan - 11-24-2015

(11-24-2015, 08:39 AM)CTcard link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=13731.msg143439#msg143439 date=1448378827]
  Stanford just doesn't do well in close games, as I segue to Shaw...

In one score games, Stanford under Shaw has gone 16-10 (2-1 in 2011, 8-2 in 2012, 4-3 in 2013, 1-3 in 2014, 1-1 in 2015).

If there is any evidence either direction in that record, it is that Stanford does well in close games.
[/quote]

A 16-10 record in close games isn't good when you consider you must be at a 90% win rate in all games played to win championships. That 16-10 works out to 8-5 over a season.  Moreover, since 2011, his record in close games is 6-7.  Neither of those marks is good enough to win championships of the national variety.

Re: Stanford - ND discussion - Mick - 11-24-2015

(11-24-2015, 08:27 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:David Shaw is 49-13 as a head coach at Stanford.  I think 9/13 of those losses are by 7 points or less, and Stanford had no business losing probably 6 or 7 of those 10, including the last two at South Bend (sorry).  If you look at his record and how competitive his teams are, he's phenomenal.  Of course, they do tend to have one game every year they just spit the bit.  This year was Northwestern.  The two years before that it was Utah.  The year before that it was UW.  You can afford one loss, but Stanford has been losing 2-games a year under Shaw, and one to a team he really should have beaten.


At 49-13, Shaw's winning percentage is slightly better than 79%, for a team that is regularly in the top third 11% of SoS with by far the most ridiculously difficult recruiting profile of any other D1 team.  Even with those restrictions, Shaw has a better winning percentage than Baer Bryant, Pop Warner, Fielding Yost, Joe Paterno, Bo Schembechler, Bobby Bowden, LaVell Edwards, Lou Holtz, Woody Hayes, Jim Tressel, Mack Brown, Brian Kelly, Steve Spurrier, Nick Saban, Mike Price, Dennis Erickson, Frank Kush, Andy Smith, Red Blaik, Lloyd Carr, Darrel Royal, John McKay, Phil Fullmer, Dan Devine, Ara Parseghian, Elmer Layden, Vince Dooley, Don James, Gary Patterson (TCU), Howard Jones, Jim Tatum, R.C. Slocum, Bobby Dodd, Bobby Petrino,  John Cooper, Mike Bellotti, Frank Solich, Mack Brown, Terry Donahue, Bill Walsh, Tommy Prothro, Tommy Bowden, Forrest Evashevski, Andy Kerr, Claude Gilbert, Bruce Snyder, Dennis Erickson, John Robinson, Pappy Waldorf, Earl Bruce, Bill McCartney, Duffy Daugherty, Barry Alvarez, Slip Madigan, Buck Shaw, Jackie Sherrill, Mike Leach, Dan Hawkins, Jeff Tedford, Chuck Taylor, John ralston and just for grins, Amos Alonzo Stagg.

He has a better coaching record than any other predominantly Pac-12 coach with five years or more of coaching.  Ever.  Since the 19th century.  If he had 10 seasons minimum, he would be the 18th overall winningest coach by percentage.

I vote we keep him.