The CardBoard
#partyinthebackfield - 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: #partyinthebackfield (/thread-12970.html)


#partyinthebackfield - needle - 10-31-2016

Stanford tied for fifth nationally with 3.5 sacks/game.

A little surprising, to me anyway, although I've noticed a tendency to bring more blitzes in recent weeks.

Washington is tied for 10th nationally with 3.25 sacks/game.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - CTcard - 10-31-2016

To complement that, Stanford is #118 nationally in sacks allowed per game at 3.13.
That is another way of saying #11 worst.


I am pretty sure that means that Stanford games would outdo any other in total number of sacks occurring, and that is with the slow pace.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - washingtonismoney - 10-31-2016

Kind of surprising that Stanford's getting so many sacks. Visually the defense does not look as disruptive as previous editions of Stanford's defense -- if anything it looks like a lot of coverage sacks, plus Solly Thomas being a beast.

Tackle for loss stats may reflect this. This year Stanford ranks #84 on TFL. That's a brobdingnagian change from previous years. In 2015 the defense was #54, and *that* felt like an unpleasant new low. (2014: #17, 2013: #5, 2012: #1, 2011: #28.)

Obviously the defense is by far the most successful of the three Stanford units, and any fair discussion of the team's faults has to start with the offense. But I still find the defense a bit odd and not-quite-fully-satisfying. (FWIW S&P+ ranks it #16, while FEI ranks it #19.) In the ideal scenario -- in which Thomas and Phillips return -- I imagine the defense would be at 2012-14 levels of dominance in 2017.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - fullmetal - 10-31-2016

The defense would look a lot better if the offense wouldn't give the ball back to opposing offenses so often.  This is a very good defense performing admirably under adverse circumstances.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - washingtonismoney - 10-31-2016

(10-31-2016, 11:15 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:The defense would look a lot better if the offense wouldn't give the ball back to opposing offenses so often.  This is a very good defense performing admirably under adverse circumstances.

This has been a stock response from fans whenever the slightest criticism of the defense is discussed, but Stanford's offense was average-to-poor throughout much of 2012 and 2014. This didn't stop those defenses from performing at a very high level -- higher than this year's level. That dog doesn't hunt.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - CTcard - 10-31-2016

(10-31-2016, 11:12 AM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Kind of surprising that Stanford's getting so many sacks. ...

Tackle for loss stats may reflect this. This year Stanford ranks #84 on TFL. ...

But I still find the defense a bit odd and not-quite-fully-satisfying. (FWIW S&P+ ranks it #16, while FEI ranks it #19.) In the ideal scenario -- in which Thomas and Phillips return -- I imagine the defense would be at 2012-14 levels of dominance in 2017.

Much of what you write appears true to me.

The defense had two bad games, the rest quite good, but hasn't been smothering as in those golden years of 2012-14.

Each unit has a few issues.

The backfield has generally done well, but is noticeably thin. The two really bad games came with two guys out - and I still think they are struggling with a replacement for Holder.

The linebackers are favorite whipping boys here. They certainly haven't been stellar, but on the other hand there is notable depth. It's the unit for which I worry the least about any one injury.

The DL isn't as thin as last year, but needs to find some other guys who can avoid getting pushed around. The Colorado game was notable for the starkness of the run D difference when Thomas and/or Phillips rested - but it wasn't unique in that aspect.

The defense looks thin. It had two horrible games (UW and WSU) which were presumably a combination of facing pretty good offenses and injuries. I am still concerned over the replacement for Holder - though while I saw some defensive backfield misses it's inappropriate to criticize a game where you give up 5 completions.

But the defense is young and performing well overall. With some luck and development, there is a good chance that next year it becomes a truly dominant unit again.



Re: #partyinthebackfield - OutsiderFan - 10-31-2016

Stanford doesn't have anyone really explosive off the edge to rack up too many TFLs, but they do have Solomon Thomas creating havoc in backfields, so even if he doesn't get to the QB, he makes it easier for others to get there.

It appears likely the defense will return 10/11 2016 starters in 2017.  Only Lloyd will be gone for sure.  And of the 2-deep on defense, only Kaumatule, Watkins, Davis, and Lloyd will be gone for sure.

By all appearances, the 2017 defense should be deep, experienced, and even better than 2016.  I suspect Andrew Pryts will be an upgrade over Lloyd.  And I wouldn't be surprised to see the four redshirting DL be at least as, if not more productive than Kaumatule and Watkins.

No dropoff in the secondary, and LBs will be better, though it sure would be nice to see a couple guys step up and separate themselves as starters at ILB. 

Re: #partyinthebackfield - BostonCard - 10-31-2016

Hoffpauir will be gone as well.  While he gets a bad rap here, he has played better of late.

BC

Re: #partyinthebackfield - donkey687 - 10-31-2016

The coverage the last couple games has been excellent leading to many coverage sacks.  Meeks coming back and Holder for a half versus Colorado were big but Buncom and Murphy have done well in place of Holder recently.  Hoffpauir and Reid also getting it done in coverage.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - Spiny_Norman - 10-31-2016

Perhaps we did not realize the depth of defensive talent Stanford had in the 2013-14 era.  Look at the starters and significant contributors who went on to make an NFL roster (or at least get drafted) - Henry Anderson, David Parry, Josh Mauro, Trent Murphy, Ben Gardner, Shayne Skov, AJ Tarpley, Blake Martinez, Jordan Richards, Ed Reynolds. 

I don't see the same mix of talent and production yet from this squad.  Aside from Thomas and Meeks, which current defensive players look like they will play on Sundays?

Re: #partyinthebackfield - gocard14 - 10-31-2016

(10-31-2016, 05:00 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Perhaps we did not realize the depth of defensive talent Stanford had in the 2013-14 era.  Look at the starters and significant contributors who went on to make an NFL roster (or at least get drafted) - Henry Anderson, David Parry, Josh Mauro, Trent Murphy, Ben Gardner, Shayne Skov, AJ Tarpley, Blake Martinez, Jordan Richards, Ed Reynolds. 

I don't see the same mix of talent and production yet from this squad.  Aside from Thomas and Meeks, which current defensive players look like they will play on Sundays?

You forget that of the players on that list only a few of them looked like future NFL players as underclass men or even redshirt sophomores, which is what the best members of our D are. Skov did as a true freshman. Richards as a sophomore. Anyone else?

On our team Meeks and Thomas look like top tier NFL picks. I wouldn't be surprised to see Phillips, Holder, Alfieri, and Buncom, at the very least, get picked up with a little more time and coaching.

Re: #partyinthebackfield - BostonCard - 10-31-2016

In addition to the ones mentioned by gocard, I would add:

Dylan Jackson is a sophomore; he may eventually become draftable
Sean Barton and Mustafa Branch also have potential, and are only sophomores; at this stage of his development, Martinez barely registered
Justin Reid seems likely to eventually make it to an NFL roster



Re: #partyinthebackfield - larkinforever - 11-01-2016

I think the back end is loaded with potential NFLers - in addition to the oft mentioned Meeks, I second gocard's Buncom nomination as well as BC's mention of Reid, who I really like. Additionally, I think Edwards looks good.

At LB, I think Okereke has been making plays the past couple of games, and he's only a redshirt sophomore.