Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - 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: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK (/thread-14538.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: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK (/thread-14538.html)
Pages:
1
2
Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - Duck Tears - 10-10-2017
Denny Green didn't give the job back to Palumbis.
David Shaw didn't replace Hogan with Nunes.
Yet...here we are.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - BobK - 10-10-2017
Yet Turk and Elway did work. At least offensively. More history
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - Phogge - 10-10-2017
Turk the third consecutive national passing champ after Benjamin and Dils.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - washingtonismoney - 10-10-2017
Why won't it work?
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - ChicagoCard - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 10:31 AM)BobK link Wrote:Yet Turk and Elway did work. At least offensively. More history
1979!
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - thunder_chik - 10-10-2017
For the Browns, will Hoganizer work? ::)
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - washingtonismoney - 10-10-2017
Upon further reflection, here are slightly more elaborate thoughts:
1) QBs definitely generally make a difference, and arguing "this" or "that" QB should start is like the ur-sports-debate.
2) That being said, in this *specific* situation it's not entirely clear to me it does. I think the consensus position on boards is that Chryst and Costello performed nearly equivalently against Utah, though Costello was an exciting player against ASU and UCLA. And we think Costello has the higher upside.
2a) Personally, my own druthers would favor Costello in this situation, for reasons of upside alone.
2b) But I think we have to admit it's a closer decision than we make it out to be.
3) It's also unclear to me that QB choice makes a big difference. Currently ESPN's FPI ranks Stanford's offense fifth in the country. Bill Connelly's S&P+ metric says the Cardinal's 8th in the country. Stanford is fourth in yards per play. I'm not sure where this college football podcast got its stats from, but it has Stanford as ranking 9th in points per drive. (https://twitter.com/SolidVerbal/status/917443306526789632)
3a) So debate who deserves credit for what (I mean beyond "Bryce Love"), but clearly the offense is excellent.
3b) The funny thing about excellence is that it's harder to get even more excellent. There might be tight ends better than your Coby Fleener/Zach Ertz/Levine Toilolo, but they are *rare* and the gain is only marginal.
3c) Given the Stanford offense's quality, therefore, it (as a matter of general principle) means that it should be *even harder* to improve the offense than it would be for, say, an average-quality unit. It's already operating at a really high level!
3d) This might indicate that the QB choice is not of great consequence.
4) On the other hand, there are some really obvious deficiencies in Stanford's passing performance -- both by eye and statistically. Whether those problems are with the QB, the receivers, the offensive line - kinda hard to tell.
5) So I think all ideas should be entertained: maybe Costello's better; maybe Chryst's better; maybe a rotation is fine; maybe it doesn't really matter. Who knows!
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - ColoradoTree - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 11:05 AM)thunder_chik link Wrote:For the Browns, will Hoganizer work? ::)
I mean, it's working for Hogan! Maybe not so great for Kizer, though, or the Browns overall.Â
On a serious note, I love how Kevin Hogan is playing himself into a long-term career as a dependable backup/occasional starter. Here's hoping some QB-desperate team gives him silly money at some point down the line.Â
As for Chryst/Costello, I tend to think that playing both QBs can work well only when the second QB has a unique skill set, i.e., the Hogan running packages in the short-lived Nunes era. You're giving the defense a fundamentally different look, and if they key on that QB's running threat, perhaps it leaves something open downfield. Perhaps it's silly of me, but I think there's a real benefit to the QB from being tabbed as "the guy"--confidence just flows from that, both the QB's confidence in himself and the rest of the team's confidence in him. That said, I don't know whether that sense I have has any basis in reality, or is another example of sports conventional wisdom accepted uncritically as truth. It certainly feels right, though! ;)
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - washingtonismoney - 10-10-2017
It seems Chryst will play the "majority of the game" against Oregon: https://twitter.com/TheBootleg/status/917820272052289536
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - BostonCard - 10-10-2017
Yup, thats what I figured. From a Bayesian perspective, the absence of significant new data from the Utah game would tend to reinforce the priors. For many people here, it reinforced their belief that Chryst is not a good QB. For Shaw it reinforces his priors and suggests that Chryst is a good QB who had a bad couple games.
BC
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - washingtonismoney - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 11:49 AM)Boston Card link Wrote:Yup, thats what I figured. From a Bayesian perspective, the absence of significant new data from the Utah game would tend to reinforce the priors. For many people here, it reinforced their belief that Chryst is not a good QB. For Shaw it reinforces his priors and suggests that Chryst is a good QB who had a bad couple games.
BC
Yeah. Though playing Costello seems like an interesting hedge.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - stupac2 - 10-10-2017
The main knock against Chryst, as far as I can tell, is that he's inconsistent. Sometimes he throws perfectly placed lasers, other times he puts in the dirt 10 feet in front of his receiver. But against Utah he didn't do that at all that I recalled. He was pretty accurate and made most of the throws he needed to make, his (already high) completion percentage was hurt by some drops. And that's against what could be the best defense we face!
So if he's sorting that out, if it just took some time to trust his knee or fear of losing his job or whatever, then fine, play him. We haven't seen the same inconsistency from Costello, but we also haven't seen all that much of Costello. So, who knows who's better? I'm fine with this.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - gocard14 - 10-10-2017
Ive never understood the notion that having more then 1 QB is a bad thing. Often times it is indicative of a poor QB situation, because good QBs are sufficiently rare that youre more likely to have 0 then 2, but if you have 2 good QBs the notion that only one should see the field seems silly to me. The notions of rhythm and continuity smack of the kind of lazy sports thinking that has often been debunked by data.
Playing 2 QBs also gives you the ability to play whichever one is having a better day. Against Utah the QBs were more or less equivalent so we stayed where we are now. But if you look at the range of outcomes, most favor trying your #2.
Chryst starts and plays great. Costello either sees the field for one series or doesnt play.
Chryst starts and plays poorly or just ok. Costello gets a shot. If he looks better, great, he stays in. If he looks the same or worse you get Chryst back in there, as Shaw will favor the more experienced hand.
The trade off is you may lose QB rhythm but gain the ability to use the better playing QB if one is having a better day than the other.
Pretend for example that this is a Baseball game with a one game playoff series and you have two ace pitchers. Would you say if you have 2 pitchers then you have no pitchers? Of course not. You would start the one you think is better. If hes pitching lights out you leave him in. If he bombs you take him out and give the other a shot. If he is in between the analogy breaks down because you cant reinsert pitchers, but if you could you would probably give #2 a shot.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - cardcrimson - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 10:37 AM)Phogge link Wrote:Turk the third consecutive national passing champ after Benjamin and Dils.
I saw that quote on Turk's wiki page, but couldn't find any facts that backed it up. Turk was the ratings leader, but apparently neither Dils or Benjamin were. Nobody was the yardage leader. . . .
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - teejers1 - 10-10-2017
I really wish our HC would treat each football game as MLB managers treat playoff games. If the starter is wobbly/not getting it done, then yank him early. Starters are getting pulled in 1st, 2nd, 3rd inning in MLB playoffs as "the sense of urgency" is extremely high. The managers don't dither with an ineffective/shaky pitcher, and you shouldn't do that with a starting QB, either. Every possession matters in CFB, especially in tight games. People say both QBs did okay against Utah; thus, it doesn't matter, yada yada yada. But what if Utah had recovered the onside kick and tied the game with their FG kicker (who had 60 yard distance)? Then those muffed/wasted possessions earlier in the game really get magnified in importance.Â
And it's not as if either Chryst or Costello has earned the right to suck for 2 series in a row (or 3 of 4) or what have you. You either perform or you get to watch. That is the case with virtually every other position on the field. The same should hold for QB, unless and until one player demonstrates ability to get it done consistently. A QB should earn the right to a long leash, and right now, neither QB has done that.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - CTcard - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 03:58 PM)teejers1 link Wrote:If the starter is wobbly/not getting it done, then yank him early.
That is a worthwhile thought, but it has its downsides.
It seems perfectly likely that we'd quickly have to go to Burns, or somewhere, as multiple QBs struggle. Of course we could simply hop back and forth.
It also goes against all the lore and common wisdom of football - you have to express confidence in your QB and give him time to get in a rhythm. Not sure what the truth of all that really is. But we do have a case in the UCLA game, where for several series Costello was hideous ... and then he wasn't.
Finally, we have the curious situation where our offense is performing quite well overall, certainly on a per play basis, perhaps largely based upon Love running the ball. So, if our QB misses some passes but successfully hands the ball off to Love, does he get to keep playing?
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - winflop - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 12:31 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:The main knock against Chryst, as far as I can tell, is that he's inconsistent.
It's more than that for me. His limited mobility is a liability on multiple fronts:
- more vulnerable to sacks
- less able to move the pocket
- less of a threat to run out of read option, so can focus more on Love
The last one is the most important to me. Without being a threat to run or being mobile, defenses can focus on Love more than they can with Costello.
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - stupac2 - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 06:06 PM)winflop link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=17649.msg205538#msg205538 date=1507663889]
The main knock against Chryst, as far as I can tell, is that he's inconsistent.
It's more than that for me. His limited mobility is a liability on multiple fronts:
- more vulnerable to sacks
- less able to move the pocket
- less of a threat to run out of read option, so can focus more on Love
The last one is the most important to me. Without being a threat to run or being mobile, defenses can focus on Love more than they can with Costello.
[/quote]
Do we expect to run that much read option going forward? Obviously we ran it a ton against Utah, but that seems more like a matchup decision than anything. I certainly don't expect to see it ~10 times a game again. (I'd actually be curious how much we ran it total, it can't really have been 1/3 of all running plays for us, could it have?)
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - BostonCard - 10-10-2017
Between them, the two quarterbacks ran it 6 times. I think most/all of those were keepers on the read option. There was at least one option where Love got the ball (the touchdown). So that's at least seven read options.
BC
Re: Chrystello WILL NOT WORK - CTcard - 10-10-2017
(10-10-2017, 06:50 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Between them, the two quarterbacks ran it 6 times. I think most/all of those were keepers on the read option. There was at least one option where Love got the ball (the touchdown). So that's at least seven read options.
BC
Lately, Stanford runs quite often out of the shotgun on plays that look like a read-option. Problem is it is hard to tell if there is really and reading and optioning going on. Nominally, the answer is typically yes when the OL is zone blocking and no when it's man, but not sure if that has been reliable for what Stanford has been doing lately.