The Narrative That Won't Die - 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: The Narrative That Won't Die (/thread-16322.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: The Narrative That Won't Die (/thread-16322.html)
The Narrative That Won't Die - CTcard - 08-31-2018
At least on this board, the "Stanford isn't winning the national championship because David Shaw is too conservative" theme seems to have died down a bit. However, it's still the go-to narrative for journalists who aren't working too hard - and is certainly still a major feature of other boards.
The latest example is Tom Fitzgerald's preview in the Chron.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-preview-Powerful-offense-may-test-David-13191929.php
His contention:
- Stanford's major problem is on offense
- That problem primarily stems from Shaw being too conservative - which in this case seems to merely mean not passing the ball enough
- This year, Shaw may be "forced" to open up the offense because of the wonderful talent in the pass game
He then backs this up with all sorts of comments that vary from questionable to simply wrong.
-----------
Despite my annoyance at the stale story line and many errors, the broad outline of the preview is correct: Stanford's offense ought to be good, Stanford's defensive prospects are somewhat unclear, and Stanford will be facing some notable obstacles (the difficult even-year schedule and a tough in-division competitor in UW).
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - d4cohn - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 10:57 AM)CTcard Wrote: At least on this board, the "Stanford isn't winning the national championship because David Shaw is too conservative" theme seems to have died down a bit. However, it's still the go-to narrative for journalists who aren't working too hard - and is certainly still a major feature of other boards.
The latest example is Tom Fitzgerald's preview in the Chron.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-preview-Powerful-offense-may-test-David-13191929.php
His contention:
- Stanford's major problem is on offense
- That problem primarily stems from Shaw being too conservative - which in this case seems to merely mean not passing the ball enough
- This year, Shaw may be "forced" to open up the offense because of the wonderful talent in the pass game
He then backs this up with all sorts of comments that vary from questionable to simply wrong.
-----------
Despite my annoyance at the stale story line and many errors, the broad outline of the preview is correct: Stanford's offense ought to be good, Stanford's defensive prospects are somewhat unclear, and Stanford will be facing some notable obstacles (the difficult even-year schedule and a tough in-division competitor in UW).
Are we sure this column by Fitzgerald isn't a re-submit from 2012 (Rick Reilly style)? :)
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - OutsiderFan - 08-31-2018
The 2018 Stanford offense has the potential to be more dynamic and pressure more of the field more consistently than any time I can remember.
In 2010, Stanford's offense had elite QB & TEs. It had a very good OL and capable RBs and WRs.
In 2018, the Stanford offense has elite OL, TEs and RB, very good WRs and at least a capable QB. Like Tennessee won a National Title with Tee Martin, not Peyton Manning, so too should this Stanford offense be better than the 2010 Luck-led version.
There are three dynamics I see that could influence the degree to which the 2018 offense may be more dominant than in recent years.
1. Tavita Pritchard is the new OC. No competent leader would promote a guy and not allow him to take ownership of his job. Shaw seems like he would be wise enough to know this. Pritchard being a former QB probably will want to have a more QB-friendly offense than might have existed under Bloomgren.
2. Carberry is the new OL coach coming from the more pass-oriented, premium on pass blocking, NFL.
3. David Shaw could see that with so many offensive weapons available now, this is the time to demonstrate he is plenty capable of having one of the best offenses in the country. I find it hard to believe Shaw doesn't want to be acclaimed for having a great offense.
My biggest question about the offense is not how much Love will be involved as a receiver, but if Stanford puts in some RPOs into the offense. I can't see a better way to deal with stacked boxes to stop Love than being in a running play and having the QB throw out of a called run when a Safety comes down to give 8 in the box. Of course, we've seen Stanford get plenty of big runs against such fronts, but that doesn't mean it's the smart thing to do!
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - OL84 - 08-31-2018
CT, good post. While I do not buy the narrative, there will be several things relating to the narrative I will be watching closely.
It will be interesting to see how the O looks this year with TP elevated and MB gone. Shaw was quoted as saying he will still be discussing each play call with the assistants, and one criticism I have had in the past is that this approach makes it difficult to follow through on the strategy you do have. With TP young and Carberry new, my hope with the DS does less talking and more calling the games.
I do not think Shaw has been too conservative in his philosophy, but the run-pass dichotomy does not really reach the question. But I sure hope to see better use of play action, more passes and more flexible formations this year. We have a lot of receivers and I hope they see plenty of balls. I don't expect a new philosophy, but I will be looking for a little more air and more frequent sets that threatening more of the field.
More specific to the SDSU game, last year's loss may have been DS's worst game planning. We certainly don't know all the went into it, but Chryst and Love both struggled with reads (as Love admitted again this week), and the fronts and blitzes baffled the OL. Especially with Burkett out, the early series will show us a lot about what the staff learned about SDSU.
I'm exciting for this year. I'm optimistic on all of these points, I love our O weapons, and I think the D has the talent to surprise in a good way. I'm looking forward to seeing how all the young guys step up. That's what's great about college football.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - CTcard - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 02:29 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: In 2010, Stanford's offense had elite QB & TEs. It had a very good OL and capable RBs and WRs.
In 2018, the Stanford offense has elite OL, TEs and RB, very good WRs and at least a capable QB. Like Tennessee won a National Title with Tee Martin, not Peyton Manning, so too should this Stanford offense be better than the 2010 Luck-led version.
The difference between Andrew Luck and "at least a capable QB" is vast, and drastically important for an offense.
In addition, the 2018 OL has not yet shown it can operate at as high a level as the 2010 or 2011 OL did.
Now, Costello could prove to be much better than "at least capable", and the 2018 OL would appear to have the potential to become elite, so I think it quite possible that the offense could prove to be as good as 2010, or 2011, of 2015 - but it does have some work to do to get there.
Quote:2. Carberry is the new OL coach coming from the more pass-oriented, premium on pass blocking, NFL.
Carberry will not be determining our offensive approach, at least as far as I can tell. For that matter, Bloomgren also came from the NFL … as did Shaw himself.
Quote:3. David Shaw could see that with so many offensive weapons available now, this is the time to demonstrate he is plenty capable of having one of the best offenses in the country. I find it hard to believe Shaw doesn't want to be acclaimed for having a great offense.
I agree. I also find it hard to believe that Shaw doesn't want to have a great offense, though he may care somewhat less about being acclaimed for it.
Of course David Shaw has had a great offense several times.
As at least nominal OC, he had
2009 #5 points per drive (nationally)
2010 #2 ppd
As Head Coach
2011 #2 ppd
2015 #2 ppd
2017 #18 ppd (not "great", but close enough for optimism for 2018)
Quote:My biggest question about the offense is not how much Love will be involved as a receiver, but if Stanford puts in some RPOs into the offense. I can't see a better way to deal with stacked boxes to stop Love than being in a running play and having the QB throw out of a called run when a Safety comes down to give 8 in the box.
Stanford has run vs pass options in the offense as far as pre-snap reads go. Some QBs have been much better at using those than others. Luck was great, Hogan eventually very good.
Stanford does not have much in the way of run-pass option plays where the option is determined after the ball is snapped. That sort of thing was always one of the great distinctions between the Oregon approach and the Stanford approach (at least beyond pace of play - though it is related to pace of play).
I am not sure if I think we should develop lots of plays with post-snap RPO or not. In general options are good. But, there are questions as to whether that is a strength of Costello and just what would those plays replace, both in terms of plays called and practice time.
Quote:Of course, we've seen Stanford get plenty of big runs against such fronts, but that doesn't mean it's the smart thing to do!
I think it does ... more or less by definition.
(08-31-2018, 03:06 PM)OL84 Wrote: CT, good post. While I do not buy the narrative, there will be several things relating to the narrative I will be watching closely.
Hey OL. Are you just now slumming over to this board?
Or are you one of those who had to change user handle to get access?
Quote:It will be interesting to see how the O looks this year with TP elevated and MB gone. Shaw was quoted as saying he will still be discussing each play call with the assistants, and one criticism I have had in the past is that this approach makes it difficult to follow through on the strategy you do have. With TP young and Carberry new, my hope with the DS does less talking and more calling the games.
While my general attitude is that there has been far too much angst over play calling itself, one issue is that there may be too much discussion when action and a decision is necessary; and with too many chefs it's hard to follow a single recipe.
So, I guess I agree.
Quote:I do not think Shaw has been too conservative in his philosophy, but the run-pass dichotomy does not really reach the question. But I sure hope to see better use of play action, more passes and more flexible formations this year.
Shaw is conservative by nature, I am just not sure whether that is a negative, a positive, or neither. Probably neither.
Play action can be effective, but it is not a cure-all and has its trade offs. On play action the QB has to turn his back to the play, and plays take longer to develop. That means you cannot do effective play action if your QB is not good at quickly scanning and reacquiring the field positions, or if the OL cannot hold pass protection. Both were issues were clearly responsible for the lack of effective play action in 2016. Shaw keeps saying a Costello strength is quickly scanning his options, so perhaps we can be very good at this in 2018.
Quote:We have a lot of receivers and I hope they see plenty of balls.
I guess I do not have any particular hope for how many receivers catch a lot of passes. As long as the offense scores when it has the ball, I don't think I care if our best receivers get the lion's share of passes or not; or care that much about the overall run/pass ratio.
Quote:More specific to the SDSU game, last year's loss may have been DS's worst game planning. We certainly don't know all the went into it, but Chryst and Love both struggled with reads (as Love admitted again this week), and the fronts and blitzes baffled the OL. Especially with Burkett out, the early series will show us a lot about what the staff learned about SDSU.
I might agree about poor planning, but the team played so poorly it is a little hard to tell.
Seeing the field or not, Chryst consistently missed open receivers … by a lot.
It was also our first game in a new OL set - which became our lineup for the year. It might not be too surprising if they were not properly in sync yet - though perhaps that is just a subset of poor game planning.
Quote:I'm exciting for this year. I'm optimistic on all of these points, I love our O weapons, and I think the D has the talent to surprise in a good way. I'm looking forward to seeing how all the young guys step up. That's what's great about college football.
I am excited as well, though I am always cautious (a bit of a worrywart I suppose).
If the offense is not at least very good, then there is some big problem.
The defense has potential, it just has to develop (and get healthy).
And as of right now, we're undefeated.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - BostonCard - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 10:57 AM)CTcard Wrote: His contention:
- Stanford's major problem is on offense
- That problem primarily stems from Shaw being too conservative - which in this case seems to merely mean not passing the ball enough
- This year, Shaw may be "forced" to open up the offense because of the wonderful talent in the pass game
To Fitzgerald's credit, it sure seemed like San Diego State "forced" Shaw to open up the offense tonight.
BC
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - UltimateCard - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 03:08 PM)CTcard Wrote: And as of right now, we're undefeated.
We’re still undefeated!!!
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - d4cohn - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 10:29 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(08-31-2018, 10:57 AM)CTcard Wrote: His contention:
- Stanford's major problem is on offense
- That problem primarily stems from Shaw being too conservative - which in this case seems to merely mean not passing the ball enough
- This year, Shaw may be "forced" to open up the offense because of the wonderful talent in the pass game
To Fitzgerald's credit, it sure seemed like San Diego State "forced" Shaw to open up the offense tonight.
BC
I mean, if USC or another Pac-12 team wants to follow the SDSU game-plan and keep running Cover-0 against us, I don't Shaw will be so slow to exploit the mismatch (for development and not showing stuff reasons). And if JJ is 75% as dominant as he was tonight, that is scary for the rest of the Pac-12. As the commentator just said on Sportscenter, that was a award-that-will-not-be-named (previously autocorrected) performance from JJ (and I completely agree). Some special stuff that we all saw tonight from JJAW.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - BostonCard - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 10:43 PM)d4cohn Wrote: I mean, if USC or another Pac-12 team wants to follow the SDSU game-plan and keep running Cover-0 against us, I don't Shaw will be so slow to exploit the mismatch (for development and not showing stuff reasons). And if JJ is 75% as dominant as he was tonight, that is scary for the rest of the Pac-12. As the commentator just said on Sportscenter, that was a award-that-will-not-be-named (previously autocorrected) performance from JJ (and I completely agree). Some special stuff that we all saw tonight from JJAW.
Yeah, he had himself a game. I mean, the SDSU DB gave up a good 6 inches and 40 lbs to JJ; I think USC DB's will be better matched even if they play without safety help. Hoping we continue to make teams pay, and I expect JJ to have an all-Pac-12 season this year, but that's more along the lines of 100 yard, 2 TD games. We will still need to fire on more cylinders against SC.
BC
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - CTcard - 08-31-2018
(08-31-2018, 11:17 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I mean, the SDSU DB gave up a good 6 inches and 40 lbs to JJ; I think USC DB's will be better matched even if they play without safety help.
According the their respective official rosters, the most victimized SDSU corner, Kyree Woods, gave up 3 inches and 40 lbs to JJ.
Woods is listed as 6'0'', 185#
The two guys atop the $C depth chart at corner are listed at 5'11'', 190# (RS Fr) and 6'1'', 205# (Sr). Hope we can get JJ on the short guy.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - slide - 09-01-2018
going back to the narrative, Shaw seems to agree with it. in the post game with Platz on KNBR, on the offense Shaw offered up "honestly I think I just stopped being stubborn and trying to establish the run when they were taking it away and I opened up the passing game and went to JJ and guys on the outside that were open."
I am hopeful against 'SC we show a bit more deception than we did early last night. a lot of telegraphing of plays.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - martyup - 09-01-2018
(08-31-2018, 11:33 PM)CTcard Wrote: The two guys atop the $C depth chart at corner are listed at 5'11'', 190# (RS Fr) and 6'1'', 205# (Sr). Hope we can get JJ on the short guy.
Being 5'11" myself, I resent that assessment.
RE: The Narrative That Won't Die - Mick - 09-01-2018
Last year, San Diego State didn't give up more than 31 points until the last game of the season. they allowed 31 to Boise State.
SDSU scored 20+ ppg last year in every game except two, Boise State (14) and Fresno State (3).
I'm thinking we're looking pretty good this year.