The CardBoard
Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - 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: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 (/thread-5733.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - jeboody - 09-28-2013

nice write-up, thanks :)

i believe owusu played already, and i think it was only on special teams.  can't recall which game, i would guess ASU

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - Leftcoast - 09-28-2013

Wow !!!

I got home from my dinner with my lovely daughter just in time to watch the second half.  WSU must have quit after the first 30 minutes because there was no fight in them in minutes 31 through 60. 

Before their NEXT game Leach better discover a running game because good defenses that have no need to respect the run will plant their QBs under the gridiron turf. 

This game?  The second half against WSU in 2013 reminded me of the second half against USC in 2012 with Haliday and Apoca reprising the role of the helpless QB last played by Barkley.

Party in the backfield, indeed!

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - Spiny_Norman - 09-29-2013

For those who did not see the tv broadcast, this was a 4th quarter highlight for the guys in the booth - Popcorn Guy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROixfhb6ZKY&f

For your convenience and viewing pleasure: BarryJ - Bruce Wang - 09-29-2013

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQsykbQXVRA&feature=youtu.be

We all knew he could do this, so I'm actually more excited about that block he made in pass protection, but I can't find that clip.

EDIT: I think this is it, but I'm not sure.  Look for the Kelsey Young reception in the 4th Quarter.

http://sports-ak.espn.go.com/ncf/video?gameId=332710265

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - 81alum - 09-29-2013

My worries and skepticism about this team are beginning to dissipate--but that worries me!  Now I can worry about Washington for a week.

Last week we talked about Shaw's stubborness with the run, when ASU sold out everything to stop it.  So...what did folks think of Shaw's decision to go for it on 4th down, on our 41 yard line, after Gaffney just got stuffed on 3rd and 1?

Gaffney nearly was tackled behind the line again, but only on a superb second effort did he pick up the first down.  (In fact, his knee may have been down before he picked up the necessary yard.)  This was in the 2nd quarter on the drive that ended with an interception.  The blocking scheme clearly was not working out of that ogre package--people are spending a lot of practice time getting ready for it.

It seemed to me that Tyler Gaffney bailed Shaw out of a questionable decision.  Maybe Shaw was willing to take risks after he saw how well the defense was playing.  But after Tyler got stuffed the first time, it seems that a call that takes advantage of the WSU run-stop formation was indicated. Another Shaw stubborn streak?

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - washingtonismoney - 09-29-2013

I thought going for it in 4th and 1 was a great decision, but I thought the playcall and execution were off.

Owusu burned his shirt against Army on a kickoff return team. He's on track to be the Griff Whalen Memorial Unjustified Redshirt Burning of 2013.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - JohnR34231 - 09-29-2013

People always want to accuse Shaw of being a) too conservative, and b) too stubborn.

He may have been stubborn on that play, but you can't accuse him of being too conservative.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - pincemob - 09-29-2013

I expected a much different game and much worse weather, along the lines of what the Oregon game looked like.  Happy to be wrong.  I don't think we could have aired it out as successfully had it been a monsoon and our run game would have needed to be better (as would theirs).  Great job by the offensive coaches in finding the flaws in the secondary and exploiting those.  Cajuste is really making a name for himself.  I think he'll start drawing a lot of coverage which will really open things up. 

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - slide - 09-29-2013

(09-29-2013, 07:44 AM)JPRI link Wrote:People always want to accuse Shaw of being a) too conservative, and b) too stubborn.

He may have been stubborn on that play, but you can't accuse him of being too conservative.

not conservative in going for it on 4th down; too conservative in the power right play call?

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - terry - 09-29-2013

(09-28-2013, 11:30 PM)garvin link Wrote:Hogan finished with 286 yards passing -- believe it or not, his personal high. It's a reminder that a major reason for his success as a starter is his limited role in the offense. He's not expected to be a one-man highlight reel out there, just a guy who makes good decisions while he hands off a lot more than he throws. You want a really challenging CardBoard contest? How about a pool on the month and year that he breaks 30 passing attempts in a game?

I'll take November 2012, in the win over #1 Oregon.

Quote:** A who-what moment: Jackson Cummings, a senior running back of whom I must admit I had never heard, caught a shovel pass for two yards not in garbage time but on Stanford's first drive of the game.

Cummings has been the up-back on our kickoff return team for a couple years.

Quote:** I believe our final extra point was kicked not by Jordan Williamson but his backup. Anybody know who that is?

That was Conrad Ukropina.



Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - twgin - 09-29-2013

Time of possession in the first half was something like 18 minutes for Stanford and 6 for WSU; hard to lose when you control the ball like that.  The fourth and 1 call was trying to keep that going and was deep strategy.  Shaw knew at that point that the game was in hand, so it all becomes about limiting information or perhaps planting disinformation for future opponents.  Shaw wants people to spend oodles of practice time figuring out how to stop the Ogre or the Elephant; he wants them to believe in Stanford's stubbornness re this part of the offense.

It probably pained Shaw in the ASU game to have to put Hogan back in and call the naked bootleg, which in retrospect was a needless release of information.  A big play like that will stick in the minds of future opponents; they will hold out one or two guys who would have jumped on the Elephant and will instead pinch off the bootleg.  Off course there are other play options, but this one is now out there and can be prepared for.

Or maybe I just read too much espionage history/fiction...

Terry

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - twgin - 09-29-2013

More on time of possession; lost in the euphoria of a blowout win was about 5 occasions where we couldn't get a play off in time.  It seems one of the goals here was to use up clock as much as possible; again in the first half we dominated time of possession by three to one.  Hard to believe this is not part of the scheme to slow down all the fast movers out there (like, um, Oregon).  So Hogan was probably tasked to take his time and delay the snap until only 1 or 2 seconds remained on the play clock.  In the execution of this we used at least two and possibly all three of our first half timeouts and garnered two delay of game penalties.  On a few other occasions we barely got the snap off on time.

Terry

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - fullmetal - 09-29-2013

I'm with twgin.  I think some of Shaw's perceived stubbornness is a call to action for the OL to execute their blocks properly even when the defense knows what's happening.  That's some attention to detail right there, and I'm okay with that.  The game was never in serious danger of being lost, and Shaw used as many opportunities as he could to teach his kids.

The season is a campaign, and Shaw has to always be thinking about strategy, not just tactics.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - CompSci87 - 09-29-2013

(09-29-2013, 12:27 PM)twgin link Wrote:More on time of possession; lost in the euphoria of a blowout win was about 5 occasions where we couldn't get a play off in time.  It seems one of the goals here was to use up clock as much as possible; again in the first half we dominated time of possession by three to one.  Hard to believe this is not part of the scheme to slow down all the fast movers out there (like, um, Oregon).  So Hogan was probably tasked to take his time and delay the snap until only 1 or 2 seconds remained on the play clock.  In the execution of this we used at least two and possibly all three of our first half timeouts and garnered two delay of game penalties.  On a few other occasions we barely got the snap off on time.

Terry

According to some Bootie posts: One or two times the delay was partly caused by the refs changing their mind about the spot after the play clock had already run down to 10 seconds or so. Once the team was on a silent count and the center didn't snap it when he was supposed to. I'll add that the stadium seemed noisy early on before the game was out of hand, which probably made it tougher to get the play called in the huddle and then adjusted at the line. Still, this is something that needs to be tightened up.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - oman - 09-29-2013

(09-29-2013, 12:29 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:I'm with twgin.  I think some of Shaw's perceived stubbornness is a call to action for the OL to execute their blocks properly even when the defense knows what's happening.  That's some attention to detail right there, and I'm okay with that.  The game was never in serious danger of being lost, and Shaw used as many opportunities as he could to teach his kids.

The season is a campaign, and Shaw has to always be thinking about strategy, not just tactics.

Agree.  And also Shaw needs any opportunity he has to make others think he isn't completely predictable.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - 81alum - 09-29-2013

Wow, some of you are a tough crowd!  I lose my first points ever on the Cardboard...at least I had Garvin on my side :)

All in all, I am ecstatic with the team and with Shaw and love the fact that he has found a way to sustain success.  I admire his dedication to the institution and hope we can keep him forever, akin to a Vanderveer or a Marquess. 

I do see the overall strategic dimension.  You want other teams to become obsessed with our reputation for power running, ogre formations, and muscle power, so they have to consume all their practice time adjusting to us--and this should work especially well in a conference becoming dominated by the spread.  Let's hope USC gets a spread coach, too, so we can stand nearly alone.

But that does not mean I always like Shaw's playcalling.  I first became interested in football under Walsh I, and I thought the genius of Walsh was to break all the tendencies--to run when the defense expects the pass and pass when they expect the run.  And so this philosophy of running when the defense expects the run is counter to the chess-game philosophy I grew up with. 

But when it works, I will applaud the same as everyone else.  I just hope that at those critical moments down the road when it doesn't, that Shaw will be quick to recognize it and shift gears.  His bootleg call last week, as in the Pac 12 championship game, gives me hope. 






Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - washingtonismoney - 09-29-2013

I think it's a mistake to focus on that one call in exclusion of the entire game, which broke tendencies in a shocking way: WSU players basically admitted to being taken off guard by the deep passing approach Shaw took. Shaw put the game on Hogan in an unprecedented (for Hogan) way. The first few drives barely put Hogan under center. Very few pure power runs. A lot of passing, of course. It was a system shock for WSU and they never recovered. (It was an especially potent shock since WSU attacks the run very aggressively and they seemed especially determined to stop our power running game.)

But yes, Shaw ran power on a couple plays in which everyone predicted he'd run power. .

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - twgin - 09-29-2013

CompSci, I noticed where Shaw was really exercised after one of the time outs, and it seemed like he was mad at the refs.  I thought at the time that something else was contributing to our snap problems.  WIM is on the money, we came out slinging the ball, very much against tendency, and very effective.  Amazing how open our people were, and good to see needed work on Hogan's deep passing; he's not the ne plus natural at the deep pass.

Maybe this has been discussed before, but if I were trying to completely isolate my team from East Coast awareness, I'd play every week at 10:00 or 10:30 Eastern.  I know that Stanford probably doesn't have much control over this but gee whiz... Same comment about Oregon...

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - washingtonismoney - 09-29-2013

So, one thing on the Barry Sanders play in the first half:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQsykbQXVRA

Check out Cajuste absolutely dominating his block.

Re: Final: Stanford 55, Washington State 17 - Bruce Wang - 09-30-2013

Just goes to show the American public's fascination with royalty.  BarryJ is the #1 subject trending on top of the Yahoo homepage this morning.

No sign of Popcorn Guy (who made the front page of reddit yesterday, not just /r/cfb).

EDIT: Now that we're examining this thing like the Zapruder film, I noticed that if Jeff Trojan hadn't missed his block, BarryJ might have scored on that run.  To Trojan's credit, he seems to have realized this.