The CardBoard
A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - 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: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison (/thread-738.html)

Pages: 1 2

A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - washingtonismoney - 11-13-2010

Wilkerson, I thought, had a really good game tonight, and I suspect ESPN\'s statistics credited a couple of his good runs to Stepfan Taylor (Taylor wears #33 and Wilkerson #32). I was interested in comparing Wilkerson to Stepfan Taylor\'s freshman year.

Anthony Wilkerson: 56 carries, 313 yards, 5.6 yards/carry (thru 10 games)

Stepfan Taylor: 56 carries, 303 yards, 5.5 yards/carry (full season).

Pretty close, though I don\'t recall Taylor ever looking as good as Wilkerson has looked in the past two games.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - fyao - 11-13-2010

It took so long for Wilkerson to make an appearance tonight (after Taylor, Stewart, Anam, Gaffney, that I was wondering whether he was injured.

He did get the ball over Taylor when we were running down the clock, which could say a lot for the future.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - washingtonismoney - 11-13-2010

He got the ball for the final set of downs in the final drive, but Taylor was running at first--was stuffed, as he was all night. Taylor is a good back; he\'s tough and determined and all that, he\'s just not good enough to be a significant threat and a playmaker who tilts the defense on his own.

All we have for Wilkerson is how we looks and a limited sample size, but I\'m pretty sure he has a higher ceiling than any running back currently on the roster.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - Ratmandoo - 11-13-2010

Wilkerson also did the majority of his running after our offense wore out the asu defense. We had 42 minutes of possession. Taylor ran hard and got a lot of really tough yards while asu and burfict were still flying around on defense. I\'m glad harbaugh stuck with the run throughout the game even if it wasn\'t effective earlier in the game.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - fyao - 11-13-2010

A TV announcer on a previous game said that in practice Wilkerson breaks free every 4th time or so -- which would mean the coaches know what they have.  The announcer also called him the future.

The Ratman has it right - Redrum - 11-13-2010

Wilkerson is getting better and better,  but you could tell the defense he faced was not the one Taylor faced.   In most of the game Taylor (et al) was met by ASU players that were not blocked and were at the point of attack when the runner arrived.   ASU loaded up the box and it worked.    By the time Wilkerson began to really get in gear,  the defense had been loosened up a bit by the Stanford passing game and was tiring out.   Wilkerson was encountering tacklers at the linebacker level where Taylor was meeting them at or behind the line of scrimmage.

But, why quibble?  Keep on truckin\' Anthony.  Harbaugh\'s ethic is:  You produce, you play.

Random:   Will Harbaugh please,  please end the Usua Amanam running-back experiment.   So far he\'s shown he\'s not that shifty so he can\'t make plays out of nothing.  And in traffic he\'s too small.  A defender gets an arm on him and that\'s pretty much it.  He\'s got other talents and I hope JH has him learning another position



Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - JohnR34231 - 11-14-2010

Next year with the addition of Young and Wright (who just got admitted) the logjam at running back gets even worse.

Some people are going to have to give defense a shot. Usua, who as I recall was a pretty good DB at Bellarmine, is one of my early nominees.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - yvonne - 11-14-2010

Quote:Next year with the addition of Young and Wright (who just got admitted) the logjam at running back gets even worse.

There is no logjam at running back. There are several running backs playing. They produce exciting results, and in all but two games have left fans in awe, thinking "I can\'t believe it! another first down!" When we had a special back, he played nearly every down. Our backs are good, but not (yet) special.

Depends on how you define "logjam" - JohnR34231 - 11-14-2010

When you have five running backs all competing for playing time (with a couple more waiting in the wings) I consider it a logjam.

If you don\'t, well that\'s why they have horse races, as the saying goes.

The point is that there is no way you are going to give them all meaningful playing time, and if they are good enough that they should be on the field, it makes sense for one or two of them to have a position change.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - Farm93 - 11-14-2010

RB, like TE, is a position with great depth now.  A large part of that is due to JH\'s system.

If you are a TE, one could argue that Stanford is the #1 FBS destination.  If you are a power RB, or played that system in HS, then Stanford is very high up on the list.  They are great problems to have for a program that used to struggle to get 15 commits a year.

I think it does not really serve JH or Stanford to bump athletes out of position in year one.  The call should be to let them try to move up the depth chart and/or let them decide on their own to move to another position.  (ie. John Lynch)

Wilkerson looks likely to be RB #1 in 2011, so those capable of other positions may realize it will be best to try different things in the Spring.   Until LOI day there really is no reason to worry about playing time for verbals.  In both cases, worrying about that in late November can\'t possibly be a concern for the team or the staff.

FWIW - We used to think some of those TEs would certainly become OL.  Ironically, all that has happened is that an OL has become the most talked about Stanford TE in 2010.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - slide - 11-15-2010

JPRI -- I agree with you re. logjam.  I would not be surprised to may be see Gaffney at LB in the spring.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - washingtonismoney - 11-15-2010

The place where Gaffney would be most interesting, IMHO: fullback. Not an Owen Marecic-style fullback, but more of a Stanley Havili-style fullback. We had a few sets last year that lined up Taylor and Gaffney in the same backfield and they worked well.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - tmswope - 11-15-2010

Quote:The place where Gaffney would be most interesting, IMHO: fullback. Not an Owen Marecic-style fullback, but more of a Stanley Havili-style fullback. We had a few sets last year that lined up Taylor and Gaffney in the same backfield and they worked well.

FWIW (read: nothing), that\'s where I used him during the 2011 season on Playstation.  I think he could be awesome in that role.  Not quite the bruising blocker that Owen is, but he\'d be an adequate blocker who could create some really tough matchup problems coming out of the backfield on play action.  Plus, we could run all sorts of misdirection with him and Taylor/Wilkerson both back there.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - JeffInCorvallis - 11-15-2010

Quote:RB, like TE, is a position with great depth now.  A large part of that is due to JH\'s system.

If you are a TE, one could argue that Stanford is the #1 FBS destination.  If you are a power RB, or played that system in HS, then Stanford is very high up on the list.  They are great problems to have for a program that used to struggle to get 15 commits a year.


Herein lies the problem if/when JH leaves.  Our personnel are now set up for JH\'s Big Ten power running system.  Stanford should be a more attractive coaching position for up-and-coming head coaches.  Bowlsby will have to decide if we want to change horses to a West Coast or spread-type offense.  There won\'t be a lot of coaches like JH available.  There aren\'t a lot of coaches like JH period.


Our PASSING offense is West Coast hybrid/derivativ - Redrum - 11-15-2010

People argue over what a "true" WC offense is,  but you can see parts of it in what Stanford does:  
--Throws to multiple receivers from multiple formations.  check
--Uses the short pass game to move the chains. check
--Throws to the RBs and FB.  check
--Uses a TE as an active receiver, not just a blocker who occasionally runs a pattern. check

There can be debate about whether a true WC offense always favors passing over running,  but the HOW we pass when we do is definitely WC.  Think of the frustrating ASU game without Owusu to go vertical.   And yet, our drives were built on short passes that weren\'t just outlet throws by Luck under pressure.  Intention and execution of a pass game based on completions where they ain\'t.   When you see Marecic,  think Tom Rathman.   When you see our TE corps, think Brent Jones.  When you see Luck,  think Montana with a better arm. We can debate whether Harbaugh\'s love of the run disqualifies us from the WCO domain,  but I bet somewhere up there Bill Walsh is smiling.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - fullmetal - 11-15-2010

I haven\'t seen too many throws to the RB/FB, but maybe that\'s because Luck\'s abilities let him deliver the ball to receivers under greater duress better than most QBs can--if you consider the RB/FB pass a dump-off route.  I don\'t think that would have worked well against ASU, who mostly stayed home and contained very well.  We needed a deep threat against this defense.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - washingtonismoney - 11-15-2010

Harbaugh\'s offense is most reminiscent of the Saints at their best--it\'s very multiple, spreads the ball around quite a bit, and doesn\'t rely on any one player overmuch. It\'s an approach that will leave the players well-prepared for any pro-style coach that might succeed Harbaugh, assuming a minimum level of competence on said successor\'s part.

Check to passes to Marecic, fullmetal - Redrum - 11-15-2010

It\'s pretty clear he\'s the intended primary receiver,  usually angling off the TE\'s rear.  He blocks in space so much the play starts like he\'s blocking as usual.  The LB probably feels like he faked Marecic out when no contact is made.    Luck is sometimes on the move to the same side, which freezes the defense on  Luck while Marecic moves to open space.    Other times Marecic goes out in a flare pattern still in the backfield. Luck throws right on Marecic\'s break upfield.  The WR has taken the DB downfield and if the timing is right and the pass caught,  we are going to get the yards we need  We\'ve used that play when we need a first down, another reason to think passes to Marecic are not just a relief valve.

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - fullmetal - 11-15-2010

Got it.  Maybe the recency of the Arizona St. game is slanting my recall.  

Re: A quick Wilkerson-Taylor comparison - fyao - 11-15-2010

Quote:The place where Gaffney would be most interesting, IMHO: fullback. Not an Owen Marecic-style fullback, but more of a Stanley Havili-style fullback. We had a few sets last year that lined up Taylor and Gaffney in the same backfield and they worked well.

Ironically, most schools, including Notre Dame were recruiting Gaffney as a fullback.  We got him because we told him he could be a halfback.

Same with Toby Gerhart - USC wanted him as a fullback.