The CardBoard
Thought an interesting little footnote to the game - 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: Thought an interesting little footnote to the game (/thread-770.html)


Thought an interesting little footnote to the game - washingtonismoney - 11-20-2010

was the running backs. It\'s basically resolved itself into a Taylor/Wilkerson duopoly, and Wilkerson is increasingly being put on the field in passing situations. The carry split of designed running plays:
Taylor, 15 carries for 59 yards (3.9 ypc)
Wilkerson, 18 carries for 67 yards (3.7 ypc).

Taylor and Doug Baldwin - Card Fan in OR - 11-20-2010

I have been surprised over the course of the season how these two have failed to get the respect I think they deserve on thecardboard. Taylor is a sophomore and 92 yards short of having a 1000-yard season, getting less than half the team\'s carries. So what if he is not as explosive as Wilkerson? To me, he looks like a very tough, dependable runner. I really enjoy watching him. I will enjoy watching the these two backs for several more years. Kudos to Stephan.

I think Doug Baldwin has been referred to as a "possession receiver." Hey, isn\'t that a good thing? I feel tremendous confidence in our receiving corps. Having Andrew Luck throwing the passes certainly doesn\'t hurt, but I do not recall a single dropped pass today. Baldwin had a great game, with a truly spectacular catch (or two). I am going to miss watching him and Ryan Whalen. Baldwin can play on my team, that\'s for sure.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - fyao - 11-20-2010

I was happy to see Wilkerson running between the tackles before the 4th quarter.  He even got a carry on our first possession in the red zone.  That shows a degree of trust is building from the coaches, e.g., that he won\'t fumble.  It was starting to get predictable that he would run a sweep to the left or right to take advantage of his speed.  Now he is starting to get experience as a power back grinding out tough yards - something that is necessary in a Harbaugh system.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - Farm93 - 11-20-2010

Quote:was the running backs. It\'s basically resolved itself into a Taylor/Wilkerson duopoly, and Wilkerson is increasingly being put on the field in passing situations. The carry split of designed running plays:
Taylor, 15 carries for 59 yards (3.9 ypc)
Wilkerson, 18 carries for 67 yards (3.7 ypc).

Yeah, they were great.  The O-Line is just so, so good and that helps.  FWIW though...Luck rushed for more yards than either of those guys.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - yvonne - 11-20-2010

I like our running backs. I like our platooning system. Last year, we had Toby, and everybody knew what was coming. Third and eight became a rushing down.

Now, we still have that "Wow" factor from watching yet another first down, but we just don\'t know where it will come from. It was exciting having a player like Toby, but it\'s exciting having a special team like this, as well.

By the way, I think either Taylor or Wilkerson could be as special as Toby.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - fullmetal - 11-20-2010

I don\'t feel like third and eight is a convert-able rushing down with Taylor or Wilkerson--at least, not solidly so as I was with Gerhart.  The evidence is in the game when Harbaugh runs it on first and second down--we usually have to convert a third down by either passing or running again.  Still, I\'m not unhappy with our backs.  They\'re doing great.  Let\'s hope the competition between the two is good-natured.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - yvonne - 11-20-2010

Quote:I don\'t feel like third and eight is a convert-able rushing down with Taylor or Wilkerson--at least, not solidly so as I was with Gerhart.

I know you didn\'t feel that third and eight was a  running down when Toby was a sophomore, either.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - JeffInCorvallis - 11-20-2010

The sound was low enough at our viewing party that I didn\'t catch most of the sideline interview with Elway.  I\'m assuming that this was his first time back at Memorial Stadium since the much-lamented 1982 Big Game.  How\'s he doing?  Will we see him on the sideline for future games, or does he put in appearances only when the team is 9-1? (I don\'t see him around nearly as much as Plunkett; I get that he lives in Colorado).

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - Farm93 - 11-20-2010

The local ABC guys did their weekly wrap-up thing and implied (confirmed?) that this was Elway\'s first visit since 1982.

John was busy for a while, and of course Stanford fired his Dad.  So that makes things a bit harder.  I am sure with a child on the Farm the situation improved.

If he had anything to do with the teams\' fantastic level of play today, then I would love to have him show up before every Big Game.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - CowboyIndian - 11-20-2010

Quote:.  I\'m assuming that this was his first time back at Memorial Stadium since the much-lamented 1982 Big Game.  

TV guys said so....and that he was an honorary captain. He was very complimentary toward Luck, Harbaugh and this Stanford team during the interview...as you might expect.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - doubledub - 11-20-2010

Two weeks ago I wrote that Wilkerson was the best back and should be the starter.  All I got in response was a snide email that said "thank you Mrs. Wilkerson."  Look at the bandwagon now...you gotta look at how these guys run rather than just the stats.  Taylor is they typical "dependable" back, good but not spectacular.  Wilkerson has shown flashes of brilliance and WILL be spectacular before the season is over (I\'m counting the bowl game).

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - yvonne - 11-20-2010

They\'re both good backs. Nothing anyone has said represents any sort of bandwagon. If you\'re campaigning to get one or the other playing time, you\'ve come to the wrong place since none of us makes those decisions.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - terry - 11-20-2010

The coaches obviously don\'t think Wilkerson is a dependable pass blocker. When Wilkerson comes into the game, we are much more predictable because Wilkerson usually gets the ball. Taylor is a very, very good pass blocker. Right now, the coaches clearly are comfortable using Taylor as an every-down back, but that does not appear to be the case with Wilkerson.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - yvonne - 11-20-2010

This is insane. It\'s one thing to criticize coaching decisions and personnel decisions when the team is doing poorly, but this is a top 10 team that is the best Stanford team in memory! I think we can trust the coaches on this one.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - jayasena - 11-21-2010

Can\'t we just like both of them? They both seem to be doing quite well.

If I take anything from washingtonismoney\'s original post, it\'s that both guys are pretty comparable when playing at similar points in the game (as opposed to one coming out after the other has worn down the defense). Perhaps Wilkerson looks better to some but Taylor is obviously doing something right as well judging by the stats. And if he\'s making it look effortless, more power to him.

I think we\'d better learn to - JohnR34231 - 11-21-2010

My guess is they will be splitting the playing time next year.

Re: Thought an interesting little footnote to the - yvonne - 11-21-2010

Quote:Can\'t we just like both of them? They both seem to be doing quite well.

Yep, they\'re our guys!

We could go to the wishbone offense - Redrum - 11-21-2010

And then instead of too many RBs,  we\'d be desperately seeking another.