[martyup]

Well, McCaffrey has high hopes for the D.

https://twitter.com/lombardiespn/status/...9491972096

I think/hope he is right.

BC

He knows more than anyone how good our D is this season.  I am stoked by his comment.

[martyup]

Well, McCaffrey has high hopes for the D.

https://twitter.com/lombardiespn/status/...9491972096

I think/hope he is right.

BC

He knows more than anyone how good our D is this season.  I am stoked by his comment.

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw, McCaffrey, and Solomon Thomas: https://soundcloud.com/gostanford/game-1-media-day

Some raves for Okereke and Reid from Shaw right off the bat.

EDIT: Lots more raves of note, but Shaw declares that "all of" the OL have NFL prospects.

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw, McCaffrey, and Solomon Thomas: https://soundcloud.com/gostanford/game-1-media-day

Some raves for Okereke and Reid from Shaw right off the bat.

EDIT: Lots more raves of note, but Shaw declares that "all of" the OL have NFL prospects.

[donkey687]

EDIT: Lots more raves of note, but Shaw declares that "all of" the OL have NFL prospects.

Shaw is certainly raving a lot less about this OL than he did two years ago when the overhyped new OL didn't pan out as planned initially.  With the exception of Tucker who was highly recruited, the rest of the starting OL were mostly mid-three star recruits.  Burkett and AT Hall are redshirt sophomores starting for the first time that we just haven't heard that much about in either recruiting or in rave reviews.  Good to see both of them develop and crack the starting lineup. I think it is a good sign that AT Hall beat out Bright for the tackle spot as Bright is a little more proven. When they line-up on Friday, recruiting rankings won't matter.  Let's hope they can carry on the recent Stanford tradition of the TWU and dominating the line of scrimmage. 

OL and QB are the biggest question marks on this team to me.  The recent hype over Jackson and Okereke have alleviated my concerns over the third DL and second ILB. Our defense is going to be good.  OL- I hope so based on TWU and Turley tradition, but on paper with limited experience from some new guys and limited recruiting star power, it isn't obvious that we will have an above average OL.  The superstar OL class from 2012 that is mostly departed (with exception of Caspers) left us with some leaner recruiting years following that.

[donkey687]

EDIT: Lots more raves of note, but Shaw declares that "all of" the OL have NFL prospects.

Shaw is certainly raving a lot less about this OL than he did two years ago when the overhyped new OL didn't pan out as planned initially.  With the exception of Tucker who was highly recruited, the rest of the starting OL were mostly mid-three star recruits.  Burkett and AT Hall are redshirt sophomores starting for the first time that we just haven't heard that much about in either recruiting or in rave reviews.  Good to see both of them develop and crack the starting lineup. I think it is a good sign that AT Hall beat out Bright for the tackle spot as Bright is a little more proven. When they line-up on Friday, recruiting rankings won't matter.  Let's hope they can carry on the recent Stanford tradition of the TWU and dominating the line of scrimmage. 

OL and QB are the biggest question marks on this team to me.  The recent hype over Jackson and Okereke have alleviated my concerns over the third DL and second ILB. Our defense is going to be good.  OL- I hope so based on TWU and Turley tradition, but on paper with limited experience from some new guys and limited recruiting star power, it isn't obvious that we will have an above average OL.  The superstar OL class from 2012 that is mostly departed (with exception of Caspers) left us with some leaner recruiting years following that.

[ChicagoCard]

Fanaika was part of that 2012 class and I believe he was a 4-star, and if I remember correctly high school player of the year in the State of Utah.

[ChicagoCard]

Fanaika was part of that 2012 class and I believe he was a 4-star, and if I remember correctly high school player of the year in the State of Utah.

[82lsju]

Fanaika was part of that 2012 class and I believe he was a 4-star, and if I remember correctly high school player of the year in the State of Utah.

The Fanaika File
• Prepped at Pleasant Grove (Utah) under head coach Dale Sampson
    • Earned three varsity football letters
    • Played left tackle, left guard, right tackle and right guard
• Signed with Stanford in 2011 before spending two years on church mission
• Four-star recruit, nation's ninth-best offensive guard by Rivals.com
• Utah's top recruit by Rivals.com
• PrepStar All-America
• SuperPrep All-America
• 2012 Offense-Defense All-American Bowl
• 2011 Army All-American Leadership Award

http://www.gostanford.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=7303

[82lsju]

Fanaika was part of that 2012 class and I believe he was a 4-star, and if I remember correctly high school player of the year in the State of Utah.

The Fanaika File
• Prepped at Pleasant Grove (Utah) under head coach Dale Sampson
    • Earned three varsity football letters
    • Played left tackle, left guard, right tackle and right guard
• Signed with Stanford in 2011 before spending two years on church mission
• Four-star recruit, nation's ninth-best offensive guard by Rivals.com
• Utah's top recruit by Rivals.com
• PrepStar All-America
• SuperPrep All-America
• 2012 Offense-Defense All-American Bowl
• 2011 Army All-American Leadership Award

http://www.gostanford.com/roster.aspx?rp_id=7303

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw on Rich Eisen's show: http://www.richeisenshow.com/2016/08/29/...ore-82916/


The "Ryan Burns as starter" thing is interesting -- if you listen to Shaw's actual rhetoric, he seems barely convinced in Burns-better-than-Chryst.

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw on Rich Eisen's show: http://www.richeisenshow.com/2016/08/29/...ore-82916/


The "Ryan Burns as starter" thing is interesting -- if you listen to Shaw's actual rhetoric, he seems barely convinced in Burns-better-than-Chryst.

[CTcard]

The "Ryan Burns as starter" thing is interesting -- if you listen to Shaw's actual rhetoric, he seems barely convinced in Burns-better-than-Chryst.

I've detected that in Shaw as well.

I cannot quite tell how much of that is Shaw coach-speak (everybody is wonderful - all competitions were extremely close - Chryst please don't leave) and how much he really thinks they were close.

As I have posted elsewhere, Neuheisel seems to think that this year Stanford had one of the rare QB competitions that actually was close.

[CTcard]

The "Ryan Burns as starter" thing is interesting -- if you listen to Shaw's actual rhetoric, he seems barely convinced in Burns-better-than-Chryst.

I've detected that in Shaw as well.

I cannot quite tell how much of that is Shaw coach-speak (everybody is wonderful - all competitions were extremely close - Chryst please don't leave) and how much he really thinks they were close.

As I have posted elsewhere, Neuheisel seems to think that this year Stanford had one of the rare QB competitions that actually was close.

[washingtonismoney]

https://twitter.com/BobGreenburg/status/...0345554945

[washingtonismoney]

https://twitter.com/BobGreenburg/status/...0345554945

[terry]

[tweet]770697760345554945[/tweet]

Makes sense. We have a lot of guys at safety. Next year, Lloyd and Hoffpauir will be gone, and there will be more opportunity for Pryts.

[terry]

[tweet]770697760345554945[/tweet]

Makes sense. We have a lot of guys at safety. Next year, Lloyd and Hoffpauir will be gone, and there will be more opportunity for Pryts.

[washingtonismoney]

Trent Irwin...deep threat???: http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/arti...193911.php

[washingtonismoney]

Trent Irwin...deep threat???: http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/arti...193911.php

[OutsiderFan]

If you saw Irwin's high school highlights, witnessed him run that stop and go route against Oregon last season, and have seen him in practices since last season, the idea of Irwin as a deep threat makes sense.


He runs such great routes that he has no problem getting behind defenders.  He will eat man coverage alive.  The question is really how will Irwin do finding openings against good zone defenses, which is also the question for Burns and Chryst.

[OutsiderFan]

If you saw Irwin's high school highlights, witnessed him run that stop and go route against Oregon last season, and have seen him in practices since last season, the idea of Irwin as a deep threat makes sense.


He runs such great routes that he has no problem getting behind defenders.  He will eat man coverage alive.  The question is really how will Irwin do finding openings against good zone defenses, which is also the question for Burns and Chryst.

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.


http://www.pacifictakes.com/2016/8/30/12...el?ref=yfp

[TreesAndBirds]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.


http://www.pacifictakes.com/2016/8/30/12...el?ref=yfp

[stupac2]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.


http://www.pacifictakes.com/2016/8/30/12...el?ref=yfp

Kinda hard to take an analysis seriously when the author is making basic factual errors like misspelling McCaffrey.

[stupac2]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.


http://www.pacifictakes.com/2016/8/30/12...el?ref=yfp

Kinda hard to take an analysis seriously when the author is making basic factual errors like misspelling McCaffrey.

[CTcard]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.

SBNation is a weird site, some good articles and some ... odd.

This guy says a couple of things that just seem wrong, and a lot that make me wonder, "how does he know?". There's a lot of stuff about the two QBs I would find interesting if I thought the author knew what he was talking about - but I just don't know.

Led by Voldemort Trophy candidate Christian McCaffery and, for what seems like the 200th year in a row, another stellar defense, Stanford should face its biggest challenge around bowl season, and is expected to more or less roll through the regular season.

Outside the first phrase, not sure where that comes from.
Last year the defense was decidedly down from recent years, but more importantly everybody paying attention thinks Stanford faces its biggest challenge over the first six games - hardly rolling through the regular season.

But more relevant here, is whether anything he says about the quarterbacks is actually true,

Ryan Burns is a classic pro style quarterback.
He works best under center.
He has great accuracy on short routes,
  and pretty good vision of the field.
He is not a dual-threat quarterback by any sense of the word, but he is agile and mobile enough to roll out of the pocket and scramble for a few yards here and there.

So, there are five statements about Burns that are pretty hard to know about a QB who ran the single wing in HS, has just barely stepped on the field in college, and has mostly undergone his development in closed practices.

The quarterback competition came down to two quarterbacks who represented two different things for Stanford.

Maybe, but that certainly goes against the conventional wisdom.

In Keller Chryst, David Shaw had a quarterback who is young,
faster than previous Stanford quarterbacks,
a strong arm,
and somehow who could make the highlight play.
However, for every highlight that Keller could create, he can also underthrow his receiver by 3 yards on a simple out route.

Now we have five things about Chryst. The first is sort of true, just barely with respect to Burns (one class behind). We've seen enough to know the strong arm part is true - but pretty much for Burns as well.
The rest?


So, I suspect the author made this all up, but does anyone here have any reason to think he has actual information?

[CTcard]

Interesting comparison of Burns v Chryst.

SBNation is a weird site, some good articles and some ... odd.

This guy says a couple of things that just seem wrong, and a lot that make me wonder, "how does he know?". There's a lot of stuff about the two QBs I would find interesting if I thought the author knew what he was talking about - but I just don't know.

Led by Voldemort Trophy candidate Christian McCaffery and, for what seems like the 200th year in a row, another stellar defense, Stanford should face its biggest challenge around bowl season, and is expected to more or less roll through the regular season.

Outside the first phrase, not sure where that comes from.
Last year the defense was decidedly down from recent years, but more importantly everybody paying attention thinks Stanford faces its biggest challenge over the first six games - hardly rolling through the regular season.

But more relevant here, is whether anything he says about the quarterbacks is actually true,

Ryan Burns is a classic pro style quarterback.
He works best under center.
He has great accuracy on short routes,
  and pretty good vision of the field.
He is not a dual-threat quarterback by any sense of the word, but he is agile and mobile enough to roll out of the pocket and scramble for a few yards here and there.

So, there are five statements about Burns that are pretty hard to know about a QB who ran the single wing in HS, has just barely stepped on the field in college, and has mostly undergone his development in closed practices.

The quarterback competition came down to two quarterbacks who represented two different things for Stanford.

Maybe, but that certainly goes against the conventional wisdom.

In Keller Chryst, David Shaw had a quarterback who is young,
faster than previous Stanford quarterbacks,
a strong arm,
and somehow who could make the highlight play.
However, for every highlight that Keller could create, he can also underthrow his receiver by 3 yards on a simple out route.

Now we have five things about Chryst. The first is sort of true, just barely with respect to Burns (one class behind). We've seen enough to know the strong arm part is true - but pretty much for Burns as well.
The rest?


So, I suspect the author made this all up, but does anyone here have any reason to think he has actual information?

[BostonCard]

Burns has the stronger arm, although both QB's have strong enough arms.
Both QB's have prototypical size for a quarterback.
Both QB's are mobile.  Conventional wisdom held that Burns was a better rusher than Chryst, while the latter was a better passer, but I don't know that this is true any more.
Burns had much farther to go to learn the system; as is well-documented, he ran a single wing in high school.
Chryst was more polished when he came to Stanford than your average freshman; his father Geep was a QB coach.
As of the spring game in 2015, Burns still had trouble executing the QB/center exchange and despite having been at Stanford a year longer than Chryst, still had further to go to learn the system.  As late as one year ago, Shaw was publicly bearish on both quarterbacks, though that may have been a motivational tool.
Chryst was nominally the backup quarterback for Kevin Hogan last year, but in practice Hogan was rarely pulled and he had only 9 attempts.  Burns has fewer career passing attempts than Christian McCaffrey.
Most people, including, supposedly David Shaw, believed that Chryst was more likely to win the starting job at the end of last season.
Burns had a stellar spring practice and showed dramatic improvement that carried over to the fall.
The QB competition was pretty close, but Burns was probably a little bit better.  More importantly, though, Burns appears to have had a steeper trajectory, starting out a bit behind and ending up a bit ahead.  Burns has always had the physical tools, but not the knowledge or experience.  He was always a bit of a "project".  However three-plus years in the system and he has progressed further than Chryst, who started out at a higher level in QB development, but may have had less room to grow.
Based on what I've seen and heard, there is reason to be bullish about both Burns and Chryst, but we will see in a few days.  If the OL can come together, we should be fine.

[BostonCard]

Burns has the stronger arm, although both QB's have strong enough arms.
Both QB's have prototypical size for a quarterback.
Both QB's are mobile.  Conventional wisdom held that Burns was a better rusher than Chryst, while the latter was a better passer, but I don't know that this is true any more.
Burns had much farther to go to learn the system; as is well-documented, he ran a single wing in high school.
Chryst was more polished when he came to Stanford than your average freshman; his father Geep was a QB coach.
As of the spring game in 2015, Burns still had trouble executing the QB/center exchange and despite having been at Stanford a year longer than Chryst, still had further to go to learn the system.  As late as one year ago, Shaw was publicly bearish on both quarterbacks, though that may have been a motivational tool.
Chryst was nominally the backup quarterback for Kevin Hogan last year, but in practice Hogan was rarely pulled and he had only 9 attempts.  Burns has fewer career passing attempts than Christian McCaffrey.
Most people, including, supposedly David Shaw, believed that Chryst was more likely to win the starting job at the end of last season.
Burns had a stellar spring practice and showed dramatic improvement that carried over to the fall.
The QB competition was pretty close, but Burns was probably a little bit better.  More importantly, though, Burns appears to have had a steeper trajectory, starting out a bit behind and ending up a bit ahead.  Burns has always had the physical tools, but not the knowledge or experience.  He was always a bit of a "project".  However three-plus years in the system and he has progressed further than Chryst, who started out at a higher level in QB development, but may have had less room to grow.
Based on what I've seen and heard, there is reason to be bullish about both Burns and Chryst, but we will see in a few days.  If the OL can come together, we should be fine.

[CTcard]

Burns has the stronger arm, ...
...
...
...

In other words, you think the guy on SB Nation made everything up?

[CTcard]

Burns has the stronger arm, ...
...
...
...

In other words, you think the guy on SB Nation made everything up?

[BostonCard]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

BC

[BostonCard]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

BC

[CTcard]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

What, no cross on his chest?

[CTcard]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

What, no cross on his chest?

[French Rage]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

BC

Is that good or bad?

[French Rage]

I wish I could find the reference, but one of the receivers was quoted as saying that Burns' throws make an audible noise going through the air.

BC

Is that good or bad?

[DC 86]

Burns had much farther to go to learn the system; as is well-documented, he ran a single wing in high school.

Burns ran the single wing through his junior year in HS but during his senior year Stone Bridge's coach installed a spread offense to take advantage of Burns's skills - there are highlights on youtube which show him in the classic spread with multiple receivers running all over the field. As a result Burns threw for over 2500 yards and 28 touchdowns in his final season.


Having said that, it's absolutely true that he had much farther to go to learn the system since he had to adjust to taking the snap from under center and Stanford's offense is far more complex than the half field reads that are typical of a spread system. But he did have experience besides the single wing which seems to be frequently cited as the only system that he played prior to Stanford.

[DC 86]

Burns had much farther to go to learn the system; as is well-documented, he ran a single wing in high school.

Burns ran the single wing through his junior year in HS but during his senior year Stone Bridge's coach installed a spread offense to take advantage of Burns's skills - there are highlights on youtube which show him in the classic spread with multiple receivers running all over the field. As a result Burns threw for over 2500 yards and 28 touchdowns in his final season.


Having said that, it's absolutely true that he had much farther to go to learn the system since he had to adjust to taking the snap from under center and Stanford's offense is far more complex than the half field reads that are typical of a spread system. But he did have experience besides the single wing which seems to be frequently cited as the only system that he played prior to Stanford.