[Durty Nelly]

For all those Perez fans.  Pro Football Focus Sun Bowl Grades.


https://www.profootballfocus.com/college...gn=college

Top defensive grades:

DI Solomon Thomas, 92.5

S Dallas Lloyd, 82.6

LB Jordan Perez, 80.8

S Justin Reid, 79.9

DI Harrison Phillips, 78.1

[Durty Nelly]

For all those Perez fans.  Pro Football Focus Sun Bowl Grades.


https://www.profootballfocus.com/college...gn=college

Top defensive grades:

DI Solomon Thomas, 92.5

S Dallas Lloyd, 82.6

LB Jordan Perez, 80.8

S Justin Reid, 79.9

DI Harrison Phillips, 78.1

[BostonCard]

Thomas and Lloyd are a given.  Reid and Phillips had good games and deserve the recognition.  A bit surprised about Perez, but he was good in pass protection.

BC

[BostonCard]

Thomas and Lloyd are a given.  Reid and Phillips had good games and deserve the recognition.  A bit surprised about Perez, but he was good in pass protection.

BC

[martyup]

Our defense was stellar.  Good for Perez.

[martyup]

Our defense was stellar.  Good for Perez.

[winflop]

I hope he carries it over into next season.  Lord knows we need a reliable ILB - none of the six this year were good.

[winflop]

I hope he carries it over into next season.  Lord knows we need a reliable ILB - none of the six this year were good.

[martyup]

I just re-watched the game and isolated on the linebackers and offensive line. 

The best LB platoon was Okereke and Palma, with Okereke having the better game.  Noor Davis and Perez were not good.  Alfieri played a good game.  Branch was spotty.  Other than the pass break-up, I didn't see Perez make any decent plays, even in pass coverage.  I did, however, see him get blocked and miss tackles.  It was Perez and Branch in on the last UNC drive that ended in a TD.  Branch was playing the right inside LB on that scramble TD pass.  Somehow he ended up on the opposite side of the field when the TD catch was made.  It doesn't appear he was on a stunt.  Had he held his ground and moved into pass protection, he could have broken up that pass.  It was caught right at the normal drop back zone for a right side LB.  Of course, pass protection might not have been his assignment in the defense play call.  Nonetheless, I would have rather seen Okereke and Palma in the game at that point.

The run blocking on the offensive line looked like poor scheming rather than poor execution.  Many times our lineman would move past a defender to get to another defender and make a good block.  However, the defender they moved past would make the tackle.  I'm not sure if that was poor awareness, poor line play calling, or poor execution.  Overall, the pass blocking was acceptable.  Hall has problems with quickness in pass protection, but he consistently created a pocket for the QB on his side.

Re-watching our 4th quarter possession at the goal line was excruciating.  First and goal from the 1/2 yard line.  The right side defensive end for UNC tackled Scarlett for a loss on a the opposite side of the ball on a dive play.  That is just wrong. The 3rd down play is a head scratcher.  We were at the 6 inch line on that play.  Tough to watch that failure.  Glad we didn't need the TD to win the game.

Thomas has strong hands.  On that two point conversion attempt, he locked onto the QB's jersey and flung him to the ground.  Had his grip slipped . . .

[martyup]

I just re-watched the game and isolated on the linebackers and offensive line. 

The best LB platoon was Okereke and Palma, with Okereke having the better game.  Noor Davis and Perez were not good.  Alfieri played a good game.  Branch was spotty.  Other than the pass break-up, I didn't see Perez make any decent plays, even in pass coverage.  I did, however, see him get blocked and miss tackles.  It was Perez and Branch in on the last UNC drive that ended in a TD.  Branch was playing the right inside LB on that scramble TD pass.  Somehow he ended up on the opposite side of the field when the TD catch was made.  It doesn't appear he was on a stunt.  Had he held his ground and moved into pass protection, he could have broken up that pass.  It was caught right at the normal drop back zone for a right side LB.  Of course, pass protection might not have been his assignment in the defense play call.  Nonetheless, I would have rather seen Okereke and Palma in the game at that point.

The run blocking on the offensive line looked like poor scheming rather than poor execution.  Many times our lineman would move past a defender to get to another defender and make a good block.  However, the defender they moved past would make the tackle.  I'm not sure if that was poor awareness, poor line play calling, or poor execution.  Overall, the pass blocking was acceptable.  Hall has problems with quickness in pass protection, but he consistently created a pocket for the QB on his side.

Re-watching our 4th quarter possession at the goal line was excruciating.  First and goal from the 1/2 yard line.  The right side defensive end for UNC tackled Scarlett for a loss on a the opposite side of the ball on a dive play.  That is just wrong. The 3rd down play is a head scratcher.  We were at the 6 inch line on that play.  Tough to watch that failure.  Glad we didn't need the TD to win the game.

Thomas has strong hands.  On that two point conversion attempt, he locked onto the QB's jersey and flung him to the ground.  Had his grip slipped . . .

[Goose]

Re-watching our 4th quarter possession at the goal line was excruciating.  First and goal from the 1/2 yard line.  The right side defensive end for UNC tackled Scarlett for a loss on a the opposite side of the ball on a dive play.  That is just wrong. The 3rd down play is a head scratcher.  We were at the 6 inch line on that play.  Tough to watch that failure.

I don't consider that play a head scratcher. Your previous sentence explained it all. All day long (really all year long), we couldn't get it done in the red zone. Also, that play (to the left side, not the right) was the walk-in 2 point conversion against UDFG. So that play could have worked great. Problem was, UNC had watched that movie.

[Goose]

Re-watching our 4th quarter possession at the goal line was excruciating.  First and goal from the 1/2 yard line.  The right side defensive end for UNC tackled Scarlett for a loss on a the opposite side of the ball on a dive play.  That is just wrong. The 3rd down play is a head scratcher.  We were at the 6 inch line on that play.  Tough to watch that failure.

I don't consider that play a head scratcher. Your previous sentence explained it all. All day long (really all year long), we couldn't get it done in the red zone. Also, that play (to the left side, not the right) was the walk-in 2 point conversion against UDFG. So that play could have worked great. Problem was, UNC had watched that movie.

[BostonCard]

Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

[BostonCard]

Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

[martyup]

Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

If there ever was a time for an audible, it was that play.  We shifted into a shotgun set with an overload on the left side.  They shifted after us and overloaded our right side.  Burns should have just called for a QB keeper to the left and ran it himself.  Missed opportunity that could have cost us the game.  But it didn't.  ;D

[martyup]

Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

If there ever was a time for an audible, it was that play.  We shifted into a shotgun set with an overload on the left side.  They shifted after us and overloaded our right side.  Burns should have just called for a QB keeper to the left and ran it himself.  Missed opportunity that could have cost us the game.  But it didn't.  ;D

[BostonCard]

Watching the replay, it is clear that they were confused by our shift in alignment.  I think the right sided overload was unintentional and was due to a defender being out of position.

A more experienced QB probably recognizes the defense and walks in.  But it is tough being a QB.  You have to relay the plays, read the defense, know exactly what you are supposed to do, and keep your eye on the clock to make sure it all goes off before the play clock expires.  Experience gets you a lot of those nearly automatically, making it easier to read the D.

Oh well.  It was a frustrating play but all is well that ends well.

BC

[BostonCard]

Watching the replay, it is clear that they were confused by our shift in alignment.  I think the right sided overload was unintentional and was due to a defender being out of position.

A more experienced QB probably recognizes the defense and walks in.  But it is tough being a QB.  You have to relay the plays, read the defense, know exactly what you are supposed to do, and keep your eye on the clock to make sure it all goes off before the play clock expires.  Experience gets you a lot of those nearly automatically, making it easier to read the D.

Oh well.  It was a frustrating play but all is well that ends well.

BC

[Goose]

Watching the replay, it is clear that they were confused by our shift in alignment.  I think the right sided overload was unintentional and was due to a defender being out of position.

A more experienced QB probably recognizes the defense and walks in.  But it is tough being a QB.  You have to relay the plays, read the defense, know exactly what you are supposed to do, and keep your eye on the clock to make sure it all goes off before the play clock expires.  Experience gets you a lot of those nearly automatically, making it easier to read the D.

Oh well.  It was a frustrating play but all is well that ends well.

BC

One wonders if the decision tree was "When we shift, if they don't shift with us, run left (where we should have a man advantage), else run right." But the case they shift the wrong way (by accident or design) was never considered, so we do the "else". It would have taken a lot of balls for the QB to run left, but look at the bright side, there was nobody they could yank him for.  ;D  It would be asking a lot, especially for a guy who was not expected to play. Actually, we were disorganized on the play also. The linemen on the left side were madly looking for someone to block.

[Goose]

Watching the replay, it is clear that they were confused by our shift in alignment.  I think the right sided overload was unintentional and was due to a defender being out of position.

A more experienced QB probably recognizes the defense and walks in.  But it is tough being a QB.  You have to relay the plays, read the defense, know exactly what you are supposed to do, and keep your eye on the clock to make sure it all goes off before the play clock expires.  Experience gets you a lot of those nearly automatically, making it easier to read the D.

Oh well.  It was a frustrating play but all is well that ends well.

BC

One wonders if the decision tree was "When we shift, if they don't shift with us, run left (where we should have a man advantage), else run right." But the case they shift the wrong way (by accident or design) was never considered, so we do the "else". It would have taken a lot of balls for the QB to run left, but look at the bright side, there was nobody they could yank him for.  ;D  It would be asking a lot, especially for a guy who was not expected to play. Actually, we were disorganized on the play also. The linemen on the left side were madly looking for someone to block.

[fullmetal]

Does our line have an issue with effective reach blocking?  Also, wasn't that option run to the short side of the field?  Ugh...

[fullmetal]

Does our line have an issue with effective reach blocking?  Also, wasn't that option run to the short side of the field?  Ugh...

[Goose]

Does our line have an issue with effective reach blocking?  Also, wasn't that option run to the short side of the field?  Ugh...

I think our line has an issue with effective blocking period.  ;D I also don't think it was an option run. It was a simple toss play to the weak side, just like the two point conversion against UDFG was. We went strong left towards the wide side of the field. UNC "should have" shifted their defense to the wide side to counter that. They didn't. In fact, the got so confused they had an extra man on the WEAK side of the field. As others have said, we should have changed the play to a strong side run. We either couldn't or didn't. My conjecture as to why is in my previous post. The play might well have worked if UNC had responded "correctly".

[Goose]

Does our line have an issue with effective reach blocking?  Also, wasn't that option run to the short side of the field?  Ugh...

I think our line has an issue with effective blocking period.  ;D I also don't think it was an option run. It was a simple toss play to the weak side, just like the two point conversion against UDFG was. We went strong left towards the wide side of the field. UNC "should have" shifted their defense to the wide side to counter that. They didn't. In fact, the got so confused they had an extra man on the WEAK side of the field. As others have said, we should have changed the play to a strong side run. We either couldn't or didn't. My conjecture as to why is in my previous post. The play might well have worked if UNC had responded "correctly".

[fullmetal]

I'm pretty sure that was an aborted option play...I remember Burns taking a few steps and then pitching the ball back as if he were afraid of getting mauled by a tackler.  But I have not seen any rebroadcasts of the game.  I feel like that was a no-win decision for Burns to be honest--that play was bad from the get-go.

Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

[fullmetal]

I'm pretty sure that was an aborted option play...I remember Burns taking a few steps and then pitching the ball back as if he were afraid of getting mauled by a tackler.  But I have not seen any rebroadcasts of the game.  I feel like that was a no-win decision for Burns to be honest--that play was bad from the get-go.

Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

[washingtonismoney]

Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

It seems like the defensive coaches trust Meeks and Holder to play bump-n-run. The other CBs played softer at the line.

[washingtonismoney]

Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

It seems like the defensive coaches trust Meeks and Holder to play bump-n-run. The other CBs played softer at the line.

[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=16356.msg184981#msg184981 date=1483479167]
Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

It seems like the defensive coaches trust Meeks and Holder to play bump-n-run. The other CBs played softer at the line.
[/quote]

And of course, lest we forget, we did not have Holder this game.

[CrazedZooChimp]

[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=16356.msg184981#msg184981 date=1483479167]
Did we play soft coverage in response to potentially faster WR speed?  Trubisky seemed to take advantage of that.

It seems like the defensive coaches trust Meeks and Holder to play bump-n-run. The other CBs played softer at the line.
[/quote]

And of course, lest we forget, we did not have Holder this game.

[washingtonismoney]

And of course, lest we forget, we did not have Holder this game.

Yeah. I think the absence of Holder has been very much underrated among Stanford fans. Not that the defense was the problem this year, mind you, but still, he was an impact player. The combination of Meeks and Holder was really something to behold the first two games of the season.

[washingtonismoney]

And of course, lest we forget, we did not have Holder this game.

Yeah. I think the absence of Holder has been very much underrated among Stanford fans. Not that the defense was the problem this year, mind you, but still, he was an impact player. The combination of Meeks and Holder was really something to behold the first two games of the season.

[larkinforever]

Can Holder apply for a medical hardship waiver?

He played in games 1, 2, 3 and 7. We played 13 games (and could've played in 14 if we had played in the CCG).

According to what I've gathered about the waiver:
(1) He can't have played in more than 3 games or 30% of games, whichever is greater - I've seen stories/blogs from fans of other schools indicating that a CCG counts even if the team didn't play in it (since the team could've played in it) - the 3 game max doesn't work, of course, but 30% might work if 14 is the denominator (28.6%) rather than 13 (30.8%).
(2) He can't have played in any game past the midpoint of the season - here again, he played in game 7, so if it's 13 games it doesn't work but 14 works.
(3) The injury had to be season ending.

Setting aside whether he would apply for it, could he apply (with reasonable hope of success)?

Aside from the 14 vs. 13 question, I'm wondering if attempting to play in game 7 means the injury wasn't "season ending"?

Did I miss anything else that's relevant to his situation?

[larkinforever]

Can Holder apply for a medical hardship waiver?

He played in games 1, 2, 3 and 7. We played 13 games (and could've played in 14 if we had played in the CCG).

According to what I've gathered about the waiver:
(1) He can't have played in more than 3 games or 30% of games, whichever is greater - I've seen stories/blogs from fans of other schools indicating that a CCG counts even if the team didn't play in it (since the team could've played in it) - the 3 game max doesn't work, of course, but 30% might work if 14 is the denominator (28.6%) rather than 13 (30.8%).
(2) He can't have played in any game past the midpoint of the season - here again, he played in game 7, so if it's 13 games it doesn't work but 14 works.
(3) The injury had to be season ending.

Setting aside whether he would apply for it, could he apply (with reasonable hope of success)?

Aside from the 14 vs. 13 question, I'm wondering if attempting to play in game 7 means the injury wasn't "season ending"?

Did I miss anything else that's relevant to his situation?

[Hank 91]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16356.msg184734#msg184734 date=1483314716]
Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

If there ever was a time for an audible, it was that play.  We shifted into a shotgun set with an overload on the left side.  They shifted after us and overloaded our right side.  Burns should have just called for a QB keeper to the left and ran it himself.  Missed opportunity that could have cost us the game.  But it didn't.  ;D
[/quote]

One of the first questions to Shaw during his presser was about that play. He said he saw what we all saw and was running down the sideline trying to get a timeout. He obviously didn't get it.

[Hank 91]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=16356.msg184734#msg184734 date=1483314716]
Not even that.  We caught UNC out of position on that third down play.  We could have walked into the left side of the end zone.  Or, if UNC hadn't been misaligned, the play might have worked as designed.

But through a combination of bad luck and/or a bad read, we ran the play right into where the Tarheels had miabalanced their defense, and they wound up with extra players. Oops.

We either should have recognized their problem and gone to the other side or, if that wasn't under the control of the QB, we should have recognized that we were running a play into the teeth of the defense and called time out.

BC

BC

If there ever was a time for an audible, it was that play.  We shifted into a shotgun set with an overload on the left side.  They shifted after us and overloaded our right side.  Burns should have just called for a QB keeper to the left and ran it himself.  Missed opportunity that could have cost us the game.  But it didn't.  ;D
[/quote]

One of the first questions to Shaw during his presser was about that play. He said he saw what we all saw and was running down the sideline trying to get a timeout. He obviously didn't get it.