[washingtonismoney]

The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[washingtonismoney]

The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[lex24]

Forget it. Not going to happen. You might as well just best your head against the wall.

The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[lex24]

Forget it. Not going to happen. You might as well just best your head against the wall.

The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[Beeg_Dawg]

Forget it. Not going to happen. You might as well just best your head against the wall.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201076#msg201076 date=1505629400]
The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[/quote]

Yep.  We have talking about this since the end of Shaw's first season.  If you are David Shaw, you long in the mirror and say "Who is better than I am ?"

Over time, it is hard to argue with that.

[Beeg_Dawg]

Forget it. Not going to happen. You might as well just best your head against the wall.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201076#msg201076 date=1505629400]
The tricky thing is that Shaw, presumably, will want to stay "pro-style," which is a term that doesn't have much meaning any more. The pros throw the ball the majority of the time and play the majority of time in shotgun and then whine when their QBs aren't good enough to win while throwing 35 times a game. Maybe try changing strategies, fellas.

Anyway, the instinct to stay "pro-style" isn't dumb. Wideouts are hard to come by for Stanford; it can recruit the best tight ends and best offensive linemen and maybe the fifth-best wideouts. Spreading things out is an excellent way to lose 40-35 games all the time. So, fine, stay "pro-style."

Still this limits your options because of the above: the pros are besotted with ludicrously complex schemes that involve mediocre QBs throwing 35+ times a game while college is dominated by the spread. But there are options. Colorado State goes pro-style and has been successful. Same for SDSU. If LSU decides to fire Ed Orgeron, grab Matt Canada, who is good. I dunno, maybe someone who learned from Mark Richt.

[/quote]

Yep.  We have talking about this since the end of Shaw's first season.  If you are David Shaw, you long in the mirror and say "Who is better than I am ?"

Over time, it is hard to argue with that.

[BostonCard]

In a game with a lot of problems, the fact that our star running back only touched the ball 13 times is the most serious, especially on a day where nearly one out of every times he touched the ball resulted in a 40+ yard gain.  The failure to feed the ball to Love isn't a matter of scheme; it was just a brain fart.

BC

[BostonCard]

In a game with a lot of problems, the fact that our star running back only touched the ball 13 times is the most serious, especially on a day where nearly one out of every times he touched the ball resulted in a 40+ yard gain.  The failure to feed the ball to Love isn't a matter of scheme; it was just a brain fart.

BC

[washingtonismoney]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do. For example, I heard time and again that because he was a stick in the mud we wouldn't see Little and Sarell starting/getting significant time this year. And yet it happened. So I don't know why people have this assurance certain things will or won't happen.

[washingtonismoney]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do. For example, I heard time and again that because he was a stick in the mud we wouldn't see Little and Sarell starting/getting significant time this year. And yet it happened. So I don't know why people have this assurance certain things will or won't happen.

[JohnR34231]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do. For example, I heard time and again that because he was a stick in the mud we wouldn't see Little and Sarell starting/getting significant time this year. And yet it happened. So I don't know why people have this assurance certain things will or won't happen.

I do think that there is a chance we might see Costello this year. However, it is going to take a couple more bad games from Chryst for that to happen. Which might be OK, because that gives the O Line more time to come together.

[JohnR34231]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do. For example, I heard time and again that because he was a stick in the mud we wouldn't see Little and Sarell starting/getting significant time this year. And yet it happened. So I don't know why people have this assurance certain things will or won't happen.

I do think that there is a chance we might see Costello this year. However, it is going to take a couple more bad games from Chryst for that to happen. Which might be OK, because that gives the O Line more time to come together.

[winflop]

I don't think the OL was that bad last night. Chryst was awful and made two god-awful throws that cost us the game, but Irwin was the only WR who got open all night. And Bryce Love cannot pass block, nor should he be asked to. Better off having him get out in the flat or beyond the LOS as a check down. Need to get him the ball a hell of a lot more than 13 times.

I'm not sure putting Costello in there is going to make things any better, but I'm not against it.

All that being said, this must be the last season for Pritchard & Bloomgren. QB development the last 3 years has been wholly inadequate, OL play hasn't been near good enough given the talent coming in the door, and offensive game plans have been just that -  offensive.

[winflop]

I don't think the OL was that bad last night. Chryst was awful and made two god-awful throws that cost us the game, but Irwin was the only WR who got open all night. And Bryce Love cannot pass block, nor should he be asked to. Better off having him get out in the flat or beyond the LOS as a check down. Need to get him the ball a hell of a lot more than 13 times.

I'm not sure putting Costello in there is going to make things any better, but I'm not against it.

All that being said, this must be the last season for Pritchard & Bloomgren. QB development the last 3 years has been wholly inadequate, OL play hasn't been near good enough given the talent coming in the door, and offensive game plans have been just that -  offensive.

[martyup]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o

[martyup]

I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o

[phxfan]

David Shaw is among the worst offensive coaches in all of major college football.  The evidence of this is abundant that DS has had top flight talent and underperforms nearly every season.  Keller Chryst was rushed back and the result is more dumped games. This game was easily winnable.

[phxfan]

David Shaw is among the worst offensive coaches in all of major college football.  The evidence of this is abundant that DS has had top flight talent and underperforms nearly every season.  Keller Chryst was rushed back and the result is more dumped games. This game was easily winnable.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201122#msg201122 date=1505654584]
I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o
[/quote]

What happened at halftime ?

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201122#msg201122 date=1505654584]
I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o
[/quote]

What happened at halftime ?

[Trevmiesterj]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=17414.msg201147#msg201147 date=1505665510]
[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201122#msg201122 date=1505654584]
I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o
[/quote]

What happened at halftime ?

This article has video and the most speculation.  It appears to me that Shaw didn't like the teams intermingling as they went to locker rooms at halftime and told opposing players to move aside.  Then he gets into it with a SDSU coach.  I have to admit, it is a bad look.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAs3J1t
[/quote]

[Trevmiesterj]

[quote author=martyup link=topic=17414.msg201147#msg201147 date=1505665510]
[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17414.msg201122#msg201122 date=1505654584]
I dunno, Shaw does a lot of things people have sworn up and down he'd never do.

Yeah, like almost getting in a fist fight running off the field at halftime.  :o
[/quote]

What happened at halftime ?

This article has video and the most speculation.  It appears to me that Shaw didn't like the teams intermingling as they went to locker rooms at halftime and told opposing players to move aside.  Then he gets into it with a SDSU coach.  I have to admit, it is a bad look.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/...ar-AAs3J1t
[/quote]

[dabigv13]

At halftime, after SDSU kneeled to kill the remaining time, Stanford started to head to the locker room first, which involved crossing the field. SDSU also had to cross the field to go to their locker room, which resulted in the two teams meeting, and then some words.

Pretty predictable occurrence, SDSU should have a better way of handling this, or switch the locker rooms/sidelines so it doesn't happen.

[dabigv13]

At halftime, after SDSU kneeled to kill the remaining time, Stanford started to head to the locker room first, which involved crossing the field. SDSU also had to cross the field to go to their locker room, which resulted in the two teams meeting, and then some words.

Pretty predictable occurrence, SDSU should have a better way of handling this, or switch the locker rooms/sidelines so it doesn't happen.

[UltimateCard]

Ah, that explains the half-time mood... but Shaw must've been on a hair trigger to blow up (for good reason).

[UltimateCard]

Ah, that explains the half-time mood... but Shaw must've been on a hair trigger to blow up (for good reason).

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

On a related subject..........

In the final seconds  of yesterday's Oregon vs Wyoming game, Oregon was on about the 20 yard line , up by almost 40 points, and decided to try and throw to the end zone for more points.
The Wyoming coach was furious and had to be restrained by his staff.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

On a related subject..........

In the final seconds  of yesterday's Oregon vs Wyoming game, Oregon was on about the 20 yard line , up by almost 40 points, and decided to try and throw to the end zone for more points.
The Wyoming coach was furious and had to be restrained by his staff.

[BobK]

I was at the game.  Did t they show the fight started by SDS?
Then at the half the SDS team stood in the way of Stanford leaving the field. 

Had nothing to do with our terrible performance

Not going for the first down 4th and inches a terrible call.  I'm sure that's discussed elsewhere

[BobK]

I was at the game.  Did t they show the fight started by SDS?
Then at the half the SDS team stood in the way of Stanford leaving the field. 

Had nothing to do with our terrible performance

Not going for the first down 4th and inches a terrible call.  I'm sure that's discussed elsewhere

[Goose]

I don't think the OL was that bad last night. Chryst was awful and made two god-awful throws that cost us the game, but Irwin was the only WR who got open all night.

Sorry, but I disagree with the concept the OL wasn't that bad. We couldn't sustain a drive because they couldn't run block most of the time. It was 50 yards or nothing, and there were more nothings than 50 yards. That is what Stanford does, and we didn't. We couldn't.
That said, Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game. There were cases when had other receivers open, but Chryst didn't even look at them. None of that would have mattered if Chryst could have completed a 12 yard pass to a basically open tight end. He threw it into the ground. He wasn't under tremendous pressure. He didn't execute. Yes, lots of other mistakes were made by other people, but that was what lost us the game. You MUST complete that pass. If you can't, we need another guy out there. I don't think this is something that is coached into a player, or learned. If you are a quality QB, you make that play. Some guys do (Hogan). Some guys don't. (Nunes) Why one and not the other? I don't know. It's not obvious. But it is real.

[Goose]

I don't think the OL was that bad last night. Chryst was awful and made two god-awful throws that cost us the game, but Irwin was the only WR who got open all night.

Sorry, but I disagree with the concept the OL wasn't that bad. We couldn't sustain a drive because they couldn't run block most of the time. It was 50 yards or nothing, and there were more nothings than 50 yards. That is what Stanford does, and we didn't. We couldn't.
That said, Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game. There were cases when had other receivers open, but Chryst didn't even look at them. None of that would have mattered if Chryst could have completed a 12 yard pass to a basically open tight end. He threw it into the ground. He wasn't under tremendous pressure. He didn't execute. Yes, lots of other mistakes were made by other people, but that was what lost us the game. You MUST complete that pass. If you can't, we need another guy out there. I don't think this is something that is coached into a player, or learned. If you are a quality QB, you make that play. Some guys do (Hogan). Some guys don't. (Nunes) Why one and not the other? I don't know. It's not obvious. But it is real.

[winflop]

Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.

[winflop]

Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.

[Goose]

[quote author=Goose link=topic=17414.msg201195#msg201195 date=1505677202]
Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.
[/quote]
I don't disagree that they were horrible. However, despite these serious errors, we were in a position to win the game if we could get a first down and keep the ball. I guess I am trying to deal with the question "Should we expect Chryst to be an adequate Stanford QB?". Until this game, in my mind at least, the jury was still out. The interceptions were mental mistakes. They were passes that shouldn't have been thrown. They were intercepted not because they were bad throws, but because any throw in the area was a mistake. Those mistakes could, at least in theory, be corrected. However, the inability to execute a relatively simple throw to an open receiver when the game is on the line is something that an "adequate" Stanford QB will always do. It didn't require superman. It required competence. That competence was missing. If it were there, we win. So, I still argue the interceptions, while really bad, weren't fatal. It was the failure to execute a "routine" play that was, and we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.

[Goose]

[quote author=Goose link=topic=17414.msg201195#msg201195 date=1505677202]
Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.
[/quote]
I don't disagree that they were horrible. However, despite these serious errors, we were in a position to win the game if we could get a first down and keep the ball. I guess I am trying to deal with the question "Should we expect Chryst to be an adequate Stanford QB?". Until this game, in my mind at least, the jury was still out. The interceptions were mental mistakes. They were passes that shouldn't have been thrown. They were intercepted not because they were bad throws, but because any throw in the area was a mistake. Those mistakes could, at least in theory, be corrected. However, the inability to execute a relatively simple throw to an open receiver when the game is on the line is something that an "adequate" Stanford QB will always do. It didn't require superman. It required competence. That competence was missing. If it were there, we win. So, I still argue the interceptions, while really bad, weren't fatal. It was the failure to execute a "routine" play that was, and we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.

[winflop]

we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.

On that we can agree 100%.

[winflop]

we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.

On that we can agree 100%.

[BostonCard]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17414.msg201212#msg201212 date=1505680461]
[quote author=Goose link=topic=17414.msg201195#msg201195 date=1505677202]
Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.
[/quote]
I don't disagree that they were horrible. However, despite these serious errors, we were in a position to win the game if we could get a first down and keep the ball. I guess I am trying to deal with the question "Should we expect Chryst to be an adequate Stanford QB?". Until this game, in my mind at least, the jury was still out. The interceptions were mental mistakes. They were passes that shouldn't have been thrown. They were intercepted not because they were bad throws, but because any throw in the area was a mistake. Those mistakes could, at least in theory, be corrected. However, the inability to execute a relatively simple throw to an open receiver when the game is on the line is something that an "adequate" Stanford QB will always do. It didn't require superman. It required competence. That competence was missing. If it were there, we win. So, I still argue the interceptions, while really bad, weren't fatal. It was the failure to execute a "routine" play that was, and we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.
[/quote]

The second INT was a bad throw not a bad decision.  JJAW had one on one coverage with a smaller DB.  It should have been an easy play for a chunk of yards.  The problem was it was an awfully thrown ball.  Literally, Chryst threw it where only the defensive back could get it.

The first interception was a bad decision.  He threw it to a player who was in quadrupole coverage.

BC

[BostonCard]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17414.msg201212#msg201212 date=1505680461]
[quote author=Goose link=topic=17414.msg201195#msg201195 date=1505677202]
Chryst threw a real bad interception that simply shouldn't happen. But that didn't cost us the game.

The hell it didn't. He threw two bad INTs. The first one resulted in an SDSU TD before halftime and the second one cost us any chance of getting into FG range. Both were bad decisions to even throw in that direction that were compounded by atrocious throws.
[/quote]
I don't disagree that they were horrible. However, despite these serious errors, we were in a position to win the game if we could get a first down and keep the ball. I guess I am trying to deal with the question "Should we expect Chryst to be an adequate Stanford QB?". Until this game, in my mind at least, the jury was still out. The interceptions were mental mistakes. They were passes that shouldn't have been thrown. They were intercepted not because they were bad throws, but because any throw in the area was a mistake. Those mistakes could, at least in theory, be corrected. However, the inability to execute a relatively simple throw to an open receiver when the game is on the line is something that an "adequate" Stanford QB will always do. It didn't require superman. It required competence. That competence was missing. If it were there, we win. So, I still argue the interceptions, while really bad, weren't fatal. It was the failure to execute a "routine" play that was, and we can't have that in a Stanford QB. Next man up.
[/quote]

The second INT was a bad throw not a bad decision.  JJAW had one on one coverage with a smaller DB.  It should have been an easy play for a chunk of yards.  The problem was it was an awfully thrown ball.  Literally, Chryst threw it where only the defensive back could get it.

The first interception was a bad decision.  He threw it to a player who was in quadrupole coverage.

BC