09-28-2012, 04:18 PM
yeah I'd probably give the WRs an F.
Poll: Now that we've seen the team against two conference opponents, how do you think we'll finish in the 8 remaining games? - You do not have permission to vote in this poll.
8 more wins; we suck it up and turn it around
10.00%
4
10.00%
6-7 more wins
32.50%
13
32.50%
4-5 more wins
52.50%
21
52.50%
2-3 more wins
5.00%
2
5.00%
0-1 more win
0%
0
0%
* You voted for this item.
Show Results
Predict the rest of the season
I think you are allowing some grade inflation to a team that was beat soundly by a squad with less talent. There should be NO As given to the offense this week.
WR F (Montgomery's drops were game changing and numerous. Other WRs just disappeared. The only people Nunes could trust last night were wearing TE numbers.)
OL  C- (B for pass blocking offset by a D for run blocking. Don't kid yourself, last night's OL play has plenty of room for improvement)
TEÂ Â BÂ (Nobody on offense gets an A, and this wasn't a great game for Toilolo)
LBÂ Â BÂ (I love those guys but they did allow a game winning TD run through B gap on a short yardage play among other lapses)
We'll improve. The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust but I think we have all lowered the ceiling on our expectations substantially. Anyone want to guess what type of defense the team will see against Arizona next week?
WR F (Montgomery's drops were game changing and numerous. Other WRs just disappeared. The only people Nunes could trust last night were wearing TE numbers.)
OL  C- (B for pass blocking offset by a D for run blocking. Don't kid yourself, last night's OL play has plenty of room for improvement)
TEÂ Â BÂ (Nobody on offense gets an A, and this wasn't a great game for Toilolo)
LBÂ Â BÂ (I love those guys but they did allow a game winning TD run through B gap on a short yardage play among other lapses)
We'll improve. The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust but I think we have all lowered the ceiling on our expectations substantially. Anyone want to guess what type of defense the team will see against Arizona next week?
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
(This post was last modified: 09-28-2012, 04:24 PM by Leftcoast.)
I think you are allowing some grade inflation to a team that was beat soundly by a squad with less talent. There should be NO As given to the offense this week.
WR F (Montgomery's drops were game changing and numerous. Other WRs just disappeared. The only people Nunes could trust last night were wearing TE numbers.)
OL  C- (B for pass blocking offset by a D for run blocking. Don't kid yourself, last night's OL play has plenty of room for improvement)
TEÂ Â BÂ (Nobody on offense gets an A, and this wasn't a great game for Toilolo)
LBÂ Â BÂ (I love those guys but they did allow a game winning TD run through B gap on a short yardage play among other lapses)
We'll improve. The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust but I think we have all lowered the ceiling on our expectations substantially. Anyone want to guess what type of defense the team will see against Arizona next week?
WR F (Montgomery's drops were game changing and numerous. Other WRs just disappeared. The only people Nunes could trust last night were wearing TE numbers.)
OL  C- (B for pass blocking offset by a D for run blocking. Don't kid yourself, last night's OL play has plenty of room for improvement)
TEÂ Â BÂ (Nobody on offense gets an A, and this wasn't a great game for Toilolo)
LBÂ Â BÂ (I love those guys but they did allow a game winning TD run through B gap on a short yardage play among other lapses)
We'll improve. The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust but I think we have all lowered the ceiling on our expectations substantially. Anyone want to guess what type of defense the team will see against Arizona next week?
In 1938 Neville Chamberlain declared "Peace in our time", Superman first appeared in Action Comics, Seabiscuit beat War Admiral ....... and C.a.l last won the Rose Bowl.
09-28-2012, 04:27 PM
Quote:The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust
And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?Â
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
Quote:The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust
And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?Â
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
09-28-2012, 04:41 PM
(09-28-2012, 04:27 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Quote:The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust
And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?
Week 2 at home was a lot better than Week 1 at home. Week 3 at home was significantly better than weeks 1 & 2 at home. The faith is in that trend.
If you think of Week 4 as road week #1, then maybe the team can make major road game improvements by the time road week #3 rolls around. Yes, yes, that would be fine. Just be ready to win big on the road by the time road week #3 comes along.
Have faith and remember that some Pac-12 teams have losses at home to FCS teams. Others have home losses to really bad FBS teams. One road loss only derails BCS CG dreams, and those are not dreams that were needed for me to keep the faith.
(09-28-2012, 04:27 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Quote:The team will get better and grow, the coaches will adjust
And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?
Week 2 at home was a lot better than Week 1 at home. Week 3 at home was significantly better than weeks 1 & 2 at home. The faith is in that trend.
If you think of Week 4 as road week #1, then maybe the team can make major road game improvements by the time road week #3 rolls around. Yes, yes, that would be fine. Just be ready to win big on the road by the time road week #3 comes along.
Have faith and remember that some Pac-12 teams have losses at home to FCS teams. Others have home losses to really bad FBS teams. One road loss only derails BCS CG dreams, and those are not dreams that were needed for me to keep the faith.
09-28-2012, 06:24 PM
Yeah, rating the WRs anything other than F is mystifying. I mean, maybe D or something, but still. Some sort of failing grade.
The defense has gotten better from week 1 to week 4 for sure. The OL is, on balance, slightly better in Week 4 than it was in Week 1 (in terms of pass protection: they were very good in pass protection in week four after struggling at times with all-out blitzes in the first three weeks). That's it (and, to be fair, these are not inconsiderable areas of improvement. It's the passing game that's holding everything back, and that's a problem that goes from QB, includes all receivers not named Zach Ertz, to coaching.)
(09-28-2012, 04:27 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?Â
The defense has gotten better from week 1 to week 4 for sure. The OL is, on balance, slightly better in Week 4 than it was in Week 1 (in terms of pass protection: they were very good in pass protection in week four after struggling at times with all-out blitzes in the first three weeks). That's it (and, to be fair, these are not inconsiderable areas of improvement. It's the passing game that's holding everything back, and that's a problem that goes from QB, includes all receivers not named Zach Ertz, to coaching.)
Yeah, rating the WRs anything other than F is mystifying. I mean, maybe D or something, but still. Some sort of failing grade.
The defense has gotten better from week 1 to week 4 for sure. The OL is, on balance, slightly better in Week 4 than it was in Week 1 (in terms of pass protection: they were very good in pass protection in week four after struggling at times with all-out blitzes in the first three weeks). That's it (and, to be fair, these are not inconsiderable areas of improvement. It's the passing game that's holding everything back, and that's a problem that goes from QB, includes all receivers not named Zach Ertz, to coaching.)
(09-28-2012, 04:27 PM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:And we should have faith that this will happen because of the improvement and the adjustments that we have seen from Week 1 to Week 4?Â
The defense has gotten better from week 1 to week 4 for sure. The OL is, on balance, slightly better in Week 4 than it was in Week 1 (in terms of pass protection: they were very good in pass protection in week four after struggling at times with all-out blitzes in the first three weeks). That's it (and, to be fair, these are not inconsiderable areas of improvement. It's the passing game that's holding everything back, and that's a problem that goes from QB, includes all receivers not named Zach Ertz, to coaching.)
09-28-2012, 06:33 PM
(09-28-2012, 04:18 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:To call them drops is a bit harsh. If you have to leave your feet and layout it should not be called a drop. In most of those cases even if both hands stay on the ball, odds are good the elbows or body hitting the ground would have caused the ball to pop out anyway.
I don't know...I think Andrew Luck holds onto at least one or two of those, as does anyone named Whalen...
(09-28-2012, 04:18 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:To call them drops is a bit harsh. If you have to leave your feet and layout it should not be called a drop. In most of those cases even if both hands stay on the ball, odds are good the elbows or body hitting the ground would have caused the ball to pop out anyway.
I don't know...I think Andrew Luck holds onto at least one or two of those, as does anyone named Whalen...
09-28-2012, 09:05 PM
(09-28-2012, 01:07 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48652#msg48652 date=1348860704]
The other factor is coaching. The coach's job is to put the best players in and call the plays that put the team in a position to win. The coach has not done that. Calling plays that take advantage of the players' abilities while compensating for their weaknesses is a key part of the coach's duties.
I doubt the coaches practiced with Nunes throwing a 2 yard pass in the turf to Ertz when he was 5 yards away.Â
[/quote]
I wasn't trying to say that the coaches coached Nunes to throw badly! :D
What I meant was that the coaching staff chose the players and called the plays. They have not chosen the players -- or at least the quarterbacks -- that will put us in a position to win. My friend who is traveling listened to Todd Husak on the radio, and my friend said that Todd said the throws that were called were low percentage throws.
That's what I meant by the coaches not putting the team in a position to win.
(09-28-2012, 01:07 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48652#msg48652 date=1348860704]
The other factor is coaching. The coach's job is to put the best players in and call the plays that put the team in a position to win. The coach has not done that. Calling plays that take advantage of the players' abilities while compensating for their weaknesses is a key part of the coach's duties.
I doubt the coaches practiced with Nunes throwing a 2 yard pass in the turf to Ertz when he was 5 yards away.Â
[/quote]
I wasn't trying to say that the coaches coached Nunes to throw badly! :D
What I meant was that the coaching staff chose the players and called the plays. They have not chosen the players -- or at least the quarterbacks -- that will put us in a position to win. My friend who is traveling listened to Todd Husak on the radio, and my friend said that Todd said the throws that were called were low percentage throws.
That's what I meant by the coaches not putting the team in a position to win.
Cardinal96
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-29-2012, 04:10 AM
(09-28-2012, 09:05 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:[quote author=Farm93 link=topic=6551.msg48660#msg48660 date=1348862853]
[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48652#msg48652 date=1348860704]
The other factor is coaching. The coach's job is to put the best players in and call the plays that put the team in a position to win. The coach has not done that. Calling plays that take advantage of the players' abilities while compensating for their weaknesses is a key part of the coach's duties.
I doubt the coaches practiced with Nunes throwing a 2 yard pass in the turf to Ertz when he was 5 yards away.Â
[/quote]
I wasn't trying to say that the coaches coached Nunes to throw badly! :D
What I meant was that the coaching staff chose the players and called the plays. They have not chosen the players -- or at least the quarterbacks -- that will put us in a position to win. My friend who is traveling listened to Todd Husak on the radio, and my friend said that Todd said the throws that were called were low percentage throws.
That's what I meant by the coaches not putting the team in a position to win.
[/quote]
Todd is right. The catches Montgomery is getting grief for not making were largely low percentage throws. Throws where he had to make a diving catch and hold on to the ball. You expect elite NFL receivers to make those catches on a consistent basis, not division 1 wide receivers. For instance, why aren't we trying more slants.
Also what ever happened to our WR2 position? Is that still Terrell? I didn't see him make one catch against UW but maybe I missed it.
(09-28-2012, 09:05 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:[quote author=Farm93 link=topic=6551.msg48660#msg48660 date=1348862853]
[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48652#msg48652 date=1348860704]
The other factor is coaching. The coach's job is to put the best players in and call the plays that put the team in a position to win. The coach has not done that. Calling plays that take advantage of the players' abilities while compensating for their weaknesses is a key part of the coach's duties.
I doubt the coaches practiced with Nunes throwing a 2 yard pass in the turf to Ertz when he was 5 yards away.Â
[/quote]
I wasn't trying to say that the coaches coached Nunes to throw badly! :D
What I meant was that the coaching staff chose the players and called the plays. They have not chosen the players -- or at least the quarterbacks -- that will put us in a position to win. My friend who is traveling listened to Todd Husak on the radio, and my friend said that Todd said the throws that were called were low percentage throws.
That's what I meant by the coaches not putting the team in a position to win.
[/quote]
Todd is right. The catches Montgomery is getting grief for not making were largely low percentage throws. Throws where he had to make a diving catch and hold on to the ball. You expect elite NFL receivers to make those catches on a consistent basis, not division 1 wide receivers. For instance, why aren't we trying more slants.
Also what ever happened to our WR2 position? Is that still Terrell? I didn't see him make one catch against UW but maybe I missed it.
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
09-29-2012, 09:06 AM
I'm not sure Terrell caught a ball against U.SC either, maybe he did. But if I remember accurately he is considered the best blocking receiver. He certainly had a great block, or maybe it's more that he was in position to make an adequate block, in the Taylor 50+ run two weekends ago. One of those throws to Montgomery seemed to me like something of a drop. Another was probably a great play by the defender after the catch, maybe PI before the ball got there too. And the one on the last drive would have been a miraculous catch, at least an outstretched diving one. Margerum would have had it but that's not really fair. There are receivers on the bench I'd like to see, the bigger, possion types (Crane, Cajuste, Pratt).
I'm not sure Terrell caught a ball against U.SC either, maybe he did. But if I remember accurately he is considered the best blocking receiver. He certainly had a great block, or maybe it's more that he was in position to make an adequate block, in the Taylor 50+ run two weekends ago. One of those throws to Montgomery seemed to me like something of a drop. Another was probably a great play by the defender after the catch, maybe PI before the ball got there too. And the one on the last drive would have been a miraculous catch, at least an outstretched diving one. Margerum would have had it but that's not really fair. There are receivers on the bench I'd like to see, the bigger, possion types (Crane, Cajuste, Pratt).
09-29-2012, 10:40 AM
One of the things that is missing in the evaluation is UWs talent, play calling, and effort.
UW focused on stopping the run by stuffing the box AND leaving their CBs one on one with our wideouts (WRs or TEs). They decided they would dare us to beat them with our QB passing to our WRs. Unfortunately, they exposed a weakness we have all expected but I think the GREAT play of their CBs (AND the bad officiating which allowed them to hold, interfere and be very aggressive all game) had a lot to do with that and was THE key to the game. It allowed them to stuff the box which forced us into 2nd or 3rd and long and put the ball into Nunes hands to make a play.
Nunes' poor short passing put us in the difficult position of having to pass long too often. BUT I do not think all those long passes were Pep's play calling. IIRC we call 3 plays in he huddle and it is Nunes' responsibility to check us into the "right" play and THEN to make the correct pass.
With UW leaving their CB on an "island" alone against Montgomery I think Nunes could have checked to a passing play vs a run - which was probably what AL would have done too. So the right play call. Montgomery actually got separation several times and Nunes made pretty accurate throws, so probably the right pass that AL would have made too. But, as several have pointed out - these are difficult plays to make. Hopefully, they get better at "executing" with repetition. To me, this actually represents the confident, "go for it" attitude that many on this board have wanted to see and what looks like the right play call and the right pass. But, I personally think there were shorter passes open on those plays and if Nunes checks down to the secondary receiver, we pick up the first down, extend the series, and put more pressure on the defense to cover the entire field.
Football is a lot about making decisions trading off risk/reward and probabilities. I think our coaches had a game plan to give Nunes a higher probability of passing success with less risk but unfortunately, he missed many of those throws and UW tempted him and forced us to take the higher risk passes and we are not at an execution level (hopefully yet) to cash in on those.
The biggest key to the game for us was missing on those short "easy" passes without defensive pressure either from the rush or coverage. Those are the highest percentage plays that MUST be fixed and is the primary reason I would consider replacing Nunes.
The other lingering issue for me is the failure of our screen plays. UW's DBs and LBs blasted in to blow up our screen plays so quickly that it appeared that they keyed off something. Screens are meant to be deceptive but something we are doing is obviously visible to our opponents. We must fix this.
UW focused on stopping the run by stuffing the box AND leaving their CBs one on one with our wideouts (WRs or TEs). They decided they would dare us to beat them with our QB passing to our WRs. Unfortunately, they exposed a weakness we have all expected but I think the GREAT play of their CBs (AND the bad officiating which allowed them to hold, interfere and be very aggressive all game) had a lot to do with that and was THE key to the game. It allowed them to stuff the box which forced us into 2nd or 3rd and long and put the ball into Nunes hands to make a play.
Nunes' poor short passing put us in the difficult position of having to pass long too often. BUT I do not think all those long passes were Pep's play calling. IIRC we call 3 plays in he huddle and it is Nunes' responsibility to check us into the "right" play and THEN to make the correct pass.
With UW leaving their CB on an "island" alone against Montgomery I think Nunes could have checked to a passing play vs a run - which was probably what AL would have done too. So the right play call. Montgomery actually got separation several times and Nunes made pretty accurate throws, so probably the right pass that AL would have made too. But, as several have pointed out - these are difficult plays to make. Hopefully, they get better at "executing" with repetition. To me, this actually represents the confident, "go for it" attitude that many on this board have wanted to see and what looks like the right play call and the right pass. But, I personally think there were shorter passes open on those plays and if Nunes checks down to the secondary receiver, we pick up the first down, extend the series, and put more pressure on the defense to cover the entire field.
Football is a lot about making decisions trading off risk/reward and probabilities. I think our coaches had a game plan to give Nunes a higher probability of passing success with less risk but unfortunately, he missed many of those throws and UW tempted him and forced us to take the higher risk passes and we are not at an execution level (hopefully yet) to cash in on those.
The biggest key to the game for us was missing on those short "easy" passes without defensive pressure either from the rush or coverage. Those are the highest percentage plays that MUST be fixed and is the primary reason I would consider replacing Nunes.
The other lingering issue for me is the failure of our screen plays. UW's DBs and LBs blasted in to blow up our screen plays so quickly that it appeared that they keyed off something. Screens are meant to be deceptive but something we are doing is obviously visible to our opponents. We must fix this.
One of the things that is missing in the evaluation is UWs talent, play calling, and effort.
UW focused on stopping the run by stuffing the box AND leaving their CBs one on one with our wideouts (WRs or TEs). They decided they would dare us to beat them with our QB passing to our WRs. Unfortunately, they exposed a weakness we have all expected but I think the GREAT play of their CBs (AND the bad officiating which allowed them to hold, interfere and be very aggressive all game) had a lot to do with that and was THE key to the game. It allowed them to stuff the box which forced us into 2nd or 3rd and long and put the ball into Nunes hands to make a play.
Nunes' poor short passing put us in the difficult position of having to pass long too often. BUT I do not think all those long passes were Pep's play calling. IIRC we call 3 plays in he huddle and it is Nunes' responsibility to check us into the "right" play and THEN to make the correct pass.
With UW leaving their CB on an "island" alone against Montgomery I think Nunes could have checked to a passing play vs a run - which was probably what AL would have done too. So the right play call. Montgomery actually got separation several times and Nunes made pretty accurate throws, so probably the right pass that AL would have made too. But, as several have pointed out - these are difficult plays to make. Hopefully, they get better at "executing" with repetition. To me, this actually represents the confident, "go for it" attitude that many on this board have wanted to see and what looks like the right play call and the right pass. But, I personally think there were shorter passes open on those plays and if Nunes checks down to the secondary receiver, we pick up the first down, extend the series, and put more pressure on the defense to cover the entire field.
Football is a lot about making decisions trading off risk/reward and probabilities. I think our coaches had a game plan to give Nunes a higher probability of passing success with less risk but unfortunately, he missed many of those throws and UW tempted him and forced us to take the higher risk passes and we are not at an execution level (hopefully yet) to cash in on those.
The biggest key to the game for us was missing on those short "easy" passes without defensive pressure either from the rush or coverage. Those are the highest percentage plays that MUST be fixed and is the primary reason I would consider replacing Nunes.
The other lingering issue for me is the failure of our screen plays. UW's DBs and LBs blasted in to blow up our screen plays so quickly that it appeared that they keyed off something. Screens are meant to be deceptive but something we are doing is obviously visible to our opponents. We must fix this.
UW focused on stopping the run by stuffing the box AND leaving their CBs one on one with our wideouts (WRs or TEs). They decided they would dare us to beat them with our QB passing to our WRs. Unfortunately, they exposed a weakness we have all expected but I think the GREAT play of their CBs (AND the bad officiating which allowed them to hold, interfere and be very aggressive all game) had a lot to do with that and was THE key to the game. It allowed them to stuff the box which forced us into 2nd or 3rd and long and put the ball into Nunes hands to make a play.
Nunes' poor short passing put us in the difficult position of having to pass long too often. BUT I do not think all those long passes were Pep's play calling. IIRC we call 3 plays in he huddle and it is Nunes' responsibility to check us into the "right" play and THEN to make the correct pass.
With UW leaving their CB on an "island" alone against Montgomery I think Nunes could have checked to a passing play vs a run - which was probably what AL would have done too. So the right play call. Montgomery actually got separation several times and Nunes made pretty accurate throws, so probably the right pass that AL would have made too. But, as several have pointed out - these are difficult plays to make. Hopefully, they get better at "executing" with repetition. To me, this actually represents the confident, "go for it" attitude that many on this board have wanted to see and what looks like the right play call and the right pass. But, I personally think there were shorter passes open on those plays and if Nunes checks down to the secondary receiver, we pick up the first down, extend the series, and put more pressure on the defense to cover the entire field.
Football is a lot about making decisions trading off risk/reward and probabilities. I think our coaches had a game plan to give Nunes a higher probability of passing success with less risk but unfortunately, he missed many of those throws and UW tempted him and forced us to take the higher risk passes and we are not at an execution level (hopefully yet) to cash in on those.
The biggest key to the game for us was missing on those short "easy" passes without defensive pressure either from the rush or coverage. Those are the highest percentage plays that MUST be fixed and is the primary reason I would consider replacing Nunes.
The other lingering issue for me is the failure of our screen plays. UW's DBs and LBs blasted in to blow up our screen plays so quickly that it appeared that they keyed off something. Screens are meant to be deceptive but something we are doing is obviously visible to our opponents. We must fix this.
09-29-2012, 04:05 PM
(09-29-2012, 09:06 AM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:And the one on the last drive would have been a miraculous catch, at least an outstretched diving one.
I disagree here. This throw was Nunes best throw of the night by far. He put it right where it needed to be. Montgomery actually made the catch more difficult by slowing down when the ball was in the air. Even then, he had BOTH hands on the ball. That's a catch he has to make. It seems like on the long balls, Montgomery is having a lot of trouble tracking the ball...like when the ball is in the air, he just misjudges where it will land. This wouldn't have been the easiest catch but it certainly wouldn't have been a miraculous catch.
Montgomery had both hands on at least three of the long passes and not just fingertips. Ask any college receiver and they will say that they should make every catch where they get both hands on the ball.
I also find it interesting that there are people ripping Nunes to shreds but are defending Montgomery's drops. Would you view the Montgomery drops differently if Nottingham had made those throws? It feels like everyone wanted Nottinghamd to win the job because he had all the "upside". When he didn't win the position, it suddenly became a clear sign that Shaw just doesn't know what he's doing. So every marginal play that Nunes made was a clear sign that Shaw was wrong and Nottingham is better. I just wonder how everyone would have reacted if Nottingham had won the job and played exactly the way that Nunes played during these first four games. Would there still be the same vitriol directed at Shaw and Nottingham?Â
It's amazing how much certainty there is that Nottingham is the better player than Nunes. The practices have been closed. I went to the Spring Game and there was nothing separating Nottingham and Nunes. I was down on the field and I really couldn't tell the difference between the two. I don't see how anyone can definitively say that Shaw made the wrong decision to start Nunes for these first four games with the information that we had heading into the season.
(09-29-2012, 09:06 AM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:And the one on the last drive would have been a miraculous catch, at least an outstretched diving one.
I disagree here. This throw was Nunes best throw of the night by far. He put it right where it needed to be. Montgomery actually made the catch more difficult by slowing down when the ball was in the air. Even then, he had BOTH hands on the ball. That's a catch he has to make. It seems like on the long balls, Montgomery is having a lot of trouble tracking the ball...like when the ball is in the air, he just misjudges where it will land. This wouldn't have been the easiest catch but it certainly wouldn't have been a miraculous catch.
Montgomery had both hands on at least three of the long passes and not just fingertips. Ask any college receiver and they will say that they should make every catch where they get both hands on the ball.
I also find it interesting that there are people ripping Nunes to shreds but are defending Montgomery's drops. Would you view the Montgomery drops differently if Nottingham had made those throws? It feels like everyone wanted Nottinghamd to win the job because he had all the "upside". When he didn't win the position, it suddenly became a clear sign that Shaw just doesn't know what he's doing. So every marginal play that Nunes made was a clear sign that Shaw was wrong and Nottingham is better. I just wonder how everyone would have reacted if Nottingham had won the job and played exactly the way that Nunes played during these first four games. Would there still be the same vitriol directed at Shaw and Nottingham?Â
It's amazing how much certainty there is that Nottingham is the better player than Nunes. The practices have been closed. I went to the Spring Game and there was nothing separating Nottingham and Nunes. I was down on the field and I really couldn't tell the difference between the two. I don't see how anyone can definitively say that Shaw made the wrong decision to start Nunes for these first four games with the information that we had heading into the season.
10-07-2012, 11:46 PM
(09-28-2012, 08:09 AM)Yvonne link Wrote:I'm wondering where you guys see 4-5 more wins without an offense?
54 points disagrees.
When the team lost you had so much to say. Why are you so quiet?
Cardinal96
Unregistered
Unregistered
10-08-2012, 10:54 AM
(10-07-2012, 11:46 PM)Rando90 link Wrote:[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48618#msg48618 date=1348844992]
I'm wondering where you guys see 4-5 more wins without an offense?
54 points disagrees.
When the team lost you had so much to say. Why are you so quiet?
[/quote]
I know this wasn't addressed to me but I was torn after that game. I was thrilled to get the win and see Nunes play much better. But up until that game I really thought our defense was an elite unit. And Arizona shredded our defense. It was so painful to watch at times that I would switch over to the Florida/LSU game off and on.
(10-07-2012, 11:46 PM)Rando90 link Wrote:[quote author=Yvonne link=topic=6551.msg48618#msg48618 date=1348844992]
I'm wondering where you guys see 4-5 more wins without an offense?
54 points disagrees.
When the team lost you had so much to say. Why are you so quiet?
[/quote]
I know this wasn't addressed to me but I was torn after that game. I was thrilled to get the win and see Nunes play much better. But up until that game I really thought our defense was an elite unit. And Arizona shredded our defense. It was so painful to watch at times that I would switch over to the Florida/LSU game off and on.
10-08-2012, 10:58 AM
Switching out entire defensive units can do that (experience, game flow), as well as having to defend such a fast-paced offense. Also, underneath stuff to prevent the big plays (bend-don't-break) is sometimes an adequate strategy if your corners and safeties can't keep up with their WRs.
Oregon will be a bugaboo to deal with, but I think I'm okay with most of the rest of Stanford's schedule.
Oregon will be a bugaboo to deal with, but I think I'm okay with most of the rest of Stanford's schedule.
Switching out entire defensive units can do that (experience, game flow), as well as having to defend such a fast-paced offense. Also, underneath stuff to prevent the big plays (bend-don't-break) is sometimes an adequate strategy if your corners and safeties can't keep up with their WRs.
Oregon will be a bugaboo to deal with, but I think I'm okay with most of the rest of Stanford's schedule.
Oregon will be a bugaboo to deal with, but I think I'm okay with most of the rest of Stanford's schedule.
10-08-2012, 12:46 PM
This team is not BCS worthy. Accept that reality and then they look OK. Teams ranked 15-25 win and lose random games all of the time. Sometimes they rise up and beat top 5 teams, other times they look terrible against unranked teams. To slice and dice each game to identify a season trend is difficult with those types of mid-tier teams.
Stanford could easily win every game left of the schedule, with the exception of Oregon.
Stanford could easily lose every game left of the schedule, with the possible exception of Colorado and Wazzu.
Against UW - The D was solid, the running game was mediocre and the passing was terrible.
Against UofA - The QB was solid, the running game was decent and the defense was not great.
I WANT to give the DBs a pass because Brown was hurt on the 1st defensive play and that seemed to be a big problem. I would like to believe the team has depth at every position, but if they did they would be a BCS-level team.
After watching SJSU and UofA I have a bad feeling about how ugly Oregon to become, but outside of that game I suspect the other games will be stressful, entertaining and close with different stars and goats each Saturday.
Stanford could easily win every game left of the schedule, with the exception of Oregon.
Stanford could easily lose every game left of the schedule, with the possible exception of Colorado and Wazzu.
Against UW - The D was solid, the running game was mediocre and the passing was terrible.
Against UofA - The QB was solid, the running game was decent and the defense was not great.
I WANT to give the DBs a pass because Brown was hurt on the 1st defensive play and that seemed to be a big problem. I would like to believe the team has depth at every position, but if they did they would be a BCS-level team.
After watching SJSU and UofA I have a bad feeling about how ugly Oregon to become, but outside of that game I suspect the other games will be stressful, entertaining and close with different stars and goats each Saturday.
This team is not BCS worthy. Accept that reality and then they look OK. Teams ranked 15-25 win and lose random games all of the time. Sometimes they rise up and beat top 5 teams, other times they look terrible against unranked teams. To slice and dice each game to identify a season trend is difficult with those types of mid-tier teams.
Stanford could easily win every game left of the schedule, with the exception of Oregon.
Stanford could easily lose every game left of the schedule, with the possible exception of Colorado and Wazzu.
Against UW - The D was solid, the running game was mediocre and the passing was terrible.
Against UofA - The QB was solid, the running game was decent and the defense was not great.
I WANT to give the DBs a pass because Brown was hurt on the 1st defensive play and that seemed to be a big problem. I would like to believe the team has depth at every position, but if they did they would be a BCS-level team.
After watching SJSU and UofA I have a bad feeling about how ugly Oregon to become, but outside of that game I suspect the other games will be stressful, entertaining and close with different stars and goats each Saturday.
Stanford could easily win every game left of the schedule, with the exception of Oregon.
Stanford could easily lose every game left of the schedule, with the possible exception of Colorado and Wazzu.
Against UW - The D was solid, the running game was mediocre and the passing was terrible.
Against UofA - The QB was solid, the running game was decent and the defense was not great.
I WANT to give the DBs a pass because Brown was hurt on the 1st defensive play and that seemed to be a big problem. I would like to believe the team has depth at every position, but if they did they would be a BCS-level team.
After watching SJSU and UofA I have a bad feeling about how ugly Oregon to become, but outside of that game I suspect the other games will be stressful, entertaining and close with different stars and goats each Saturday.
10-08-2012, 12:55 PM
I have no idea how the rest of the season will turn out. If I went into a coma and woke up at the end of the season, and was told a result anywhere between 7-5 and 10-2, I would find it totally plausible.
I have no idea how the rest of the season will turn out. If I went into a coma and woke up at the end of the season, and was told a result anywhere between 7-5 and 10-2, I would find it totally plausible.
11-24-2012, 10:12 PM
(09-27-2012, 10:18 PM)TreeFitty link Wrote:Arizona: 60% Win, 40% Loss
Northern Indiana Parochial College: 35% Win, 65% Loss
the Pac-12 school with the lowest football graduation rate: 60% win, 40% Loss
Colorado: 80% win, 20% loss
WSU: 70% win, 30% loss
Oregon State:Â 35% Win, 65% Loss
Oregon: 5% win, 95% loss
UCLA: 40% win, 60% loss
So 3-4 more wins.
Boy do I feel silly.
(09-27-2012, 10:18 PM)TreeFitty link Wrote:Arizona: 60% Win, 40% Loss
Northern Indiana Parochial College: 35% Win, 65% Loss
the Pac-12 school with the lowest football graduation rate: 60% win, 40% Loss
Colorado: 80% win, 20% loss
WSU: 70% win, 30% loss
Oregon State:Â 35% Win, 65% Loss
Oregon: 5% win, 95% loss
UCLA: 40% win, 60% loss
So 3-4 more wins.
Boy do I feel silly.
11-25-2012, 06:55 AM
I thought 8-4 (with maybe 9-3 if everything fell into place).
10-2 I thought was a bit of a wet dream, but I guess dreams can come true.
Anyway, I think it is better to be conservative in your predictions and be pleasantly surprised than extravagant and be unpleasantly surprised.
10-2 I thought was a bit of a wet dream, but I guess dreams can come true.
Anyway, I think it is better to be conservative in your predictions and be pleasantly surprised than extravagant and be unpleasantly surprised.
I thought 8-4 (with maybe 9-3 if everything fell into place).
10-2 I thought was a bit of a wet dream, but I guess dreams can come true.
Anyway, I think it is better to be conservative in your predictions and be pleasantly surprised than extravagant and be unpleasantly surprised.
10-2 I thought was a bit of a wet dream, but I guess dreams can come true.
Anyway, I think it is better to be conservative in your predictions and be pleasantly surprised than extravagant and be unpleasantly surprised.
11-25-2012, 07:50 AM
I thought maybe 11-1, but more realistically 10-2, with losses against Oregon and perhaps USC.Â
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »