[Leftcoast]

I'd like to see Williamson back.  He's been fairly reliable as a PK with the notable exception and his ability to force touchbacks on high booming kicks is an unsung advantage.  Has anyone else noticed how much more of an adventure kick-off returns have become since his  injury?

[Leftcoast]

I'd like to see Williamson back.  He's been fairly reliable as a PK with the notable exception and his ability to force touchbacks on high booming kicks is an unsung advantage.  Has anyone else noticed how much more of an adventure kick-off returns have become since his  injury?

[CompSci87]

Do we have another punter lined up? Ben Rhyne did a good job this season, I thought.

Ukropina can also punt, but I doubt that's the plan.

[CompSci87]

Do we have another punter lined up? Ben Rhyne did a good job this season, I thought.

Ukropina can also punt, but I doubt that's the plan.

[stupac2]

Has anyone else noticed how much more of an adventure kick-off returns have become since his  injury?

Yes, I have. I just assumed Williamson would be back, he's clearly our best kicker and it seems unlikely that we'll have another good one ready for next year.

[stupac2]

Has anyone else noticed how much more of an adventure kick-off returns have become since his  injury?

Yes, I have. I just assumed Williamson would be back, he's clearly our best kicker and it seems unlikely that we'll have another good one ready for next year.

[Griffins78]

I'm also a little puzzled at the claim that he'll never move up the depth chart. We've never even seen him pass in a game. The fact that Kevin Hogan was third on the depth chart at the beginning of last season and wound up starting in the Rose Bowl, while the two guys ahead of him are no longer with the team, suggests that depth charts can be pretty fluid.

We need a backup QB that can do the kinds of things (running) that Hogan does. Right now that QB is Lloyd so ideally we'd like him to continue to develop and even push Hogan but at minimum be able to take over and run our full offense effectively.

[Griffins78]

I'm also a little puzzled at the claim that he'll never move up the depth chart. We've never even seen him pass in a game. The fact that Kevin Hogan was third on the depth chart at the beginning of last season and wound up starting in the Rose Bowl, while the two guys ahead of him are no longer with the team, suggests that depth charts can be pretty fluid.

We need a backup QB that can do the kinds of things (running) that Hogan does. Right now that QB is Lloyd so ideally we'd like him to continue to develop and even push Hogan but at minimum be able to take over and run our full offense effectively.

[stupac2]

We need a backup QB that can do the kinds of things (running) that Hogan does.

Do we? Hasn't the coaching staff's reluctance to run Hogan been a common complaint on these boards? We got more of it on Saturday, but it hasn't exactly been used a lot. And it's not like you need Hogan's wheels to get running play calls, anyone else remember Nunes scoring on the option multiple times against Arizona last year? Nunes was hardly a runner.

Also, Garvin, I don't think comparing Lloyd to Hogan makes sense. Hogan got eased into games over the course of the year in an increasing fashion, Lloyd got put in a few times, made too mistakes, and hasn't gone in again. If the coaches had put him in again after his fumble at ORST (or did they and I just missed it? CFBstats has him with a -11 yard reception against USC, and a tackle, but I can't find total touches anywhere) then I'd be more sanguine, but right now it seems clear that they just don't trust him during gametime. I mean, if he didn't see the field against Cal, when will he? And it seems pretty likely that Burns will pass him on the depth chart next year, does the QB4 get any reps at all in practices?

Again, I'm not really predicting anything particular here, just trying to read tea leaves, but I won't be surprised by a position change. I also won't be surprised if he stays at QB.

[stupac2]

We need a backup QB that can do the kinds of things (running) that Hogan does.

Do we? Hasn't the coaching staff's reluctance to run Hogan been a common complaint on these boards? We got more of it on Saturday, but it hasn't exactly been used a lot. And it's not like you need Hogan's wheels to get running play calls, anyone else remember Nunes scoring on the option multiple times against Arizona last year? Nunes was hardly a runner.

Also, Garvin, I don't think comparing Lloyd to Hogan makes sense. Hogan got eased into games over the course of the year in an increasing fashion, Lloyd got put in a few times, made too mistakes, and hasn't gone in again. If the coaches had put him in again after his fumble at ORST (or did they and I just missed it? CFBstats has him with a -11 yard reception against USC, and a tackle, but I can't find total touches anywhere) then I'd be more sanguine, but right now it seems clear that they just don't trust him during gametime. I mean, if he didn't see the field against Cal, when will he? And it seems pretty likely that Burns will pass him on the depth chart next year, does the QB4 get any reps at all in practices?

Again, I'm not really predicting anything particular here, just trying to read tea leaves, but I won't be surprised by a position change. I also won't be surprised if he stays at QB.

[washingtonismoney]

Do we? Hasn't the coaching staff's reluctance to run Hogan been a common complaint on these boards? We got more of it on Saturday, but it hasn't exactly been used a lot.

The coaches' pattern w/r/t Hogan running is pretty clear: they don't let him run against opponents they think they should beat anyway. Hogan never ran (except for a sack) against 59ers; against N.D. they unleash him for 7 carries. So we'll see a lot of Hogan running against the Sun Devils.

I would hope Burns passes Crower and Lloyd; given Chryst incoming, I wouldn't be shocked by a Lloyd position switch. He's really athletic and we've got a pipeline of highly-rated QBs.

[washingtonismoney]

Do we? Hasn't the coaching staff's reluctance to run Hogan been a common complaint on these boards? We got more of it on Saturday, but it hasn't exactly been used a lot.

The coaches' pattern w/r/t Hogan running is pretty clear: they don't let him run against opponents they think they should beat anyway. Hogan never ran (except for a sack) against 59ers; against N.D. they unleash him for 7 carries. So we'll see a lot of Hogan running against the Sun Devils.

I would hope Burns passes Crower and Lloyd; given Chryst incoming, I wouldn't be shocked by a Lloyd position switch. He's really athletic and we've got a pipeline of highly-rated QBs.

[stupac2]

The coaches' pattern w/r/t Hogan running is pretty clear: they don't let him run against opponents they think they should beat anyway. Hogan never ran (except for a sack) against 59ers; against N.D. they unleash him for 7 carries. So we'll see a lot of Hogan running against the Sun Devils.

I thought there were complaints about it against teams like Washington or ORST, those games we should've won easily but didn't. Maybe it's just not in the gameplan? Maybe I'm remembering wrong? Regardless, at the game I don't really chart these things, I knew he ran against ND but didn't think it was 7 times!

[stupac2]

The coaches' pattern w/r/t Hogan running is pretty clear: they don't let him run against opponents they think they should beat anyway. Hogan never ran (except for a sack) against 59ers; against N.D. they unleash him for 7 carries. So we'll see a lot of Hogan running against the Sun Devils.

I thought there were complaints about it against teams like Washington or ORST, those games we should've won easily but didn't. Maybe it's just not in the gameplan? Maybe I'm remembering wrong? Regardless, at the game I don't really chart these things, I knew he ran against ND but didn't think it was 7 times!

[stupac2]

Saying somebody will never move up the depth chart when he's only a red-shirt freshman is wildly premature.

Garvin, can you please point me to where someone has actually said this? I don't think anyone is against Lloyd as much as you seem to think they are.

[stupac2]

Saying somebody will never move up the depth chart when he's only a red-shirt freshman is wildly premature.

Garvin, can you please point me to where someone has actually said this? I don't think anyone is against Lloyd as much as you seem to think they are.

[Mick]

This is sort of outside the scope here, but what's the deal with everyone majoring in STS? I don't remember anything about that during my time at Stanford, but clearly it's popular. Is it a relatively light load?

Biomechanical Engineering (Danser)
Energy Resource Engineering (Amanam)
Architectural Design (Olugbode)

Go Bells...

[Mick]

This is sort of outside the scope here, but what's the deal with everyone majoring in STS? I don't remember anything about that during my time at Stanford, but clearly it's popular. Is it a relatively light load?

Biomechanical Engineering (Danser)
Energy Resource Engineering (Amanam)
Architectural Design (Olugbode)

Go Bells...

[stupac2]

Garvin, can you please point me to where someone has actually said this? I don't think anyone is against Lloyd as much as you seem to think they are.

Well, one fellow said this:

I doubt they're going to let him take another snap at QB after all those fumbles.

Then somebody else wrote this:

I just don't think that he's ever going to move up the depth chart, so it might mike sense to see if he fits somewhere else better.

Oh, wait, my bad. That was the same guy. Let me see if I can find his handle...

Please point me to where I said he'd never move up. I said "I don't think he's ever going to" and "I doubt". And, because I know it'll come to this, there's a world of difference between saying "he's never going to move up the depth chart" and "I don't think he'll ever move up the depth chart". One is postulating something with 100% certainty, the other is leaving plenty of room for other things to happen.

[stupac2]

Garvin, can you please point me to where someone has actually said this? I don't think anyone is against Lloyd as much as you seem to think they are.

Well, one fellow said this:

I doubt they're going to let him take another snap at QB after all those fumbles.

Then somebody else wrote this:

I just don't think that he's ever going to move up the depth chart, so it might mike sense to see if he fits somewhere else better.

Oh, wait, my bad. That was the same guy. Let me see if I can find his handle...

Please point me to where I said he'd never move up. I said "I don't think he's ever going to" and "I doubt". And, because I know it'll come to this, there's a world of difference between saying "he's never going to move up the depth chart" and "I don't think he'll ever move up the depth chart". One is postulating something with 100% certainty, the other is leaving plenty of room for other things to happen.

[stupac2]

Yes...so much room that you suggested he change positions....

Huh? You mean when I said "it might make sense to see if he fits somewhere else"? Yeah, I've clearly got a torch and pitchfork in my hand over here, demanding drastic changes.  ::)

[stupac2]

Yes...so much room that you suggested he change positions....

Huh? You mean when I said "it might make sense to see if he fits somewhere else"? Yeah, I've clearly got a torch and pitchfork in my hand over here, demanding drastic changes.  ::)

[pincemob]

Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

[pincemob]

Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

[TreeWeird]

Go Bells...

Go Bells

[TreeWeird]

Go Bells...

Go Bells

[fullmetal]

Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

When I was there, I don't think any class started before 9AM with the exception of Social Dance 1, which had an 8:45AM start time.  We'd get back from rowing practice around 9:05 or 9:10 due to lovely Bay Area traffic on the 101...I had to drop Social Dance 1 otherwise I'd fail the strict attendance policy designed to force punctuality.

[fullmetal]

Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

When I was there, I don't think any class started before 9AM with the exception of Social Dance 1, which had an 8:45AM start time.  We'd get back from rowing practice around 9:05 or 9:10 due to lovely Bay Area traffic on the 101...I had to drop Social Dance 1 otherwise I'd fail the strict attendance policy designed to force punctuality.

[fullmetal]

I started swing/blues dancing three years ago in Austin and can now groove with the best of them.  I'm certainly spending enough money on dance exchanges/workshops...

[fullmetal]

I started swing/blues dancing three years ago in Austin and can now groove with the best of them.  I'm certainly spending enough money on dance exchanges/workshops...

[Oasis]

[quote author=norcalcard link=topic=8996.msg76649#msg76649 date=1386043880]
Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

When I was there, I don't think any class started before 9AM with the exception of Social Dance 1, which had an 8:45AM start time.  We'd get back from rowing practice around 9:05 or 9:10 due to lovely Bay Area traffic on the 101...I had to drop Social Dance 1 otherwise I'd fail the strict attendance policy designed to force punctuality.
[/quote]

I have seen much more desperate responses to the Stanford dating situation.

[Oasis]

[quote author=norcalcard link=topic=8996.msg76649#msg76649 date=1386043880]
Just one comment in defense of "jock majors".  While certainly some majors are easier than others, a big reason some of the athletes choose (or at least chose) the majors they do/did is because certain majors offer 8 a.m. classes which they need to leave afternoons open for practice, unlike guys like me who favored maybe an 11 a.m/ 2 p.m. schedule.  It could be that STSS is just flexible, as opposed to easy (or maybe it's both -- I don't know).

When I was there, I don't think any class started before 9AM with the exception of Social Dance 1, which had an 8:45AM start time.  We'd get back from rowing practice around 9:05 or 9:10 due to lovely Bay Area traffic on the 101...I had to drop Social Dance 1 otherwise I'd fail the strict attendance policy designed to force punctuality.
[/quote]

I have seen much more desperate responses to the Stanford dating situation.

[SUBuddha]

This is why I married an NAU grad who could have gotten into LSJU but did not have the funds. She is smarter than me, by a country mile, but has adapted to my FarmFandom. No dating issues there :).

[SUBuddha]

This is why I married an NAU grad who could have gotten into LSJU but did not have the funds. She is smarter than me, by a country mile, but has adapted to my FarmFandom. No dating issues there :).

[fullmetal]

I would be astounded--but now I know :)  Dance Central is a fun past time for those with gaming consoles. 

[fullmetal]

I would be astounded--but now I know :)  Dance Central is a fun past time for those with gaming consoles.