[CTcard]

Just curious if Hulk or Yvonne think there has been any change implemented by coaching staff in play calling after the NW game? 

I am neither Hulk nor Yvonne, but I think it is pretty clear that since the Northwestern game, Stanford has decided to rely on its run game to set up everything else. My impression is that among other things, the coaching staff panicked when the run game wasn't immediately producing big gains and Northwestern was doing well on the line of scrimmage. So they junked the run game and started the dink and dunk stuff (presumably thought that between safety help and a collapsing pocket that they couldn't rely on a deeper pass game).

The run game wasn't immediately wonderful after Northwestern, particularly against UCF. However, they stuck to it and there was enough success that it opened up other options.

BC has a thread titled something like "Correlation is not causation" that goes through much of the numbers. I'll list just two. Is there any one game that sticks out here?

Opponent    % Run Plays*    Hogan's PER
c.a.l.                  69                  155
UCLA                  70                  222
Maryland            62                  182
NU                    39                    89
UCF                    58                  192
U$c                    63                  209
OSU                  77                  195
Arizona              64                  220

* Sacks counted as pass plays.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=13045.msg133387#msg133387 date=1444335149]
I think it was Ben Muth who was arguing there's more zone blocking, or more shotgun running (e.g. increased usage of buck sweeps) than before, and less of the Power O bread-and-butter. But this is not what I suspect teejers means by better playcalling.

I would love to see the detailed analysis that broke down our runs by whether it went between the tackles or outside the tackles.  We had that for the Under Stanford Control game (because some Trojan went through each play on video and did the breakdown), but unfortunately that sort of stat isn't widely available.
[/quote]

Do you still have a link for that analysis (i.e. the Trojan going through each play)?

There is definitely more shot gun running and seems to be more zone blocking schemes. I don't think there is necessarily any more running wide (at least since last year where we did quite a bit of that - not generally effectively). There's also quite a bit of pulling, though not necessarily classic Power. This OL has some issues, but they seem to be pretty athletic and can move - occasionally with issues finding someone to hit after moving but that seems to be getting much better.

[CTcard]

Just curious if Hulk or Yvonne think there has been any change implemented by coaching staff in play calling after the NW game? 

I am neither Hulk nor Yvonne, but I think it is pretty clear that since the Northwestern game, Stanford has decided to rely on its run game to set up everything else. My impression is that among other things, the coaching staff panicked when the run game wasn't immediately producing big gains and Northwestern was doing well on the line of scrimmage. So they junked the run game and started the dink and dunk stuff (presumably thought that between safety help and a collapsing pocket that they couldn't rely on a deeper pass game).

The run game wasn't immediately wonderful after Northwestern, particularly against UCF. However, they stuck to it and there was enough success that it opened up other options.

BC has a thread titled something like "Correlation is not causation" that goes through much of the numbers. I'll list just two. Is there any one game that sticks out here?

Opponent    % Run Plays*    Hogan's PER
c.a.l.                  69                  155
UCLA                  70                  222
Maryland            62                  182
NU                    39                    89
UCF                    58                  192
U$c                    63                  209
OSU                  77                  195
Arizona              64                  220

* Sacks counted as pass plays.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=13045.msg133387#msg133387 date=1444335149]
I think it was Ben Muth who was arguing there's more zone blocking, or more shotgun running (e.g. increased usage of buck sweeps) than before, and less of the Power O bread-and-butter. But this is not what I suspect teejers means by better playcalling.

I would love to see the detailed analysis that broke down our runs by whether it went between the tackles or outside the tackles.  We had that for the Under Stanford Control game (because some Trojan went through each play on video and did the breakdown), but unfortunately that sort of stat isn't widely available.
[/quote]

Do you still have a link for that analysis (i.e. the Trojan going through each play)?

There is definitely more shot gun running and seems to be more zone blocking schemes. I don't think there is necessarily any more running wide (at least since last year where we did quite a bit of that - not generally effectively). There's also quite a bit of pulling, though not necessarily classic Power. This OL has some issues, but they seem to be pretty athletic and can move - occasionally with issues finding someone to hit after moving but that seems to be getting much better.