[Goose]

While that has been the standard theme in describing Stanford's offense in recent years, using that idea in such a blanket fashion obscures how Stanford has controlled the ball. What Stanford actually has usually done is run on first and second downs to where we have a manageable third down, and then convert by some kind of play from the quarterback. [Though that is somewhat simplified. In fact Stanford has run very heavily on first down, but has a reasonably strong tendency to pass on second down and run if possible on third down. That sequence is similar, and also collapses with a sack on second down.]

I basically agree. When one says "recent years" though, I think one needs to qualify that by how recent. You may have some stats on this, and if so, I would be interested in seeing them, but it is my sense that with Gerhart and Taylor, we were pretty likely to run on all three downs a good deal. With Gaffney, less so, and with CMAC even less. Part of that was that we got better at recognizing what the defense was giving us, and part of that was that CMAC and to some degree Gaffney are more outside runners than "up the gut" guys. In recent years we tended to get more second and long and second and short, not as many second and 6 as we did with say Gerhart. The variance was larger in later years.

The problem vs many teams last year was that the formula was more like run on first and second downs to create a manageable third down and then get sacked.

So, McCaffrey (while injured) averaged 4.08 yds/carry vs UW and 4.38 vs WSU. But in neither game did he have nearly enough carries (12 and 8). That was partly because we fell behind and started passing, partly because McCaffrey was injured and wasn't the guy we really know, and partly because we couldn't convert on third downs to keep drives alive so we simply didn't run many plays - especially while the game was still undecided.

While I agree with lots of the statement, I would add the assertion that we couldn't convert because despite CMAC averaging 4 yac, we couldn't reliably run for a first down on third down. If we could, we would have. And we couldn't do that because the line couldn't make a hole. Now, I agree that third and 2 is not a sure thing, even with Gerhart, but it was pretty probable. In 2015, we would run CMAC behind the left side of the line (or more probably Wright) and we would get it. The defenses knew it, everybody knew it, didn't matter. This year, we couldn't do that reliably against anyone (even some of the "bad" teams), and certainly not against Washington/WSU. In line with your comments, in 2015, if we lined up as if we would do that and instead Hogan ran/passed, it was a big play. You won't get that if the defense can stop you without selling out.

In 2015, McCaffrey averaged 3.48 yds/carry vs und, 2.9 yds/carry vs UCF, 4.42 yds/carry vs $C. Those range from worse to about the same as his bad games in 2016. However, we won the three games listed because that was good enough running to complement that pass game - and in fact those were some of our better passing games as those teams were selling out to stop the run.

It is also worth remembering that we basically did not have a healthy running back in our three worst running games in 2016: vs UW, WSU, and Colorado. The run game struggled those games. That was important and contributed to the losses and was indeed partially due to the OL's substandard performance. But, that happens over the course of a season - and against good defenses; and given the health situation was not completely due to the OL.

Fully agree. But some of it was. One thing we really got used to with Hogan was that he would get us into the correct play, quite possibly a pass, when the defense was loaded up for a run. This year, our quarterbacks (yes, Chryst as well) often didn't do that. When that happens, it is man on man, hat on hat. Not where you want to be if you can avoid it, but if you are, you need to prevail at least some of the time. Generally, we didn't, which was a change from 2015 certainly. It is a lot easier to win football games when we get a good "read" on the defense. But we need to survive when we don't That said, our overall execution in these three games was poor enough that it is hard to point fingers in a meaningful way.

Another interesting data point is the $C game. That was probably the last time over the first half of the season that the team was reasonably healthy. $C was the third best run defense in the Pac 12, second best we faced (in the Pac 12 - KSU was a better run defense overall). We rolled over those guys. 302 yards rushing, 6.29 yds/carry. That was awfully good; almost certainly the team's best performance of the year. No complaints about the run game there.

Yes, but as I recall SC had two important defensive players get hurt before/during that game. Their defensive line was not at full strength. This undoubtedly made our line look a lot better. And, we were playing from ahead, which is always easier. But you are correct, we looked much better against KSU and USC than we did subsequently. So did Burns. What happened, I don't know.

[Goose]

While that has been the standard theme in describing Stanford's offense in recent years, using that idea in such a blanket fashion obscures how Stanford has controlled the ball. What Stanford actually has usually done is run on first and second downs to where we have a manageable third down, and then convert by some kind of play from the quarterback. [Though that is somewhat simplified. In fact Stanford has run very heavily on first down, but has a reasonably strong tendency to pass on second down and run if possible on third down. That sequence is similar, and also collapses with a sack on second down.]

I basically agree. When one says "recent years" though, I think one needs to qualify that by how recent. You may have some stats on this, and if so, I would be interested in seeing them, but it is my sense that with Gerhart and Taylor, we were pretty likely to run on all three downs a good deal. With Gaffney, less so, and with CMAC even less. Part of that was that we got better at recognizing what the defense was giving us, and part of that was that CMAC and to some degree Gaffney are more outside runners than "up the gut" guys. In recent years we tended to get more second and long and second and short, not as many second and 6 as we did with say Gerhart. The variance was larger in later years.

The problem vs many teams last year was that the formula was more like run on first and second downs to create a manageable third down and then get sacked.

So, McCaffrey (while injured) averaged 4.08 yds/carry vs UW and 4.38 vs WSU. But in neither game did he have nearly enough carries (12 and 8). That was partly because we fell behind and started passing, partly because McCaffrey was injured and wasn't the guy we really know, and partly because we couldn't convert on third downs to keep drives alive so we simply didn't run many plays - especially while the game was still undecided.

While I agree with lots of the statement, I would add the assertion that we couldn't convert because despite CMAC averaging 4 yac, we couldn't reliably run for a first down on third down. If we could, we would have. And we couldn't do that because the line couldn't make a hole. Now, I agree that third and 2 is not a sure thing, even with Gerhart, but it was pretty probable. In 2015, we would run CMAC behind the left side of the line (or more probably Wright) and we would get it. The defenses knew it, everybody knew it, didn't matter. This year, we couldn't do that reliably against anyone (even some of the "bad" teams), and certainly not against Washington/WSU. In line with your comments, in 2015, if we lined up as if we would do that and instead Hogan ran/passed, it was a big play. You won't get that if the defense can stop you without selling out.

In 2015, McCaffrey averaged 3.48 yds/carry vs und, 2.9 yds/carry vs UCF, 4.42 yds/carry vs $C. Those range from worse to about the same as his bad games in 2016. However, we won the three games listed because that was good enough running to complement that pass game - and in fact those were some of our better passing games as those teams were selling out to stop the run.

It is also worth remembering that we basically did not have a healthy running back in our three worst running games in 2016: vs UW, WSU, and Colorado. The run game struggled those games. That was important and contributed to the losses and was indeed partially due to the OL's substandard performance. But, that happens over the course of a season - and against good defenses; and given the health situation was not completely due to the OL.

Fully agree. But some of it was. One thing we really got used to with Hogan was that he would get us into the correct play, quite possibly a pass, when the defense was loaded up for a run. This year, our quarterbacks (yes, Chryst as well) often didn't do that. When that happens, it is man on man, hat on hat. Not where you want to be if you can avoid it, but if you are, you need to prevail at least some of the time. Generally, we didn't, which was a change from 2015 certainly. It is a lot easier to win football games when we get a good "read" on the defense. But we need to survive when we don't That said, our overall execution in these three games was poor enough that it is hard to point fingers in a meaningful way.

Another interesting data point is the $C game. That was probably the last time over the first half of the season that the team was reasonably healthy. $C was the third best run defense in the Pac 12, second best we faced (in the Pac 12 - KSU was a better run defense overall). We rolled over those guys. 302 yards rushing, 6.29 yds/carry. That was awfully good; almost certainly the team's best performance of the year. No complaints about the run game there.

Yes, but as I recall SC had two important defensive players get hurt before/during that game. Their defensive line was not at full strength. This undoubtedly made our line look a lot better. And, we were playing from ahead, which is always easier. But you are correct, we looked much better against KSU and USC than we did subsequently. So did Burns. What happened, I don't know.