[Goose]

Shhav's point is that since 2007, Stanford's coaches always have deployed a nickel when an opponent shows a three wide receiver set, and no reporter has questioned the wisdom of that until this week.

His further point, by implication, is that a two DL set can work if everyone does their jobs.  It's not inherently weak against a run.

But it IS inherently weak against the run. 95% of our opponents  have shown little stomach for running right at us. That is because they are not built to do that. In 2016 I was scared to death that U$C would commit to the run. They had some early success against us, and then, miracle of miracles, they stopped trying to run at us. It can work against the run if 1) the opposing team isn't very good running the ball or 2) the opposing team chooses not to run the ball much between the tackles. It is not a matter of doing your job. If the other team is good at banging between the tackles, you need enough beef on the LOS or you will have a very long day. Most college teams today don't (and probably can't) do this. Some do however.
Utah has a history of grinding it out between the tackles. We haven't done well against them. OSU can run the ball inside with Nall, but they aren't good otherwise, so it doesn't matter. UW has hurt us with the run even in 2015. However, in 2015 their QB was hurt, so we played more 3 man line (and we had some bigger guys).
I think that the 2-5-4 was adopted to solve the "Oregon problem". Spread teams are trying to go around you, spreading the field laterally. Big defensive linemen can't move fast enough to stop this. OTOH, the wide offensive line splits spread teams use doesn't generate as much "push", so using more lighter, faster players makes sense. With three wide receivers, or four, they will pass or run a sprint draw type play. They aren't going to run into your strength.
In the recent past, U$C had the backs and linemen who could run right at us. But, because their coaches weren't so good, they didn't. That error has been corrected. If you try to defend USC as if they were Oregon, you will get a double dose of tailback. That's why they are good.

And while he neither said nor implied this, my guess is that Shaw saw on film that our three DL sets weren't stopping SC's running game, either.

Unfortunately, I think this is also true. It could be we just didn't play well, or it could be we just don't have the personnel. We don't have a prototypical nose tackle for our 3 man line. Phillips should be playing end. He is a good nose tackle, but it seems he is all by himself even when we have two other linemen in the game. He would be a beast as an end. We need a couple of guys to step up, and soon.

[Goose]

Shhav's point is that since 2007, Stanford's coaches always have deployed a nickel when an opponent shows a three wide receiver set, and no reporter has questioned the wisdom of that until this week.

His further point, by implication, is that a two DL set can work if everyone does their jobs.  It's not inherently weak against a run.

But it IS inherently weak against the run. 95% of our opponents  have shown little stomach for running right at us. That is because they are not built to do that. In 2016 I was scared to death that U$C would commit to the run. They had some early success against us, and then, miracle of miracles, they stopped trying to run at us. It can work against the run if 1) the opposing team isn't very good running the ball or 2) the opposing team chooses not to run the ball much between the tackles. It is not a matter of doing your job. If the other team is good at banging between the tackles, you need enough beef on the LOS or you will have a very long day. Most college teams today don't (and probably can't) do this. Some do however.
Utah has a history of grinding it out between the tackles. We haven't done well against them. OSU can run the ball inside with Nall, but they aren't good otherwise, so it doesn't matter. UW has hurt us with the run even in 2015. However, in 2015 their QB was hurt, so we played more 3 man line (and we had some bigger guys).
I think that the 2-5-4 was adopted to solve the "Oregon problem". Spread teams are trying to go around you, spreading the field laterally. Big defensive linemen can't move fast enough to stop this. OTOH, the wide offensive line splits spread teams use doesn't generate as much "push", so using more lighter, faster players makes sense. With three wide receivers, or four, they will pass or run a sprint draw type play. They aren't going to run into your strength.
In the recent past, U$C had the backs and linemen who could run right at us. But, because their coaches weren't so good, they didn't. That error has been corrected. If you try to defend USC as if they were Oregon, you will get a double dose of tailback. That's why they are good.

And while he neither said nor implied this, my guess is that Shaw saw on film that our three DL sets weren't stopping SC's running game, either.

Unfortunately, I think this is also true. It could be we just didn't play well, or it could be we just don't have the personnel. We don't have a prototypical nose tackle for our 3 man line. Phillips should be playing end. He is a good nose tackle, but it seems he is all by himself even when we have two other linemen in the game. He would be a beast as an end. We need a couple of guys to step up, and soon.