[BostonCard]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC

[BostonCard]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC