08-24-2016, 03:23 PM
An indicator that you can never really take coaches at their word: https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...6714349569
Ryan Burns it is
An indicator that you can never really take coaches at their word: https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...6714349569
08-24-2016, 03:27 PM
Well that was not something I expected to hear today. Also, funny how we're now 2/2 on the underdog QB winning the battle in camp. Hopefully it goes better this time...
08-24-2016, 03:44 PM
https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
08-24-2016, 03:47 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:29 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Huh. Hopefully nothing catastrophic happened ???
I, for one, am relieved that Shaw has named a starter. Congratulations, Ryan!
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
(08-24-2016, 03:29 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:Huh. Hopefully nothing catastrophic happened ???
I, for one, am relieved that Shaw has named a starter. Congratulations, Ryan!
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)
08-24-2016, 03:48 PM
I'm very happy they made the call this early. We need the team gelling sooner rather than later with this schedule.
It did seem to me that Burns played better both in the spring game and fall camp/open practice the other day.Â
It did seem to me that Burns played better both in the spring game and fall camp/open practice the other day.Â
I'm very happy they made the call this early. We need the team gelling sooner rather than later with this schedule.
It did seem to me that Burns played better both in the spring game and fall camp/open practice the other day.Â
It did seem to me that Burns played better both in the spring game and fall camp/open practice the other day.Â
08-24-2016, 03:50 PM
What's the point of a Chryst package? It didn't seem like their strengths are all that different.
08-24-2016, 04:04 PM
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
Eric
"the older we get the better we were"
08-24-2016, 04:27 PM
As someone who make a lot of signs for games, I like this.
The name "Burns" works better. To be topical, I can do a "Feel the Burns" one. Or perhaps to appeal to the younger crowd, there can be a Mr. Burns reference. Or anything using "burn" as a verb.
There's really only one word "Chryst" is similar too, and I ain't going there with a funny sign. Even in the Bay Area, that's asking for it.
:P
The name "Burns" works better. To be topical, I can do a "Feel the Burns" one. Or perhaps to appeal to the younger crowd, there can be a Mr. Burns reference. Or anything using "burn" as a verb.
There's really only one word "Chryst" is similar too, and I ain't going there with a funny sign. Even in the Bay Area, that's asking for it.
:P
As someone who make a lot of signs for games, I like this.
The name "Burns" works better. To be topical, I can do a "Feel the Burns" one. Or perhaps to appeal to the younger crowd, there can be a Mr. Burns reference. Or anything using "burn" as a verb.
There's really only one word "Chryst" is similar too, and I ain't going there with a funny sign. Even in the Bay Area, that's asking for it.
:P
The name "Burns" works better. To be topical, I can do a "Feel the Burns" one. Or perhaps to appeal to the younger crowd, there can be a Mr. Burns reference. Or anything using "burn" as a verb.
There's really only one word "Chryst" is similar too, and I ain't going there with a funny sign. Even in the Bay Area, that's asking for it.
:P
08-24-2016, 04:28 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
Yup, I would say it is a good example of epistemic closure. Hard to be truly surprised, other than maybe not expecting an announcement before the game. Certainly Shaw never gave an indication that Chryst was ahead (though I don't think he gave any indication that Burns was ahead). Agreed that though they appeared close, Burns probably won the starting nod on the basis of performance that we are privy to (though, again, we don't have as much information as Shaw does).
Anyways, nice to see a starter named. Now we can get ready for the Ryan Burns era at Stanford.
Next question... what does Chryst do? Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?
BC
(08-24-2016, 03:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:https://twitter.com/LombardiESPN/status/...5820720128
I suppose I'm not surprised. Burns looked ever-so-slightly better than Chryst in the spring game to me. People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
Yup, I would say it is a good example of epistemic closure. Hard to be truly surprised, other than maybe not expecting an announcement before the game. Certainly Shaw never gave an indication that Chryst was ahead (though I don't think he gave any indication that Burns was ahead). Agreed that though they appeared close, Burns probably won the starting nod on the basis of performance that we are privy to (though, again, we don't have as much information as Shaw does).
Anyways, nice to see a starter named. Now we can get ready for the Ryan Burns era at Stanford.
Next question... what does Chryst do? Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?
BC
08-24-2016, 04:29 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:50 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:What's the point of a Chryst package? It didn't seem like their strengths are all that different.
Chryst can be used as a lead blocker. ;)
(08-24-2016, 03:50 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:What's the point of a Chryst package? It didn't seem like their strengths are all that different.
Chryst can be used as a lead blocker. ;)
08-24-2016, 04:53 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:47 PM)Papa John link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=15484.msg168333#msg168333 date=1472077783]
Huh. Hopefully nothing catastrophic happened ???
I, for one, am relieved that Shaw has named a starter. Congratulations, Ryan!
[/quote]
I second that strongly. I heard that Chryst did not look good at the open scrimmage last Friday.
(08-24-2016, 03:47 PM)Papa John link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=15484.msg168333#msg168333 date=1472077783]
Huh. Hopefully nothing catastrophic happened ???
I, for one, am relieved that Shaw has named a starter. Congratulations, Ryan!
[/quote]
I second that strongly. I heard that Chryst did not look good at the open scrimmage last Friday.
08-24-2016, 05:00 PM
(08-24-2016, 03:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
I think people assumed that Chryst would win the job because he was the first QB off the bench last year. Neither Chryst nor Burns got much playing time, but when they played, Chryst got in the game before Burns. I guess Burns must have improved more than Chryst in the off-season.
(08-24-2016, 03:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:People just assumed that Chryst would win and never gave up that prejudice.
I think people assumed that Chryst would win the job because he was the first QB off the bench last year. Neither Chryst nor Burns got much playing time, but when they played, Chryst got in the game before Burns. I guess Burns must have improved more than Chryst in the off-season.
08-24-2016, 05:14 PM
(08-24-2016, 05:00 PM)terry link Wrote:I think people assumed that Chryst would win the job because he was the first QB off the bench last year. Neither Chryst nor Burns got much playing time, but when they played, Chryst got in the game before Burns. I guess Burns must have improved more than Chryst in the off-season.
Sure. Though we made this mistake with Nottingham over Nunes.
Listening to the Shaw interview -- http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/8/24...pener.aspx -- he mentions that Chryst will get a "few series," and refuses to say how many plays Chryst will get. Aside from bestowing the title, it's hard to say how different this situation is from the QB rotating scenario we've been discussing.
(08-24-2016, 05:00 PM)terry link Wrote:I think people assumed that Chryst would win the job because he was the first QB off the bench last year. Neither Chryst nor Burns got much playing time, but when they played, Chryst got in the game before Burns. I guess Burns must have improved more than Chryst in the off-season.
Sure. Though we made this mistake with Nottingham over Nunes.
Listening to the Shaw interview -- http://www.gostanford.com/news/2016/8/24...pener.aspx -- he mentions that Chryst will get a "few series," and refuses to say how many plays Chryst will get. Aside from bestowing the title, it's hard to say how different this situation is from the QB rotating scenario we've been discussing.
08-24-2016, 05:47 PM
Shaw also said that Burns and Chryst would get significant playing time last year and that sure didn't happen despite quite a few opportunities for garbage-time reps.
08-24-2016, 06:11 PM
(08-24-2016, 04:28 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Next question... what does Chryst do? Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?
BC
I'm sure it's not a feel-good moment for Chryst, but if past Shaw years are any indicator, this QB competition is just starting to heat up.... Shaw didn't exactly name Burns the QB of future, or even the season, or for that matter even one full game....
"Ryan Burns will start and play a good chunk of the game," said Shaw. "Keller Chryst will play as well. We're going to play both guys and try to win a game. There hasn't been a brobdingnagian separation between the two. Both guys have played extremely well. Ryan has been enough ahead to get the nod."
(08-24-2016, 04:28 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Next question... what does Chryst do? Wait two years for his "turn" and hope he beats out KJ Costello?
BC
I'm sure it's not a feel-good moment for Chryst, but if past Shaw years are any indicator, this QB competition is just starting to heat up.... Shaw didn't exactly name Burns the QB of future, or even the season, or for that matter even one full game....
"Ryan Burns will start and play a good chunk of the game," said Shaw. "Keller Chryst will play as well. We're going to play both guys and try to win a game. There hasn't been a brobdingnagian separation between the two. Both guys have played extremely well. Ryan has been enough ahead to get the nod."
I was expecting this, just wasn't expecting this yet.
I thought comments from Shaw and Bloomgren had a hint of Burns playing better than Chryst lately (though if you press me I cannot back that up) and also thought that based upon the little bit that was available to be seen publicly Burns was on a better trajectory (behind last fall, even last spring, looking somewhat better this fall).
It will be interesting to see how much time Chryst actually gets. It seems to me that in the past Shaw had intentions of playing a backup of QB at least a moderate amount but in the heat of a game that rarely happened. I am sure he both wants Chryst to be ready if necessary and thinks it was a close enough competition that Chryst "deserves" some time - but it will still be hard to pull the trigger.
I'm also sure the motivation for Shaw is partially to keep Chryst engaged and around. But as to what Chryst does now, I guess that is the question for each and every QB who loses a competition to be the starter. The answer is as individual as the people.
ADD:
If it is any source of optimism, Ryan Burns' career pass efficiency rating is 209.2*.
This compares favorably to Hogan's career average rating of 154.5 or Luck's 162.8, and even Chryst's 147.3. Of course it doesn't approach McCaffrey's career 395.9 - don't know why he didn't get named QB starter.
* Burns acquired that rating on 1 completion in 1 attempt for 13 yards, 0 TDs, and 0 INTs.
I thought comments from Shaw and Bloomgren had a hint of Burns playing better than Chryst lately (though if you press me I cannot back that up) and also thought that based upon the little bit that was available to be seen publicly Burns was on a better trajectory (behind last fall, even last spring, looking somewhat better this fall).
It will be interesting to see how much time Chryst actually gets. It seems to me that in the past Shaw had intentions of playing a backup of QB at least a moderate amount but in the heat of a game that rarely happened. I am sure he both wants Chryst to be ready if necessary and thinks it was a close enough competition that Chryst "deserves" some time - but it will still be hard to pull the trigger.
I'm also sure the motivation for Shaw is partially to keep Chryst engaged and around. But as to what Chryst does now, I guess that is the question for each and every QB who loses a competition to be the starter. The answer is as individual as the people.
ADD:
If it is any source of optimism, Ryan Burns' career pass efficiency rating is 209.2*.
This compares favorably to Hogan's career average rating of 154.5 or Luck's 162.8, and even Chryst's 147.3. Of course it doesn't approach McCaffrey's career 395.9 - don't know why he didn't get named QB starter.
* Burns acquired that rating on 1 completion in 1 attempt for 13 yards, 0 TDs, and 0 INTs.
I was expecting this, just wasn't expecting this yet.
I thought comments from Shaw and Bloomgren had a hint of Burns playing better than Chryst lately (though if you press me I cannot back that up) and also thought that based upon the little bit that was available to be seen publicly Burns was on a better trajectory (behind last fall, even last spring, looking somewhat better this fall).
It will be interesting to see how much time Chryst actually gets. It seems to me that in the past Shaw had intentions of playing a backup of QB at least a moderate amount but in the heat of a game that rarely happened. I am sure he both wants Chryst to be ready if necessary and thinks it was a close enough competition that Chryst "deserves" some time - but it will still be hard to pull the trigger.
I'm also sure the motivation for Shaw is partially to keep Chryst engaged and around. But as to what Chryst does now, I guess that is the question for each and every QB who loses a competition to be the starter. The answer is as individual as the people.
ADD:
If it is any source of optimism, Ryan Burns' career pass efficiency rating is 209.2*.
This compares favorably to Hogan's career average rating of 154.5 or Luck's 162.8, and even Chryst's 147.3. Of course it doesn't approach McCaffrey's career 395.9 - don't know why he didn't get named QB starter.
* Burns acquired that rating on 1 completion in 1 attempt for 13 yards, 0 TDs, and 0 INTs.
I thought comments from Shaw and Bloomgren had a hint of Burns playing better than Chryst lately (though if you press me I cannot back that up) and also thought that based upon the little bit that was available to be seen publicly Burns was on a better trajectory (behind last fall, even last spring, looking somewhat better this fall).
It will be interesting to see how much time Chryst actually gets. It seems to me that in the past Shaw had intentions of playing a backup of QB at least a moderate amount but in the heat of a game that rarely happened. I am sure he both wants Chryst to be ready if necessary and thinks it was a close enough competition that Chryst "deserves" some time - but it will still be hard to pull the trigger.
I'm also sure the motivation for Shaw is partially to keep Chryst engaged and around. But as to what Chryst does now, I guess that is the question for each and every QB who loses a competition to be the starter. The answer is as individual as the people.
ADD:
If it is any source of optimism, Ryan Burns' career pass efficiency rating is 209.2*.
This compares favorably to Hogan's career average rating of 154.5 or Luck's 162.8, and even Chryst's 147.3. Of course it doesn't approach McCaffrey's career 395.9 - don't know why he didn't get named QB starter.
* Burns acquired that rating on 1 completion in 1 attempt for 13 yards, 0 TDs, and 0 INTs.
08-24-2016, 06:28 PM
In the interview Shaw wouldn't answer questions about what will happen after KSU, not even to say whether or not the situation is still fluid. He had a funny quip when a reporter asked a question that began "we are wondering if..." "Sometimes it's good for you guys to wonder about things." (I probably didn't quote that exactly.)
In the interview Shaw wouldn't answer questions about what will happen after KSU, not even to say whether or not the situation is still fluid. He had a funny quip when a reporter asked a question that began "we are wondering if..." "Sometimes it's good for you guys to wonder about things." (I probably didn't quote that exactly.)
08-24-2016, 10:14 PM
For what it's worth Fborg and I have always thought that Burns throws a beautiful ball. Going to be interesting when the Second Coming shows up in Palo Alto next summer. If Burns is The Guy expect either Chryst or Costello to transfer, perhaps both.
08-24-2016, 11:33 PM
Granted, I was doing a fair amount of socializing at the Open House. But I thought that Costello showed some real promise. Clearly he is a red shirt for this year. But next year, I wouldn't be surprised if Chryst could possibly be 3rd on the chart. For a guy with his athletic ability the options are
1) stay at Stanford and compete with Burns, Chryst, Costello, and then West
2) take the John Lynch option
3) take the Babe Laufenberg option
1) stay at Stanford and compete with Burns, Chryst, Costello, and then West
2) take the John Lynch option
3) take the Babe Laufenberg option
Granted, I was doing a fair amount of socializing at the Open House. But I thought that Costello showed some real promise. Clearly he is a red shirt for this year. But next year, I wouldn't be surprised if Chryst could possibly be 3rd on the chart. For a guy with his athletic ability the options are
1) stay at Stanford and compete with Burns, Chryst, Costello, and then West
2) take the John Lynch option
3) take the Babe Laufenberg option
1) stay at Stanford and compete with Burns, Chryst, Costello, and then West
2) take the John Lynch option
3) take the Babe Laufenberg option
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »