(07-11-2017, 03:51 AM)Durty Nelly link Wrote:Not much insight here. Did not go out of the way to make any bold predictions.
At least the writer tried to actually say something about the upcoming Stanford team, unlike the nominally similar article by a Bruin supporter discussed here recently.
It's got a typical mix of common wisdom, half truths, and outright incorrect info that is typical in this kind of opponent preview. I guess it's understandable; nobody knows other teams as well as they know their own. On the other hand, the Stanford answers were provided by somebody named Nick Dempsey, who apparently manages both the Rule of Tree and Conquest Chronicles sub-web sites at SBNation. One might think that the Rule of Tree part means he knows our team.
Here is a collection of comments that caught my eye:
"However, the Cardinals have a pretty deep backfield with plenty of talented running backs so would expect a committee rushing the ball this fall."
Apparently Louisville has a deep backfield.
The Stanford Cardinal appear to have a rather thin backfield, at least of guys who have seen significant playing time, but they do have one very promising lead back. I expect Love to get by far the majority of the carries this fall - if health and reasonable success prevail.
"As far as replacing his [McCaffrey's] passing game production I would expect Stanford to return to using tight ends for passes underneath or across the middle."
Perhaps. I do expect more passes to tight ends and no back will have as many receptions as McCaffrey did. Whether the TEs will be running the same kind of routes and serving the same sort of role as McCaffrey as receiver played is much less clear.
" David Shaw does not provide any insights or clues into what he is thinking about the position [quarterback]."
Actually, Shaw says quite a bit about what he is thinking on the quarterback role. For the coming year, he has said that the starting job is Chryst's and that Chryst will be back healthy on time. It's everybody else who cannot quite believe that's true given the apparent severity of the injury Chryst suffered. Hard to tell what is true, but Shaw's statements have been clear.
"the defense has another special group in the secondary. Look for guys like Frank Buncom and Quenton Meeks to make an impact this season."
It should be a special group. However, it's not exactlynew to look for Meeks to make an impact, and not sure that Buncom comes second to mind in thinking about the secondary. It's not entirely clear to me if being switched to safety is an arrow up or down for his playing prospects this coming season, but it does show he wasn't about to be a starting cornerback.
"Q: What under the radar player(s) should Literature's most famous losers fans look for come week two in September?
A: Running Back Bryce Love could have a great breakout season, offensive lineman Nate Herbig is a massive stud at guard and could really turn some heads this season. Wide Receiver JJ Arcega-Whiteside could also really step up this season and become a real threat on the outside."
I actually think this is a pretty good answer, but it also strikes me as a little funny.
On offense, Love, Herbig and JJAW are about as above the radar guys as we've got (well, maybe not JJAW but he did get a call-out in Bill Connelly's preview). Still for the rest of the world they aren't on many radars.Â
And I saved this on for last because it's complicated, and many will disagree with me ...
"Stanford is loaded at linebacker and while they were young last year they did not get a lot of production."
At least the second part of that statement seems to be the common wisdom around here. Given that it's common wisdom, I am not surprised to see it in this kind of preview. However, in looking back at the last two seasons more closely, I am not certain how true it is.Â
I think that the common wisdom is that in 2016, ILB production fell through the floor with the loss of Martinez and OLB production was mostly flat.Â
Rewatching a lot of games and trying to integrate over the seasons, I am not quite sure whether I believe this or not. It certainly looked different. In 2015 it seems all linebacker plays were made by Martinez, whereas in 2016 LB plays were split between a host of players.
The defensive numbers added up are surprising, at least to me.
By my count,
in 2015 the linebackers made 44.5% of all tackles.
in 2016 the linebackers made 44.1% of all tackles.
in 2015 the linebackers made 19.5 sacks in 14 games.
in 2016 the linebackers made 19.5 sacks in 13 games.
Those were accompanied by a very small shift in the tackle split between ILB and OLB, with ILB making just slightly more of the overall tackles in 2015. However, the ILB also made fewer of the sacks in 2015.
Of course that is not everything - somebody makes the tackle on most plays whether it's for zero yards or fifteen.
Overall, the defense
in 2015 gave up 4.32 yds/rush attempt
in 2016 gave up 4.11 yds/rush attempt
in 2015 gave up a pass efficiency of 124.0 (6.8 yds/att)
in 2016 gave up a pass efficiency of 117.8 (6.7 yds/att)Â Â Â Â
So, it's not as if all tackles were being made much further down the field.
As folks will note, there are a problem with these numbers (and any numbers) as a proxy for the broad question of how good was linebacker play, but at the very least I think that our cumulative ILB play in 2016 was better than common wisdom seems to allow.
I'm also pretty optimistic for linebacker play in 2017.
