[stupac2]

According to the ESPN box score. Why did Love only getting 14 touches?

[stupac2]

According to the ESPN box score. Why did Love only getting 14 touches?

[amartinsu13]

I just made the exact same post on the Rivals board, hah.

https://imgur.com/a/REQbE#32n5XrH

I was going to straight up call him the best RB in the nation looking at these stats, but I'll try to temper saying that until the season is done.

I also noticed they threw Love out there on the last KOR to try and make some magic happen. Would've been fun to see that all game.

Food for thought: I wonder if we don't give him the ball more because he struggles with endurance. I noticed them panning to him on the sideline and him huffing and puffing very heavy, even with his minimal workload. That might explain why they don't want him on KOR, because he'd gas out before the series starts.

[amartinsu13]

I just made the exact same post on the Rivals board, hah.

https://imgur.com/a/REQbE#32n5XrH

I was going to straight up call him the best RB in the nation looking at these stats, but I'll try to temper saying that until the season is done.

I also noticed they threw Love out there on the last KOR to try and make some magic happen. Would've been fun to see that all game.

Food for thought: I wonder if we don't give him the ball more because he struggles with endurance. I noticed them panning to him on the sideline and him huffing and puffing very heavy, even with his minimal workload. That might explain why they don't want him on KOR, because he'd gas out before the series starts.

[Mick]

I just made the exact same post on the Rivals board, hah.

https://imgur.com/a/REQbE#32n5XrH

I was going to straight up call him the best RB in the nation looking at these stats, but I'll try to temper saying that until the season is done.

I also noticed they threw Love out there on the last KOR to try and make some magic happen. Would've been fun to see that all game.

Food for thought: I wonder if we don't give him the ball more because he struggles with endurance. I noticed them panning to him on the sideline and him huffing and puffing very heavy, even with his minimal workload. That might explain why they don't want him on KOR, because he'd gas out before the series starts.

I think you're right.  I think his wind needs to catch up to make greater use of him.

[Mick]

I just made the exact same post on the Rivals board, hah.

https://imgur.com/a/REQbE#32n5XrH

I was going to straight up call him the best RB in the nation looking at these stats, but I'll try to temper saying that until the season is done.

I also noticed they threw Love out there on the last KOR to try and make some magic happen. Would've been fun to see that all game.

Food for thought: I wonder if we don't give him the ball more because he struggles with endurance. I noticed them panning to him on the sideline and him huffing and puffing very heavy, even with his minimal workload. That might explain why they don't want him on KOR, because he'd gas out before the series starts.

I think you're right.  I think his wind needs to catch up to make greater use of him.

[phxfan]

I argued for years on the bootleg that Love should be returning kicks instead of McCaffrey.  We may now never get to see Love return kicks on a regular basis. 

[phxfan]

I argued for years on the bootleg that Love should be returning kicks instead of McCaffrey.  We may now never get to see Love return kicks on a regular basis. 

[dabigv13]

Looked at another way, Love got about a third of our offensive touches. For a small back, I think that's a lot. The real problem was how inept our offense was, we couldn't sustain drives, and so had few plays in total, and I think that blame is probably split between poor OL play, poor QB play, and poor playcalling, in probably equal helpings.

[dabigv13]

Looked at another way, Love got about a third of our offensive touches. For a small back, I think that's a lot. The real problem was how inept our offense was, we couldn't sustain drives, and so had few plays in total, and I think that blame is probably split between poor OL play, poor QB play, and poor playcalling, in probably equal helpings.

[phxfan]

He should have caught more balls which is not affected by his size.

[phxfan]

He should have caught more balls which is not affected by his size.

[BostonCard]

I argued for years on the bootleg that Love should be returning kicks instead of McCaffrey.  We may now never get to see Love return kicks on a regular basis.

Last year I thought Love should be perfect for returning kicks, but it didn't materialize.  To be fair, it was hard to argue with the results.  But the fact that he is not returning kicks this year tells me there is likely some issue (like catching the kicks) that makes the coaches not want to have him back there.  Or maybe the coaches are total idiots, who knows.  But I think most likely it is a matter of Love missing some vital kick returning skill.

BC

[BostonCard]

I argued for years on the bootleg that Love should be returning kicks instead of McCaffrey.  We may now never get to see Love return kicks on a regular basis.

Last year I thought Love should be perfect for returning kicks, but it didn't materialize.  To be fair, it was hard to argue with the results.  But the fact that he is not returning kicks this year tells me there is likely some issue (like catching the kicks) that makes the coaches not want to have him back there.  Or maybe the coaches are total idiots, who knows.  But I think most likely it is a matter of Love missing some vital kick returning skill.

BC

[Sea Loon]

I agree that Love should have gotten the ball more often, but at the least, I think he should have at least looked like he was getting the ball on every play, since he was getting so focused on. It could have helped everything else. In the way that we had everyone watching Penny on every play, this made SDSU misdirection way more effective, leaving open easier passes and 1-on-1 situations.

[Sea Loon]

I agree that Love should have gotten the ball more often, but at the least, I think he should have at least looked like he was getting the ball on every play, since he was getting so focused on. It could have helped everything else. In the way that we had everyone watching Penny on every play, this made SDSU misdirection way more effective, leaving open easier passes and 1-on-1 situations.

[Remy74]

Looked at another way, Love got about a third of our offensive touches. For a small back, I think that's a lot. The real problem was how inept our offense was, we couldn't sustain drives, and so had few plays in total, and I think that blame is probably split between poor OL play, poor QB play, and poor playcalling, in probably equal helpings.

Love is listed at 5'10", 196 while McCaffrey was listed at 6'0", 200 pounds last year with both likely 1 inch shorter per NFL Combine [barefoot] measurements.  Love has the higher BMI/more compact.

Love is actually 9-10 pounds away from being the optimal size for an NFL RB based on historical production.  I think the issue with additional carries is more conditioning than size.

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/201..._backs.php

Chris Johnson played most of his NFL career under 200 pounds. Jamaal Charles as well.

[Remy74]

Looked at another way, Love got about a third of our offensive touches. For a small back, I think that's a lot. The real problem was how inept our offense was, we couldn't sustain drives, and so had few plays in total, and I think that blame is probably split between poor OL play, poor QB play, and poor playcalling, in probably equal helpings.

Love is listed at 5'10", 196 while McCaffrey was listed at 6'0", 200 pounds last year with both likely 1 inch shorter per NFL Combine [barefoot] measurements.  Love has the higher BMI/more compact.

Love is actually 9-10 pounds away from being the optimal size for an NFL RB based on historical production.  I think the issue with additional carries is more conditioning than size.

http://www.sports-central.org/sports/201..._backs.php

Chris Johnson played most of his NFL career under 200 pounds. Jamaal Charles as well.

[dabigv13]

My point is that his usage was already pretty high, and running 50% of your offense through a small running back (and yes, under 200 lbs is small) is not a recipe for long term success. Maybe in that game, given how horrible the rest of our offense was performing, it would have been better. But the usage of Love is very low on my list of what is wrong with the offense right now.

[dabigv13]

My point is that his usage was already pretty high, and running 50% of your offense through a small running back (and yes, under 200 lbs is small) is not a recipe for long term success. Maybe in that game, given how horrible the rest of our offense was performing, it would have been better. But the usage of Love is very low on my list of what is wrong with the offense right now.

[North Woods]

Although he was far and away our best option, seems the root of relatively low touches is a low number of total plays. We didn't move the chains on sustained drives.

To some degree he was part of that. If you take away his 3 brobdingnagian gains (151 yards combined) he averaged 3 yards per touch. To clarify: he had a great game but even so giving to him was not a sure thing like we have seen with some of the recent power backs or even last year. Probably haa a lot to do with OL inconsistency even factoring in his style of running.

More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

[North Woods]

Although he was far and away our best option, seems the root of relatively low touches is a low number of total plays. We didn't move the chains on sustained drives.

To some degree he was part of that. If you take away his 3 brobdingnagian gains (151 yards combined) he averaged 3 yards per touch. To clarify: he had a great game but even so giving to him was not a sure thing like we have seen with some of the recent power backs or even last year. Probably haa a lot to do with OL inconsistency even factoring in his style of running.

More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

[BostonCard]

Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

[BostonCard]

Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

[JJJ]

Bryce Love continues to show he is one of the elite running backs in the country.

The speedy junior from Wake Forest, North Carolina, turned in another dazzling performance Saturday night in Stanford's 20-17 loss at San Diego State. He carried 13 times for 184 yards and produced scoring bursts of 53 and 51. Love also set up a field goal with a 47-yard burst.

He has now run for more than 100 yards and tallied a rushing or receiving touchdown in five consecutive contests.

Through three games, Love has amassed 524 yards rushing, second-most in the nation. He ranks No. 2 in yards per game (174.7) and No. 8 in all-purpose yards (175.67).
 

http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/9/17...oltau.aspx

[JJJ]

Bryce Love continues to show he is one of the elite running backs in the country.

The speedy junior from Wake Forest, North Carolina, turned in another dazzling performance Saturday night in Stanford's 20-17 loss at San Diego State. He carried 13 times for 184 yards and produced scoring bursts of 53 and 51. Love also set up a field goal with a 47-yard burst.

He has now run for more than 100 yards and tallied a rushing or receiving touchdown in five consecutive contests.

Through three games, Love has amassed 524 yards rushing, second-most in the nation. He ranks No. 2 in yards per game (174.7) and No. 8 in all-purpose yards (175.67).
 

http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/9/17...oltau.aspx

[Goose]

Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

True. But it doesn't help our TOP and sustained drives. A quick TD, while nice, puts our defense right back out there. If it is third and three, by the numbers, we have a 10% chance of a TD, a 10% chance of a first down,  and an 80% chance of punting. That's not going to work.

[Goose]

Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

True. But it doesn't help our TOP and sustained drives. A quick TD, while nice, puts our defense right back out there. If it is third and three, by the numbers, we have a 10% chance of a TD, a 10% chance of a first down,  and an 80% chance of punting. That's not going to work.

[81alum]

More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

I agree.  This is the strangest thing to me.  Just when we feel as if we have an elite group of TEs, they disappear.  Hitting them with regularity will punish the box-stacking and get the linebackers back on their heels.  They also could be quicker targets to hit so as to dampen the rush.  Given that our WRs are not getting much separation, why not go for the mismatches instead and do more with the TEs and less with the WRs.  And given that KC does not seem that accurate, give him big targets to hit.

The TEs are usually possession receivers--we need them to make third downs, sustain drives, etc.

They were obviously not a key part of the game plan.  There must be a reason, I suppose, but it doesn't currently make sense to me.

[81alum]

More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

I agree.  This is the strangest thing to me.  Just when we feel as if we have an elite group of TEs, they disappear.  Hitting them with regularity will punish the box-stacking and get the linebackers back on their heels.  They also could be quicker targets to hit so as to dampen the rush.  Given that our WRs are not getting much separation, why not go for the mismatches instead and do more with the TEs and less with the WRs.  And given that KC does not seem that accurate, give him big targets to hit.

The TEs are usually possession receivers--we need them to make third downs, sustain drives, etc.

They were obviously not a key part of the game plan.  There must be a reason, I suppose, but it doesn't currently make sense to me.

[North Woods]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17419.msg201268#msg201268 date=1505698960]
Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

True. But it doesn't help our TOP and sustained drives. A quick TD, while nice, puts our defense right back out there. If it is third and three, by the numbers, we have a 10% chance of a TD, a 10% chance of a first down,  and an 80% chance of punting. That's not going to work.
[/quote]

Yeah that was what I was trying to say. Give him tons of credit for the big plays and he should get more touches than anyone else -- probably by a wide margin. He is performing at an elite level. But in addition to looking at his average per touch the strategy needs to account also for his median touch or other similar stat. If he could reliably pound out 3-4 yards each time he wouldn't necessarily be more valuable overall, but might have gotten touches in situations where yesterday we went with a different option. He's not necessarily seen as a sure thing 3rd (or 4th  >:() and short guy who will definitely get the first down.

[North Woods]

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17419.msg201268#msg201268 date=1505698960]
Bryce Love has 43 carries so far this year.  He has 4 runs for 50 yards or more; just about 1 in every 10 times he touches the ball, and he has had at least 1 such run in each game.  He has 9 runs of 20 yards or more; a bit more than once every five times he touches the ball.

At some point, it no longer makes sense to say "without the long runs" because they are not outliers; they are an intrinsic part of his game.

BC

True. But it doesn't help our TOP and sustained drives. A quick TD, while nice, puts our defense right back out there. If it is third and three, by the numbers, we have a 10% chance of a TD, a 10% chance of a first down,  and an 80% chance of punting. That's not going to work.
[/quote]

Yeah that was what I was trying to say. Give him tons of credit for the big plays and he should get more touches than anyone else -- probably by a wide margin. He is performing at an elite level. But in addition to looking at his average per touch the strategy needs to account also for his median touch or other similar stat. If he could reliably pound out 3-4 yards each time he wouldn't necessarily be more valuable overall, but might have gotten touches in situations where yesterday we went with a different option. He's not necessarily seen as a sure thing 3rd (or 4th  >:() and short guy who will definitely get the first down.

[Remy74]

Love's big play/ feast or famine running style actually reminds me a great deal of Barry Sanders (1988 season as well as the NFL). 

PFF rates RBs via their Elusive Rating to assess a running back’s success beyond the point of being helped by his blockers. Essentially it takes into account not only missed tackles forced by the player, but also how much extra yardage is gained after contact on run plays.

Love was 2nd in the nation in Elusive Rating [heading into bowl games] last year and was 2nd this season in forced missed tackles after 2 games.

[Remy74]

Love's big play/ feast or famine running style actually reminds me a great deal of Barry Sanders (1988 season as well as the NFL). 

PFF rates RBs via their Elusive Rating to assess a running back’s success beyond the point of being helped by his blockers. Essentially it takes into account not only missed tackles forced by the player, but also how much extra yardage is gained after contact on run plays.

Love was 2nd in the nation in Elusive Rating [heading into bowl games] last year and was 2nd this season in forced missed tackles after 2 games.

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

[quote author=North Woods link=topic=17419.msg201267#msg201267 date=1505698659]
More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

I agree.  This is the strangest thing to me.  Just when we feel as if we have an elite group of TEs, they disappear.  Hitting them with regularity will punish the box-stacking and get the linebackers back on their heels.  They also could be quicker targets to hit so as to dampen the rush.  Given that our WRs are not getting much separation, why not go for the mismatches instead and do more with the TEs and less with the WRs.  And given that KC does not seem that accurate, give him big targets to hit.

The TEs are usually possession receivers--we need them to make third downs, sustain drives, etc.

They were obviously not a key part of the game plan.  There must be a reason, I suppose, but it doesn't currently make sense to me.
[/quote]

Tonight I was watching the Eagles play and wondering about Zach Ertz.
When he played for Stanford, was he thrown the ball 4 or 5 times per game , more?

[SF_Cardinal_Fan]

[quote author=North Woods link=topic=17419.msg201267#msg201267 date=1505698659]
More than Love's touches, I'm perplexed that our TEs were not much more involved. Only one reception by Schultz. Whether that is fully on Chryst for decisions made or throws not made I don't know, but that part was sorely missed.

I agree.  This is the strangest thing to me.  Just when we feel as if we have an elite group of TEs, they disappear.  Hitting them with regularity will punish the box-stacking and get the linebackers back on their heels.  They also could be quicker targets to hit so as to dampen the rush.  Given that our WRs are not getting much separation, why not go for the mismatches instead and do more with the TEs and less with the WRs.  And given that KC does not seem that accurate, give him big targets to hit.

The TEs are usually possession receivers--we need them to make third downs, sustain drives, etc.

They were obviously not a key part of the game plan.  There must be a reason, I suppose, but it doesn't currently make sense to me.
[/quote]

Tonight I was watching the Eagles play and wondering about Zach Ertz.
When he played for Stanford, was he thrown the ball 4 or 5 times per game , more?

[81alum]

Tonight I was watching the Eagles play and wondering about Zach Ertz.
When he played for Stanford, was he thrown the ball 4 or 5 times per game , more?

He had 69 catches his senior year, but I don't know how many times he was targeted.  Still, that is more than 5 catches a game. 
Coby Fleener had 34 catches in 2011, his final year.  That same year Ertz had 27 and Toilolo had 25.  That is 86 between the 3 of them, and they no doubt were targeted a lot more than that.  I think you could safely say that the TEs were targeted nearly 10 times a game in 2011, when we had those three outstanding players.

This year Schultz has 3 catches, Parkinson has 3, Harrington has 3, and Smith has 6.  That is 15 over 3 games.  Schultz and Harrington each caught one in the SDSU debacle.  The TEs caught 5 against SC.  The TEs caught 10 against Rice.

[81alum]

Tonight I was watching the Eagles play and wondering about Zach Ertz.
When he played for Stanford, was he thrown the ball 4 or 5 times per game , more?

He had 69 catches his senior year, but I don't know how many times he was targeted.  Still, that is more than 5 catches a game. 
Coby Fleener had 34 catches in 2011, his final year.  That same year Ertz had 27 and Toilolo had 25.  That is 86 between the 3 of them, and they no doubt were targeted a lot more than that.  I think you could safely say that the TEs were targeted nearly 10 times a game in 2011, when we had those three outstanding players.

This year Schultz has 3 catches, Parkinson has 3, Harrington has 3, and Smith has 6.  That is 15 over 3 games.  Schultz and Harrington each caught one in the SDSU debacle.  The TEs caught 5 against SC.  The TEs caught 10 against Rice.