[martyup]

I think stressful, disappointing outcomes like we've had the previous two weeks put our resolve as fans to the test.  Some of us are analytically oriented and try to read the tea leaves with misleadingly exact reasoning and dispassionate assessment.  Others of us are more impulsive and react emotionally to what unfolds before us. 

This point is backed by the UCLA game thread.  I invite those that didn't follow the game thread to quickly scan it. 

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17474.0

It got pretty ugly and nasty.  I would hope that our team and coach Shaw would have earned more patience and respect.  Although, I suspect there are some newer members of this board that are not true Stanford fans and are actually trolling us.

[martyup]

I think stressful, disappointing outcomes like we've had the previous two weeks put our resolve as fans to the test.  Some of us are analytically oriented and try to read the tea leaves with misleadingly exact reasoning and dispassionate assessment.  Others of us are more impulsive and react emotionally to what unfolds before us. 

This point is backed by the UCLA game thread.  I invite those that didn't follow the game thread to quickly scan it. 

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17474.0

It got pretty ugly and nasty.  I would hope that our team and coach Shaw would have earned more patience and respect.  Although, I suspect there are some newer members of this board that are not true Stanford fans and are actually trolling us.

[Goose]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=17451.msg202558#msg202558 date=1506276359]
I think stressful, disappointing outcomes like we've had the previous two weeks put our resolve as fans to the test.  Some of us are analytically oriented and try to read the tea leaves with misleadingly exact reasoning and dispassionate assessment.  Others of us are more impulsive and react emotionally to what unfolds before us. 

This point is backed by the UCLA game thread.  I invite those that didn't follow the game thread to quickly scan it. 

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17474.0

It got pretty ugly and nasty.  I would hope that our team and coach Shaw would have earned more patience and respect.  Although, I suspect there are some newer members of this board that are not true Stanford fans and are actually trolling us.
[/quote]
I noticed the same thing. Lots of emotion that probably shouldn't have made it to the ether, IMHO, even if genuine. I think some people like to vent, but I suggest the internet isn't the place to do it. Some one on this board has said "My best posts are the ones I didn't make".  I sometimes find myself typing madly, reading what I typed and umping it. Often a good idea IMHO.

[Goose]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=17451.msg202558#msg202558 date=1506276359]
I think stressful, disappointing outcomes like we've had the previous two weeks put our resolve as fans to the test.  Some of us are analytically oriented and try to read the tea leaves with misleadingly exact reasoning and dispassionate assessment.  Others of us are more impulsive and react emotionally to what unfolds before us. 

This point is backed by the UCLA game thread.  I invite those that didn't follow the game thread to quickly scan it. 

http://thecardboard.org/board/index.php?topic=17474.0

It got pretty ugly and nasty.  I would hope that our team and coach Shaw would have earned more patience and respect.  Although, I suspect there are some newer members of this board that are not true Stanford fans and are actually trolling us.
[/quote]
I noticed the same thing. Lots of emotion that probably shouldn't have made it to the ether, IMHO, even if genuine. I think some people like to vent, but I suggest the internet isn't the place to do it. Some one on this board has said "My best posts are the ones I didn't make".  I sometimes find myself typing madly, reading what I typed and umping it. Often a good idea IMHO.

[lex24]

Do you feel Hogan under acheived??

 

[quote author=lex24 link=topic=17451.msg202525#msg202525 date=1506271291]Where is the bust?  Shaw has his flaws. But I don't see what evidence you have for your post which breaks down to they have done this despite the coaching.

Til yesterday's game, I would have pointed out (and this still may be the case) that Stanford's QB performance/depth vis-à-vis recruiting rankings has been poor.  I will also point out that I've only ever been focused on QB recruiting and performance, so the whole-team stats are irrelevant.
[/quote]

[lex24]

Do you feel Hogan under acheived??

 

[quote author=lex24 link=topic=17451.msg202525#msg202525 date=1506271291]Where is the bust?  Shaw has his flaws. But I don't see what evidence you have for your post which breaks down to they have done this despite the coaching.

Til yesterday's game, I would have pointed out (and this still may be the case) that Stanford's QB performance/depth vis-à-vis recruiting rankings has been poor.  I will also point out that I've only ever been focused on QB recruiting and performance, so the whole-team stats are irrelevant.
[/quote]

[fullmetal]

Hogan overachieved. He never got the throwing mechanics coaching he needed, but between his playbook knowledge, decision-making, and grittiness, he became a great QB.

I think with a true quick release throw, Hogan's decision-making would have benefited immeasurably.

[fullmetal]

Hogan overachieved. He never got the throwing mechanics coaching he needed, but between his playbook knowledge, decision-making, and grittiness, he became a great QB.

I think with a true quick release throw, Hogan's decision-making would have benefited immeasurably.

[pefloresjr]

Hogan overachieved. He never got the throwing mechanics coaching he needed, but between his playbook knowledge, decision-making, and grittiness, he became a great QB.

I think with a true quick release throw, Hogan's decision-making would have benefited immeasurably.

I'm not sure Pritchard is the right answer as quarterback coach, but he (and Shaw) should get credit for Hogan "overachieving".  We can't know the percentage of credit to give to Hogan versus the coaches but I was pleasantly surprised by the continual improvement Hogan showed over the three years when he had real playing time.  Throwing motions for quarterbacks are tricky like pitching motions and a player's performance can sometimes be harmed by trying to change their throwing motion.  Doesn't mean it should never be tried, but I don't think that fixing Hogan's motion is as simple as it seems.  I'm also not sure if his release time is significantly improved or not.  It is tough to tell from the naked eye.  Again, the coaches are on the hook for their recruiting misses but their successes shouldn't just be discounted based on the assumption that they could have done better. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

Hogan overachieved. He never got the throwing mechanics coaching he needed, but between his playbook knowledge, decision-making, and grittiness, he became a great QB.

I think with a true quick release throw, Hogan's decision-making would have benefited immeasurably.

I'm not sure Pritchard is the right answer as quarterback coach, but he (and Shaw) should get credit for Hogan "overachieving".  We can't know the percentage of credit to give to Hogan versus the coaches but I was pleasantly surprised by the continual improvement Hogan showed over the three years when he had real playing time.  Throwing motions for quarterbacks are tricky like pitching motions and a player's performance can sometimes be harmed by trying to change their throwing motion.  Doesn't mean it should never be tried, but I don't think that fixing Hogan's motion is as simple as it seems.  I'm also not sure if his release time is significantly improved or not.  It is tough to tell from the naked eye.  Again, the coaches are on the hook for their recruiting misses but their successes shouldn't just be discounted based on the assumption that they could have done better. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[winflop]

re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

[winflop]

re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

[stupac2]

re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

Talk about sample size issues... We've only given 3 QBs a decent number of reps since then! Leaving aside the Lake Wobegone problem here, I'd argue that your expectations are off too. How many highly touted QBs end up panning out? It doesn't seem to be a lot, and maybe one of our recruitniks knows where to look for an answer, but I'd say that given we've had top-25 level QB play for most of the past decade, we shouldn't really be complaining about this too much.

[stupac2]

re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

Talk about sample size issues... We've only given 3 QBs a decent number of reps since then! Leaving aside the Lake Wobegone problem here, I'd argue that your expectations are off too. How many highly touted QBs end up panning out? It doesn't seem to be a lot, and maybe one of our recruitniks knows where to look for an answer, but I'd say that given we've had top-25 level QB play for most of the past decade, we shouldn't really be complaining about this too much.

[BostonCard]

Question... should USC be penalized for Max Browne (top rated QB) being a flop or get credit for Sam Darnold (a 4* QB ranked 8th his year)?

BC

[BostonCard]

Question... should USC be penalized for Max Browne (top rated QB) being a flop or get credit for Sam Darnold (a 4* QB ranked 8th his year)?

BC

[winflop]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17451.msg202802#msg202802 date=1506365413]
re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

Talk about sample size issues... We've only given 3 QBs a decent number of reps since then! Leaving aside the Lake Wobegone problem here, I'd argue that your expectations are off too. How many highly touted QBs end up panning out? It doesn't seem to be a lot, and maybe one of our recruitniks knows where to look for an answer, but I'd say that given we've had top-25 level QB play for most of the past decade, we shouldn't really be complaining about this too much.
[/quote]

It's not about the past decade it's about the last four years. If we get top 25 level play this year then Pritchard keeps his job. If not I think he should go.

[winflop]

[quote author=winflop link=topic=17451.msg202802#msg202802 date=1506365413]
re Hogan: Pritchard became QB coach in Jan 2014, so he only coached Hogan for the last two of his five years.

Hogan is the only QB in this program who has exceeded expectations since Pritchard became QB coach. That's just not good enough sorry.

Similar story for Bloomgren & the OL since he added the OC job and became a part-time OL coach. 2015 is the only year where the OL has performed to expectations

Jury's still out on this season on both fronts but come January it will be four years for both of them in current roles which I think provides a sufficient sample size.

Talk about sample size issues... We've only given 3 QBs a decent number of reps since then! Leaving aside the Lake Wobegone problem here, I'd argue that your expectations are off too. How many highly touted QBs end up panning out? It doesn't seem to be a lot, and maybe one of our recruitniks knows where to look for an answer, but I'd say that given we've had top-25 level QB play for most of the past decade, we shouldn't really be complaining about this too much.
[/quote]

It's not about the past decade it's about the last four years. If we get top 25 level play this year then Pritchard keeps his job. If not I think he should go.

[Goose]

It's not about the past decade it's about the last four years. If we get top 25 level play this year then Pritchard keeps his job. If not I think he should go.

Winflop, I have no idea whether Tavita is any good as a QB coach. However, for all we know, he told Shaw two years ago that both Burns and Chryst had issues, and just didn't have "it". He may have tried his best to coach them up, but it was only marginally effective. Or he may be clueless. However, I think the sample size is two, going on three, QBs. Not a big sample size. I think you would agree that one of the problems in evaluating Tavita is that his CV is all Stanford based. There is no "outside" confirmation that he is a good coach, which makes it lots easier to say he isn't. However, I personally will defer to Shaw's judgement. If Shaw says he is what the program wants, that is good enough for me. I doubt that Shaw is the type to ever let personal loyalty substitute for competence.
As I have said before, I think Tavita will need to move on pretty soon in order to punch his ticket for more  responsible jobs in the NCAA/NFL ranks. So he may be gone next year for that reason, not that Shaw thinks he is not a good coach. I think we lack enough objective data to say that the QB issues we have had can be laid even partly at his door.

[Goose]

It's not about the past decade it's about the last four years. If we get top 25 level play this year then Pritchard keeps his job. If not I think he should go.

Winflop, I have no idea whether Tavita is any good as a QB coach. However, for all we know, he told Shaw two years ago that both Burns and Chryst had issues, and just didn't have "it". He may have tried his best to coach them up, but it was only marginally effective. Or he may be clueless. However, I think the sample size is two, going on three, QBs. Not a big sample size. I think you would agree that one of the problems in evaluating Tavita is that his CV is all Stanford based. There is no "outside" confirmation that he is a good coach, which makes it lots easier to say he isn't. However, I personally will defer to Shaw's judgement. If Shaw says he is what the program wants, that is good enough for me. I doubt that Shaw is the type to ever let personal loyalty substitute for competence.
As I have said before, I think Tavita will need to move on pretty soon in order to punch his ticket for more  responsible jobs in the NCAA/NFL ranks. So he may be gone next year for that reason, not that Shaw thinks he is not a good coach. I think we lack enough objective data to say that the QB issues we have had can be laid even partly at his door.

[JohnR34231]

Question... should U$C be penalized for Max Browne (top rated QB) being a flop or get credit for Sam Darnold (a 4* QB ranked 8th his year)?

BC

Yes!

[JohnR34231]

Question... should U$C be penalized for Max Browne (top rated QB) being a flop or get credit for Sam Darnold (a 4* QB ranked 8th his year)?

BC

Yes!

[Hulk01]

Elite QBs often don't turn out well.

Of the 22 Elite 11 quarterbacks in the 2014 and 2015 class, only 12 are currently starting for their college teams., and only two rank in the top 20 for pass efficiency.  Throw in Watson, who left early, and that's three top 20 QBs our of an elite group of 22. 

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

[Hulk01]

Elite QBs often don't turn out well.

Of the 22 Elite 11 quarterbacks in the 2014 and 2015 class, only 12 are currently starting for their college teams., and only two rank in the top 20 for pass efficiency.  Throw in Watson, who left early, and that's three top 20 QBs our of an elite group of 22. 

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

[pefloresjr]

I wish I knew the answer to the coaching issues people have with the team.  We fans may have enough information to prefer a dedicated offensive line coach when our program is truly built on having a superior offensive line.  But it is nearly impossible to know if having a dedicated OLine coach would have made a meaningful difference in the performance of the line each year. 

The quarterback coach issue seems even less clear to me.  The stats above show that most elite qb prospects don't become stars.  I am not saying the Pritchard should stay or go because I don't have enough information.  A cautionary tale is the situation with Pete Alamar.  Cal fans thought he was a terrible special teams coach.  My boss mocked me when Stanford announced his hiring as special teams coach at Stanford in 2012.  He has done really well with Stanford's special teams since then.  I could attribute his success to having several standout players during that tenure, but he was their coach and it is tough to argue that they succeeded despite his terrible coaching without some real evidence supporting that position. 

I just think we all wish there was an easy answer or fix to any problems or weaknesses on the team and, in most cases, I don't think that is true.  I understand that coaching changes can sometimes bring major improvements from nearly the same player group, I just don't think most fans really know when that will and will not be true. 

I'm left hoping for great quarterback and offensive line play the rest of the year and a shot at $C in the championship game. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[pefloresjr]

I wish I knew the answer to the coaching issues people have with the team.  We fans may have enough information to prefer a dedicated offensive line coach when our program is truly built on having a superior offensive line.  But it is nearly impossible to know if having a dedicated OLine coach would have made a meaningful difference in the performance of the line each year. 

The quarterback coach issue seems even less clear to me.  The stats above show that most elite qb prospects don't become stars.  I am not saying the Pritchard should stay or go because I don't have enough information.  A cautionary tale is the situation with Pete Alamar.  Cal fans thought he was a terrible special teams coach.  My boss mocked me when Stanford announced his hiring as special teams coach at Stanford in 2012.  He has done really well with Stanford's special teams since then.  I could attribute his success to having several standout players during that tenure, but he was their coach and it is tough to argue that they succeeded despite his terrible coaching without some real evidence supporting that position. 

I just think we all wish there was an easy answer or fix to any problems or weaknesses on the team and, in most cases, I don't think that is true.  I understand that coaching changes can sometimes bring major improvements from nearly the same player group, I just don't think most fans really know when that will and will not be true. 

I'm left hoping for great quarterback and offensive line play the rest of the year and a shot at $C in the championship game. 

Cheers,
Pete F.

[stupac2]

Elite QBs often don't turn out well.

Of the 22 Elite 11 quarterbacks in the 2014 and 2015 class, only 12 are currently starting for their college teams., and only two rank in the top 20 for pass efficiency.  Throw in Watson, who left early, and that's three top 20 QBs our of an elite group of 22. 

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

So the hit rate for a top-10-ish HS QB in the country turning into a top-25-ish college QB is roughly 15%? If that's the case, then we're wildly overperforming.

Although it does make Shaw's decision to skip taking a QB one year look all the more unwise. You can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket!

[stupac2]

Elite QBs often don't turn out well.

Of the 22 Elite 11 quarterbacks in the 2014 and 2015 class, only 12 are currently starting for their college teams., and only two rank in the top 20 for pass efficiency.  Throw in Watson, who left early, and that's three top 20 QBs our of an elite group of 22. 

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

So the hit rate for a top-10-ish HS QB in the country turning into a top-25-ish college QB is roughly 15%? If that's the case, then we're wildly overperforming.

Although it does make Shaw's decision to skip taking a QB one year look all the more unwise. You can't win the lottery if you don't buy a ticket!

[CTcard]

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

Hogan ranked #4 in the country in 2015 for PER, with a Stanford record 171.03

Hogan was a moderately highly rated recruit. #20 QB on 247 sports composite. He was #12 on Scout. (In both cases for all QBs, mixing pro-style and dual-threat.)

[CTcard]

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

Hogan ranked #4 in the country in 2015 for PER, with a Stanford record 171.03

Hogan was a moderately highly rated recruit. #20 QB on 247 sports composite. He was #12 on Scout. (In both cases for all QBs, mixing pro-style and dual-threat.)

[FarmBoy]

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

Number 9 according to 247 and 15 according to Rivals, from what I could see.

[FarmBoy]

Note the Hogan ranked 4th or 5h in the country in his senior year. . .

Number 9 according to 247 and 15 according to Rivals, from what I could see.

[Velodoc]

I find some of this discussion interesting...

...and I think Shaw is at a disadvantage as a non-QB type head coach.  QB assistant coaches are typically young guys on the way up the coaching ladder and good ones are like lightening in a bottle...tough to keep on staff as, like Mike Sanford Jr, they quickly advance to OC's and HC's.  Head coaches who were QB coaches or were QB's as players reach their HC job and don't have to worry about finding that rare outstanding QB coach (Harbaugh, Peterson, etc). So Shaw is at a disadvantage. 

As previously stated, highly recruited high school QB's don't always become good college QB's, even with good mentors/coaches.  I'd say it's probably 50-50.  So, we may just have gotten unlucky with two consecutive subpar performers (Burns and Chryst).  Or one or both may be potential good D1 QB's who have been deprived much-needed quality coaching and mentoring. 

I think AJ Costello will help clarify the issue, as it would be unlikely bad luck that we'd recruit three straight highly rated QB's who  underperform. 

And so far, KJ looks like "The Man." 

[Velodoc]

I find some of this discussion interesting...

...and I think Shaw is at a disadvantage as a non-QB type head coach.  QB assistant coaches are typically young guys on the way up the coaching ladder and good ones are like lightening in a bottle...tough to keep on staff as, like Mike Sanford Jr, they quickly advance to OC's and HC's.  Head coaches who were QB coaches or were QB's as players reach their HC job and don't have to worry about finding that rare outstanding QB coach (Harbaugh, Peterson, etc). So Shaw is at a disadvantage. 

As previously stated, highly recruited high school QB's don't always become good college QB's, even with good mentors/coaches.  I'd say it's probably 50-50.  So, we may just have gotten unlucky with two consecutive subpar performers (Burns and Chryst).  Or one or both may be potential good D1 QB's who have been deprived much-needed quality coaching and mentoring. 

I think AJ Costello will help clarify the issue, as it would be unlikely bad luck that we'd recruit three straight highly rated QB's who  underperform. 

And so far, KJ looks like "The Man." 

[Beeg_Dawg]

Some of trivia guys will answer this ( I hope), but hasn't Stanford seen a number of top rated QB's transfer and fail to perform elsewhere?

Tough crowd.  Good thing we aren't Nebraska. 

[Beeg_Dawg]

Some of trivia guys will answer this ( I hope), but hasn't Stanford seen a number of top rated QB's transfer and fail to perform elsewhere?

Tough crowd.  Good thing we aren't Nebraska. 

[Snorlax94]

Brett Nottingham, who lost out to Nunes and (eventually) Hogan, was ranked the #4 pro-style QB by Rivals.com.

After failing to make the cut at Stanford, he transferred to Columbia. They were so excited, they were getting a Stanford QB who was a backup to Andrew Luck.

He started some games at Columbia, but got benched after throwing three interceptions to Monmouth, so he quit the team.

So that was a highly rated QB (and, a Harbaugh recruit) who later couldn't even make the cut at Columbia. Playing Monmouth.

[Snorlax94]

Brett Nottingham, who lost out to Nunes and (eventually) Hogan, was ranked the #4 pro-style QB by Rivals.com.

After failing to make the cut at Stanford, he transferred to Columbia. They were so excited, they were getting a Stanford QB who was a backup to Andrew Luck.

He started some games at Columbia, but got benched after throwing three interceptions to Monmouth, so he quit the team.

So that was a highly rated QB (and, a Harbaugh recruit) who later couldn't even make the cut at Columbia. Playing Monmouth.

[washingtonismoney]

As previously stated, highly recruited high school QB's don't always become good college QB's, even with good mentors/coaches.  I'd say it's probably 50-50.  ...

about 44% of five-star pro-style QBs get drafted, at least per this old data... (http://mgoblog.com/diaries/5-stars-first...ecruit-pro)

Of course five-star QBs are rare. In fact, Stanford's only got one on the roster -- Davis Mills.

[washingtonismoney]

As previously stated, highly recruited high school QB's don't always become good college QB's, even with good mentors/coaches.  I'd say it's probably 50-50.  ...

about 44% of five-star pro-style QBs get drafted, at least per this old data... (http://mgoblog.com/diaries/5-stars-first...ecruit-pro)

Of course five-star QBs are rare. In fact, Stanford's only got one on the roster -- Davis Mills.