[cardcrimson]

Not the Love has much of a shot at the HeismanTrophy with all the love for Barkley but, it will be interesting to see what impact the QB decision has on his output tonight.

Many have conjectured that:
The Utes will load the box against the run, as Chryst is less of a threat in the passing game.
Chryst is no threat on the read option.
The expanded playbook, will limit Love's touches.

After two stellar performances following three really good ones, it'd be a shame to see Love's impacted negatively.

[cardcrimson]

Not the Love has much of a shot at the HeismanTrophy with all the love for Barkley but, it will be interesting to see what impact the QB decision has on his output tonight.

Many have conjectured that:
The Utes will load the box against the run, as Chryst is less of a threat in the passing game.
Chryst is no threat on the read option.
The expanded playbook, will limit Love's touches.

After two stellar performances following three really good ones, it'd be a shame to see Love's impacted negatively.

[lex24]

Utah will load the box no matter who is  Quarterbacking.  Only an idiot would NOT load the box against Stanford.  So the decision is not a factor on that front  (I mean seriously, haven't teams stacked the box against Stanford since 2012???)

As for Loves touches - what impacts that is the number of plays Stanford runs. So if they can't move the chains that will matter. As it will if Utah churns out long slow drives.  See SDS on both counts

Not the Love has much of a shot at the HeismanTrophy with all the love for Barkley but, it will be interesting to see what impact the QB decision has on his output tonight.

Many have conjectured that:
The Utes will load the box against the run, as Chryst is less of a threat in the passing game.
Chryst is no threat on the read option.
The expanded playbook, will limit Love's touches.

After two stellar performances following three really good ones, it'd be a shame to see Love's impacted negatively.

[lex24]

Utah will load the box no matter who is  Quarterbacking.  Only an idiot would NOT load the box against Stanford.  So the decision is not a factor on that front  (I mean seriously, haven't teams stacked the box against Stanford since 2012???)

As for Loves touches - what impacts that is the number of plays Stanford runs. So if they can't move the chains that will matter. As it will if Utah churns out long slow drives.  See SDS on both counts

Not the Love has much of a shot at the HeismanTrophy with all the love for Barkley but, it will be interesting to see what impact the QB decision has on his output tonight.

Many have conjectured that:
The Utes will load the box against the run, as Chryst is less of a threat in the passing game.
Chryst is no threat on the read option.
The expanded playbook, will limit Love's touches.

After two stellar performances following three really good ones, it'd be a shame to see Love's impacted negatively.

[cardcrimson]

Some have mentioned 9 in the box verses Chryst. Don't think they'd do that verses Costello, unless were in the Jumbo.

[cardcrimson]

Some have mentioned 9 in the box verses Chryst. Don't think they'd do that verses Costello, unless were in the Jumbo.

[BostonCard]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box.  Although it does increase the possibility that they stop Love within 5 yards of the LOS, an overloaded box means that if he gets through the initial wave, there will be no one there to stop him until he scores.

BC

[BostonCard]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box.  Although it does increase the possibility that they stop Love within 5 yards of the LOS, an overloaded box means that if he gets through the initial wave, there will be no one there to stop him until he scores.

BC

[Goose]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box.  Although it does increase the possibility that they stop Love within 5 yards of the LOS, an overloaded box means that if he gets through the initial wave, there will be no one there to stop him until he scores.

BC

I think Love prefers both the safeties up near the LOS, for exactly that reason. One Safety is probably so far on the "wrong side" of the field he won't even make it into the play until Love is past him, and with Love's speed, nobody is going to chase him down. Often, we can get a block on the other safety, or, if required, Love just beats him. Our passing game should like this too, no matter who the QB is. However, with Utah, I expect more 8 in the box than 9 in the box. They probably think it is a better alignment for them. (I couldn't bring myself to say they think 8 is enough) You don't want to re-design your entire defense for one game, and you also don't want too many "home runs". That may change if the safety can't tackle Love after his 10 yard gain though  :).

[Goose]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box.  Although it does increase the possibility that they stop Love within 5 yards of the LOS, an overloaded box means that if he gets through the initial wave, there will be no one there to stop him until he scores.

BC

I think Love prefers both the safeties up near the LOS, for exactly that reason. One Safety is probably so far on the "wrong side" of the field he won't even make it into the play until Love is past him, and with Love's speed, nobody is going to chase him down. Often, we can get a block on the other safety, or, if required, Love just beats him. Our passing game should like this too, no matter who the QB is. However, with Utah, I expect more 8 in the box than 9 in the box. They probably think it is a better alignment for them. (I couldn't bring myself to say they think 8 is enough) You don't want to re-design your entire defense for one game, and you also don't want too many "home runs". That may change if the safety can't tackle Love after his 10 yard gain though  :).

[ChicagoCard]

Chase Hansen is supposed to be a really good safety. Anybody know if he's available to play? I know he has been battling an injury.

[ChicagoCard]

Chase Hansen is supposed to be a really good safety. Anybody know if he's available to play? I know he has been battling an injury.

[CTcard]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box. 

Stanford's offense, when it is working, is more or less designed to force the opponent to load the box.
That has several advantages: it takes opponents out of their base defense, it usually takes defenses out of alignments they are used to (with so much time spent defending spreads), it allows for big plays as you noted, and it allows for much better pass-game match ups and ought to lead to an efficient pass game.


I see no evidence that opposing defenses are more likely to stack the box when Chryst is in vs. Costello.
Costello remains an inexperienced QB, and teams tend to see if inexperienced players can really beat them.
Costello has never thrown more than 24 passes in a game. Chryst has done so four times, and another at 23.
The number of appearances for both are so small it's hard to really track a pattern, but it would appear that Stanford is certainly no more likely to throw with Costello in the game.

[CTcard]

Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box. 

Stanford's offense, when it is working, is more or less designed to force the opponent to load the box.
That has several advantages: it takes opponents out of their base defense, it usually takes defenses out of alignments they are used to (with so much time spent defending spreads), it allows for big plays as you noted, and it allows for much better pass-game match ups and ought to lead to an efficient pass game.


I see no evidence that opposing defenses are more likely to stack the box when Chryst is in vs. Costello.
Costello remains an inexperienced QB, and teams tend to see if inexperienced players can really beat them.
Costello has never thrown more than 24 passes in a game. Chryst has done so four times, and another at 23.
The number of appearances for both are so small it's hard to really track a pattern, but it would appear that Stanford is certainly no more likely to throw with Costello in the game.

[lex24]

+1. Any defense is going to commit to stopping Love. just as they did McCaffrey before him.

I heard a commentator talking about theNFL.  He mentioned that defenses have gotten smaller and faster- to deal with the more spread out speed oriented offenses. He then said some offenses have reacted by going to more of a power running game. I don't know if he's right or not.

But it made me think of "THE ISSUE" with Stanford football- the reliance on a power oriented (tight formation, ogre package etc) when everyone else seemed to be going to spreads.  Once Stanford overtook Oregon as the top dog( 3-4 years as Champs) some adjusted. Most notably SC.

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17601.msg204528#msg204528 date=1507395422]
Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box. 

Stanford's offense, when it is working, is more or less designed to force the opponent to load the box.
That has several advantages: it takes opponents out of their base defense, it usually takes defenses out of alignments they are used to (with so much time spent defending spreads), it allows for big plays as you noted, and it allows for much better pass-game match ups and ought to lead to an efficient pass game.


I see no evidence that opposing defenses are more likely to stack the box when Chryst is in vs. Costello.
Costello remains an inexperienced QB, and teams tend to see if inexperienced players can really beat them.
Costello has never thrown more than 24 passes in a game. Chryst has done so four times, and another at 23.
The number of appearances for both are so small it's hard to really track a pattern, but it would appear that Stanford is certainly no more likely to throw with Costello in the game.
[/quote]

[lex24]

+1. Any defense is going to commit to stopping Love. just as they did McCaffrey before him.

I heard a commentator talking about theNFL.  He mentioned that defenses have gotten smaller and faster- to deal with the more spread out speed oriented offenses. He then said some offenses have reacted by going to more of a power running game. I don't know if he's right or not.

But it made me think of "THE ISSUE" with Stanford football- the reliance on a power oriented (tight formation, ogre package etc) when everyone else seemed to be going to spreads.  Once Stanford overtook Oregon as the top dog( 3-4 years as Champs) some adjusted. Most notably SC.

[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17601.msg204528#msg204528 date=1507395422]
Note that in many cases, Love has benefitted from the opponent overloading the box. 

Stanford's offense, when it is working, is more or less designed to force the opponent to load the box.
That has several advantages: it takes opponents out of their base defense, it usually takes defenses out of alignments they are used to (with so much time spent defending spreads), it allows for big plays as you noted, and it allows for much better pass-game match ups and ought to lead to an efficient pass game.


I see no evidence that opposing defenses are more likely to stack the box when Chryst is in vs. Costello.
Costello remains an inexperienced QB, and teams tend to see if inexperienced players can really beat them.
Costello has never thrown more than 24 passes in a game. Chryst has done so four times, and another at 23.
The number of appearances for both are so small it's hard to really track a pattern, but it would appear that Stanford is certainly no more likely to throw with Costello in the game.
[/quote]

[washingtonismoney]

+1. Any defense is going to commit to stopping Love. just as they did McCaffrey before him.

I heard a commentator talking about theNFL.  He mentioned that defenses have gotten smaller and faster- to deal with the more spread out speed oriented offenses. He then said some offenses have reacted by going to more of a power running game. I don't know if he's right or not.

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

[washingtonismoney]

+1. Any defense is going to commit to stopping Love. just as they did McCaffrey before him.

I heard a commentator talking about theNFL.  He mentioned that defenses have gotten smaller and faster- to deal with the more spread out speed oriented offenses. He then said some offenses have reacted by going to more of a power running game. I don't know if he's right or not.

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

[Goose]

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

Isn't there a lot of situation bias in these numbers though? For instance, I would expect Jumbo to show up mostly when you only need a yard, or, more directly, are one yard from the end zone. You aren't going to get any 20 yard plays to move the average up.

[Goose]

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

Isn't there a lot of situation bias in these numbers though? For instance, I would expect Jumbo to show up mostly when you only need a yard, or, more directly, are one yard from the end zone. You aren't going to get any 20 yard plays to move the average up.

[lex24]

Yep. If the jumbo is used on third and one and you run for 1.3 that is a successful play. Shotgun may involve more second and third and longs.

Still Washingtons overall point is, I think, it's a passing league. And that is undeniable.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17601.msg204579#msg204579 date=1507408288]

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

Isn't there a lot of situation bias in these numbers though? For instance, I would expect Jumbo to show up mostly when you only need a yard, or, more directly, are one yard from the end zone. You aren't going to get any 20 yard plays to move the average up.
[/quote]

[lex24]

Yep. If the jumbo is used on third and one and you run for 1.3 that is a successful play. Shotgun may involve more second and third and longs.

Still Washingtons overall point is, I think, it's a passing league. And that is undeniable.

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17601.msg204579#msg204579 date=1507408288]

They may have reacted that way...but they're not good at it:

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the NFL this year:

Shotgun: 4.82
Singleback: 3.88
Pistol: 3.86
I-Form: 3.82
Wildcat: 2.56
Jumbo: 1.34"

"Yards Per Carry by Formation in the Red Zone this year:

Shotgun: 3.95
I-Form: 3.13
Singleback: 2.89
Jumbo: 0.81"

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...1615952896

https://twitter.com/NFLDrafter/status/91...6106437632

Isn't there a lot of situation bias in these numbers though? For instance, I would expect Jumbo to show up mostly when you only need a yard, or, more directly, are one yard from the end zone. You aren't going to get any 20 yard plays to move the average up.
[/quote]

[Goose]

Yep. If the jumbo is used on third and one and you run for 1.3 that is a successful play. Shotgun may involve more second and third and longs.

Still Washingtons overall point is, I think, it's a passing league. And that is undeniable.

True. As we all know, the rules have been changed over the years to encourage this. That isn't going to change anytime soon.

[Goose]

Yep. If the jumbo is used on third and one and you run for 1.3 that is a successful play. Shotgun may involve more second and third and longs.

Still Washingtons overall point is, I think, it's a passing league. And that is undeniable.

True. As we all know, the rules have been changed over the years to encourage this. That isn't going to change anytime soon.

[BostonCard]

Sounds like Utah is likely to play 1 safety deep, man-to-man on the edges and 8 in the box (per Platz and Husak; I haven't looked at the film myself).  DOesn't sound like the QB decision will make a difference.

BC

[BostonCard]

Sounds like Utah is likely to play 1 safety deep, man-to-man on the edges and 8 in the box (per Platz and Husak; I haven't looked at the film myself).  DOesn't sound like the QB decision will make a difference.

BC