[washingtonismoney]

There's probably more to it than that, but I think a healthy portion of the gains can be explained by this dynamic. Check out the video below:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:6988019

In it, the linebackers and such are so intent upon getting to the box that they totally ignore Toilolo breaking forward. No "BLOCKING TIGHT END ON THE MOVE" light bulbs go off. Remarkable.

[washingtonismoney]

There's probably more to it than that, but I think a healthy portion of the gains can be explained by this dynamic. Check out the video below:

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:6988019

In it, the linebackers and such are so intent upon getting to the box that they totally ignore Toilolo breaking forward. No "BLOCKING TIGHT END ON THE MOVE" light bulbs go off. Remarkable.

[cardfan09]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

[cardfan09]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

[Farm93]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

Get out to a 2 TD lead in the first quarter and see if the team panics.  And in that panic, possibly abandoning Power for faster formations that might get TDs quicker.

[Farm93]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

Get out to a 2 TD lead in the first quarter and see if the team panics.  And in that panic, possibly abandoning Power for faster formations that might get TDs quicker.

[OutsiderFan]

Great article by Tom Fitzgerald. 

It is difficult for people observing Stanford to see the lack of WR production and conclude the team is elite.  We are so accustomed to seeing offenses produce a certain way, that when we see something that doesn't fit into that mold, we question how elite the offense is.  People also question how good the defense is because teams have passed for some yards.

I'm with David Shaw.  It's all about putting points on the board and preventing them from going up.  What difference does it make how it is done, as long as it is done?  So TEs aren't amazing open field runners, and don't make the highlight reel plays, but isn't it about scoring TDs?  If you can get your TEs behind the defense, isn't that even better than getting the ball to a WR on a 10 yard cross and having him run 60 yards for a TD?

And listen to Pep Hamilton, the guy that watches the game tapes.  He sees how the defenses are defending his team, and he says the LBs and Safeties are always creeping up.  Even on plays where they don't have 8/9 in the box, they are moving forward at the snap, because if they don't they are going to give up a big run that allows Stanford to move the chains and keep possession.

Since the WRs are split wide, they can't get on top of the Safeties (and make them pay for creeping up) as fast as the TEs can.  As great as it would be to see Stanford WRs getting open for big passing plays, if you can get big passing plays by throwing to the TEs more (as Stanford has clearly done), why on earth would you not do it?  Why would you not take advantage of the opportunity the defense provides and shun throwing to the TEs just to get more production from the WRs? 

[OutsiderFan]

Great article by Tom Fitzgerald. 

It is difficult for people observing Stanford to see the lack of WR production and conclude the team is elite.  We are so accustomed to seeing offenses produce a certain way, that when we see something that doesn't fit into that mold, we question how elite the offense is.  People also question how good the defense is because teams have passed for some yards.

I'm with David Shaw.  It's all about putting points on the board and preventing them from going up.  What difference does it make how it is done, as long as it is done?  So TEs aren't amazing open field runners, and don't make the highlight reel plays, but isn't it about scoring TDs?  If you can get your TEs behind the defense, isn't that even better than getting the ball to a WR on a 10 yard cross and having him run 60 yards for a TD?

And listen to Pep Hamilton, the guy that watches the game tapes.  He sees how the defenses are defending his team, and he says the LBs and Safeties are always creeping up.  Even on plays where they don't have 8/9 in the box, they are moving forward at the snap, because if they don't they are going to give up a big run that allows Stanford to move the chains and keep possession.

Since the WRs are split wide, they can't get on top of the Safeties (and make them pay for creeping up) as fast as the TEs can.  As great as it would be to see Stanford WRs getting open for big passing plays, if you can get big passing plays by throwing to the TEs more (as Stanford has clearly done), why on earth would you not do it?  Why would you not take advantage of the opportunity the defense provides and shun throwing to the TEs just to get more production from the WRs? 

[washingtonismoney]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

What's really insidious from a defensive perspective isn't just this formation, it's that this is only the beginning of your problems.

Let's say Luck is running a no-huddle with the skill players of Taylor, Hewitt, plus the three tight ends. On one snap, he can split Ertz and Fleener out wide with Toilolo and Hewitt to block. On the next he can compress everyone to go jumbo. On the third he can split Hewitt out to have a single-man backfield. And so on and so forth. Given the amount of variation possible with our tight ends, it's really hard to figure out the right personnel grouping to match up with them.

[washingtonismoney]

Is there any way to properly defend a power running formation with our three fantastic TEs, Andrew Luck behind center, and Stephan Taylor in the backfield?

What's really insidious from a defensive perspective isn't just this formation, it's that this is only the beginning of your problems.

Let's say Luck is running a no-huddle with the skill players of Taylor, Hewitt, plus the three tight ends. On one snap, he can split Ertz and Fleener out wide with Toilolo and Hewitt to block. On the next he can compress everyone to go jumbo. On the third he can split Hewitt out to have a single-man backfield. And so on and so forth. Given the amount of variation possible with our tight ends, it's really hard to figure out the right personnel grouping to match up with them.

[terry]

Stanford's three TEs, as a group, are averaging 18.8 yards/reception this year. That would be outstanding for a group of WRs. For a group of TEs, it's off the charts. Those are big-play numbers. Points of comparison:

- UCBerkeley's WRs as a group are averaging 15.7 yards/reception; their # 1 receiver, Keenan Allen, is averaging 17.1 yards/reception.

- SC's WRs as a group are averaging 13.1 yards/reception; their # 1 receiver, Robert Woods, is averaging 13.6 yards/reception.

When you see a team that throws a lot to its TEs and its backs, as Stanford has done, you normally expect to see lots of short completions. That hasn't been the case with Stanford's TEs. Rather, Stanford's TEs have been legitimate big-play guys this year, by any standard.

[terry]

Stanford's three TEs, as a group, are averaging 18.8 yards/reception this year. That would be outstanding for a group of WRs. For a group of TEs, it's off the charts. Those are big-play numbers. Points of comparison:

- UCBerkeley's WRs as a group are averaging 15.7 yards/reception; their # 1 receiver, Keenan Allen, is averaging 17.1 yards/reception.

- SC's WRs as a group are averaging 13.1 yards/reception; their # 1 receiver, Robert Woods, is averaging 13.6 yards/reception.

When you see a team that throws a lot to its TEs and its backs, as Stanford has done, you normally expect to see lots of short completions. That hasn't been the case with Stanford's TEs. Rather, Stanford's TEs have been legitimate big-play guys this year, by any standard.

[fullmetal]

Spot on.  Most teams won't have LBs or safeties ready to make that snap decision to defend run or pass with the appropriate athleticism for both job descriptions.  We have TEs fast enough to blow past a cheating defense and somewhat big enough to block for the power run game.  Uh, how is our TE run blocking anyway?  I missed the Colorado game...

[fullmetal]

Spot on.  Most teams won't have LBs or safeties ready to make that snap decision to defend run or pass with the appropriate athleticism for both job descriptions.  We have TEs fast enough to blow past a cheating defense and somewhat big enough to block for the power run game.  Uh, how is our TE run blocking anyway?  I missed the Colorado game...