[gailtate]

Nice post slide.  I don't mean to imply that certain play calls are not frustrating or non-optimal.  There is, of course, room for improvement there.  However, the amount of "ink" spilled on criticizing the play-calling is disproportionate to its impact, and I try to call attention to the underappreciated problems.

I try to go back to the days of Buddy Teevens.  I always remember him calling hilariously incompetent shotgun draws that would get swallowed up at or below the line of scrimmage.  Now, that same play worked well when Teevens was the assistant for Steve Spurier at Florida, so it is not that the play was intrinsically flawed.  The problem was that the Stanford offensive line (depleted by Willingham's recruiting neglect) couldn't open holes, and the running backs couldn't hit them.  Had Teevens had the athletes Spurrier enjoyed at Florida, would the shotgun draw maybe not have been the butt of jokes?  Maybe we are not a 10-2 team no matter who Teevens has in the backfield because Teevens is not an FBS caliber coach, but I don't think Bill Walsh would have coached a winning season in 2002.

I also remember when towards the end of a game against USC where we were just dominating them at the LoS, a USC DLmen was quoted "If you guys run power one more time, I'm done; I'm subbing myself out."  The play was utterly predictable, and yet USC could do nothing about it.  I would much rather be in this situation where we are utterly overwhelmed at the LoS, no matter what the playcalls are.

That being said, in between an utterly dominant machine of an offense as we had in 2010/2011/2015, and the completely overwhelmed offenses of the dark ages, there is a role for coaching to maximize productivity.  A five yard penalty due to a delay of game won't have much of an impact if you can reliably gain 7 yards per play, and conversely if you can't string together three plays to get you a first down, then you weren't going to get a first down anyways.  But in between, a 5-yard DoG can make the difference between a drive continuing and a drive stalling.

BC

Yes, coaching still matters: The fall-off in performance after the '92 season that led to Walsh2's sad departure reflected the HC's waning passion at that moment far more than the talent on hand. Had a 47-year-old Walsh (his age when he first arrived at Stanford) inherited even Willingham' empty cupboard in 2002 I believe he would have a made a pretty good chicken salad out of the feathers. And think about him tutoring Trent Edwards from '03 on.

[gailtate]

Nice post slide.  I don't mean to imply that certain play calls are not frustrating or non-optimal.  There is, of course, room for improvement there.  However, the amount of "ink" spilled on criticizing the play-calling is disproportionate to its impact, and I try to call attention to the underappreciated problems.

I try to go back to the days of Buddy Teevens.  I always remember him calling hilariously incompetent shotgun draws that would get swallowed up at or below the line of scrimmage.  Now, that same play worked well when Teevens was the assistant for Steve Spurier at Florida, so it is not that the play was intrinsically flawed.  The problem was that the Stanford offensive line (depleted by Willingham's recruiting neglect) couldn't open holes, and the running backs couldn't hit them.  Had Teevens had the athletes Spurrier enjoyed at Florida, would the shotgun draw maybe not have been the butt of jokes?  Maybe we are not a 10-2 team no matter who Teevens has in the backfield because Teevens is not an FBS caliber coach, but I don't think Bill Walsh would have coached a winning season in 2002.

I also remember when towards the end of a game against USC where we were just dominating them at the LoS, a USC DLmen was quoted "If you guys run power one more time, I'm done; I'm subbing myself out."  The play was utterly predictable, and yet USC could do nothing about it.  I would much rather be in this situation where we are utterly overwhelmed at the LoS, no matter what the playcalls are.

That being said, in between an utterly dominant machine of an offense as we had in 2010/2011/2015, and the completely overwhelmed offenses of the dark ages, there is a role for coaching to maximize productivity.  A five yard penalty due to a delay of game won't have much of an impact if you can reliably gain 7 yards per play, and conversely if you can't string together three plays to get you a first down, then you weren't going to get a first down anyways.  But in between, a 5-yard DoG can make the difference between a drive continuing and a drive stalling.

BC

Yes, coaching still matters: The fall-off in performance after the '92 season that led to Walsh2's sad departure reflected the HC's waning passion at that moment far more than the talent on hand. Had a 47-year-old Walsh (his age when he first arrived at Stanford) inherited even Willingham' empty cupboard in 2002 I believe he would have a made a pretty good chicken salad out of the feathers. And think about him tutoring Trent Edwards from '03 on.

[slide]

Totally agree. It has always amazed me that a guy who dislikes surprises and plans everything like David Shaw doesn't have a method to eliminate these DOGs that are caused by getting the play in late. Furthermore, if you have a well coached team that can execute a play that isn't "optimal" but is rather "good enough" (no matter what the Cardboard may say) beats a DOG penalty. Some of the DOGs are on the QB just taking too much time himself. Those are bad and shouldn't happen. Good coaching can minimize them. DOGs caused by the coaching staff OTOH should NEVER happen.

Goose -- Shaw is the method, or the hiccup in the method, that causes the DOGs etc.  I am always surprised that he is surprised/unprepared for/hasn't anticipated the next call (ie 2nd and short, you take a shot on play action deep, if complete, then... or if incomplete, 3rd down you run x, and if inside their 40, you are prepared to go for it on 4th down etc).  you see the look as he searches for the next call on the big Denny's menu as the clock burns or if the camera is on the QB, the QB waiting waiting waiting for the play and personnel to get onto the field.  it is as if he does not have a great feel for calls as the game progresses -- almost the anti-Walsh in that respect.  this lack of feel seems more acute in what passes for our hurry up offense.

[slide]

Totally agree. It has always amazed me that a guy who dislikes surprises and plans everything like David Shaw doesn't have a method to eliminate these DOGs that are caused by getting the play in late. Furthermore, if you have a well coached team that can execute a play that isn't "optimal" but is rather "good enough" (no matter what the Cardboard may say) beats a DOG penalty. Some of the DOGs are on the QB just taking too much time himself. Those are bad and shouldn't happen. Good coaching can minimize them. DOGs caused by the coaching staff OTOH should NEVER happen.

Goose -- Shaw is the method, or the hiccup in the method, that causes the DOGs etc.  I am always surprised that he is surprised/unprepared for/hasn't anticipated the next call (ie 2nd and short, you take a shot on play action deep, if complete, then... or if incomplete, 3rd down you run x, and if inside their 40, you are prepared to go for it on 4th down etc).  you see the look as he searches for the next call on the big Denny's menu as the clock burns or if the camera is on the QB, the QB waiting waiting waiting for the play and personnel to get onto the field.  it is as if he does not have a great feel for calls as the game progresses -- almost the anti-Walsh in that respect.  this lack of feel seems more acute in what passes for our hurry up offense.

[Goose]

Totally agree. It has always amazed me that a guy who dislikes surprises and plans everything like David Shaw doesn't have a method to eliminate these DOGs that are caused by getting the play in late. Furthermore, if you have a well coached team that can execute a play that isn't "optimal" but is rather "good enough" (no matter what the Cardboard may say) beats a DOG penalty. Some of the DOGs are on the QB just taking too much time himself. Those are bad and shouldn't happen. Good coaching can minimize them. DOGs caused by the coaching staff OTOH should NEVER happen.

Goose -- Shaw is the method, or the hiccup in the method, that causes the DOGs etc.  I am always surprised that he is surprised/unprepared for/hasn't anticipated the next call (ie 2nd and short, you take a shot on play action deep, if complete, then... or if incomplete, 3rd down you run x, and if inside their 40, you are prepared to go for it on 4th down etc).  you see the look as he searches for the next call on the big Denny's menu as the clock burns or if the camera is on the QB, the QB waiting waiting waiting for the play and personnel to get onto the field.  it is as if he does not have a great feel for calls as the game progresses -- almost the anti-Walsh in that respect.  this lack of feel seems more acute in what passes for our hurry up offense.

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

[Goose]

Totally agree. It has always amazed me that a guy who dislikes surprises and plans everything like David Shaw doesn't have a method to eliminate these DOGs that are caused by getting the play in late. Furthermore, if you have a well coached team that can execute a play that isn't "optimal" but is rather "good enough" (no matter what the Cardboard may say) beats a DOG penalty. Some of the DOGs are on the QB just taking too much time himself. Those are bad and shouldn't happen. Good coaching can minimize them. DOGs caused by the coaching staff OTOH should NEVER happen.

Goose -- Shaw is the method, or the hiccup in the method, that causes the DOGs etc.  I am always surprised that he is surprised/unprepared for/hasn't anticipated the next call (ie 2nd and short, you take a shot on play action deep, if complete, then... or if incomplete, 3rd down you run x, and if inside their 40, you are prepared to go for it on 4th down etc).  you see the look as he searches for the next call on the big Denny's menu as the clock burns or if the camera is on the QB, the QB waiting waiting waiting for the play and personnel to get onto the field.  it is as if he does not have a great feel for calls as the game progresses -- almost the anti-Walsh in that respect.  this lack of feel seems more acute in what passes for our hurry up offense.

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

[slide]

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

an example of "feel" for game calling were the consecutive fade calls from the 2 yard line.  offensive line was consistently gouging the Oregon DL and we get to 2 yard line, first down and the boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  and then another boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  really?  has Shaw not been watching how well the young OL had been handling the LOS.

[slide]

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

an example of "feel" for game calling were the consecutive fade calls from the 2 yard line.  offensive line was consistently gouging the Oregon DL and we get to 2 yard line, first down and the boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  and then another boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  really?  has Shaw not been watching how well the young OL had been handling the LOS.

[old spanish trail]

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

an example of "feel" for game calling were the consecutive fade calls from the 2 yard line.  offensive line was consistently gouging the Oregon DL and we get to 2 yard line, first down and the boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  and then another boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  really?  has Shaw not been watching how well the young OL had been handling the LOS.

Slide, word was that McKee hadn't had much practice and had been not clean on handoffs' So, staff was worried re handoffs in the jumble of the goal line. If true, imo, they should have subbed West in.

[old spanish trail]

I don't see the decision tree approach being a "feel" issue. You should be able to do that with no feelings at all. That is a totally intellectual enterprise. It may lead to boring, uninspired play calling, but it should be possible for a very "structured" guy. The "feel" plays are deviations from the structure, the things you call that are not part of the game plan as originally designed. That is why I don't get Shaw being late on calls. No feel,  what does the game plan say to run? Simple choice. That should always be in the background and available if inspiration isn't there ATM. Heck, the QB should know the possible play selection based on the game plan if he has played a year or so.

an example of "feel" for game calling were the consecutive fade calls from the 2 yard line.  offensive line was consistently gouging the Oregon DL and we get to 2 yard line, first down and the boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  and then another boxout fade (which was blanketed)?  really?  has Shaw not been watching how well the young OL had been handling the LOS.

Slide, word was that McKee hadn't had much practice and had been not clean on handoffs' So, staff was worried re handoffs in the jumble of the goal line. If true, imo, they should have subbed West in.

[slide]

Slide, word was that McKee hadn't had much practice and had been not clean on handoffs' So, staff was worried re handoffs in the jumble of the goal line. If true, imo, they should have subbed West in.

thanks for the additional background.  even more curious now on calls.  I guess a direct snap/QB run was too difficult...

[slide]

Slide, word was that McKee hadn't had much practice and had been not clean on handoffs' So, staff was worried re handoffs in the jumble of the goal line. If true, imo, they should have subbed West in.

thanks for the additional background.  even more curious now on calls.  I guess a direct snap/QB run was too difficult...

[Phogge]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

[Phogge]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

[Maple Leaf]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

Can you post the video of that on youtube?  For sure it would set a record for the number of people who viewed it.  Two questions which I may regret asking..........who was snapping the ball?  And if who I think it was snapping the ball how long did you stay under center for the snap count?

[Maple Leaf]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

Can you post the video of that on youtube?  For sure it would set a record for the number of people who viewed it.  Two questions which I may regret asking..........who was snapping the ball?  And if who I think it was snapping the ball how long did you stay under center for the snap count?

[Phogge]

I just did it like I used to do with my kid who played in HS. Hold the ball, drop back and fling it. I still can do the footwork in my sleep. We ran dives, quick turn around pivots to long pitches to our HB. Fakes on that footwork and turn to hand off to the FB on a trap play and twice a game run play action which was called in our system simply fake and throw. I have no idea who called it “play action” but I bet Mick does. How can a five star kid not know how to hand off?

[Phogge]

I just did it like I used to do with my kid who played in HS. Hold the ball, drop back and fling it. I still can do the footwork in my sleep. We ran dives, quick turn around pivots to long pitches to our HB. Fakes on that footwork and turn to hand off to the FB on a trap play and twice a game run play action which was called in our system simply fake and throw. I have no idea who called it “play action” but I bet Mick does. How can a five star kid not know how to hand off?

[Goose]

How can a five star kid not know how to hand off?

He was an Air Raid QB? (OK, I know McKee wasn't, but that is an answer to uour question.)

[Goose]

How can a five star kid not know how to hand off?

He was an Air Raid QB? (OK, I know McKee wasn't, but that is an answer to uour question.)

[Spiny_Norman]

Anyone want to critique his handoff (or RPO) technique? Looks to me like he is capable enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7klI8nKhago

[Spiny_Norman]

Anyone want to critique his handoff (or RPO) technique? Looks to me like he is capable enough.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7klI8nKhago

[CompSci87]

I have no idea whether it's true that staff didn't trust him to hand off near the goal line but trusted him to pass. That seems bizarre.

I must say that I did notice one very awkward handoff by McKee during the game. (I'm not going to rewatch to find it again!)

[CompSci87]

I have no idea whether it's true that staff didn't trust him to hand off near the goal line but trusted him to pass. That seems bizarre.

I must say that I did notice one very awkward handoff by McKee during the game. (I'm not going to rewatch to find it again!)

[murky]

I have no idea whether it's true that staff didn't trust him to hand off near the goal line but trusted him to pass. That seems bizarre.

I must say that I did notice one very awkward handoff by McKee during the game. (I'm not going to rewatch to find it again!)

I see him hitting a bunch of guys in stride.  That seemed to be a theme, at least in the highlight reel.

[murky]

I have no idea whether it's true that staff didn't trust him to hand off near the goal line but trusted him to pass. That seems bizarre.

I must say that I did notice one very awkward handoff by McKee during the game. (I'm not going to rewatch to find it again!)

I see him hitting a bunch of guys in stride.  That seemed to be a theme, at least in the highlight reel.

[teejers1]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

Can you post the video of that on youtube?  For sure it would set a record for the number of people who viewed it.  Two questions which I may regret asking..........who was snapping the ball?  And if who I think it was snapping the ball how long did you stay under center for the snap count?

That was funny.

Still, Phogge's main point stands:  the notion that the fades were called because Shaw didn't trust the QB to hand the ball off is just preposterous.  Seriously, does anyone give that any credence?

[teejers1]

God almighty I’m 74 and haven’t run an offense for 53 years. So last week I grabbed an NFL football and went out in the driveway and practiced handing off to my wife. Piece of cake. I don’t care if his mission was spent in an igloo. In fifteen minutes you can learn to handoff. Just unbelievable.

Can you post the video of that on youtube?  For sure it would set a record for the number of people who viewed it.  Two questions which I may regret asking..........who was snapping the ball?  And if who I think it was snapping the ball how long did you stay under center for the snap count?

That was funny.

Still, Phogge's main point stands:  the notion that the fades were called because Shaw didn't trust the QB to hand the ball off is just preposterous.  Seriously, does anyone give that any credence?

[Goose]

Still, Phogge's main point stands:  the notion that the fades were called because Shaw didn't trust the QB to hand the ball off is just preposterous.  Seriously, does anyone give that any credence?

I for sure don't. Shaw obviously thought they could and should complete that pass at a high percentage. You don't call it three times in a row if you don't believe that.

[Goose]

Still, Phogge's main point stands:  the notion that the fades were called because Shaw didn't trust the QB to hand the ball off is just preposterous.  Seriously, does anyone give that any credence?

I for sure don't. Shaw obviously thought they could and should complete that pass at a high percentage. You don't call it three times in a row if you don't believe that.