[BostonCard]

OK, raise your hand if you expected the Pac-12 leader in third down conversion percentage to be... Stanford

At 48%, we actually led the league.  Moreover, 48% was a higher third down conversion percentage than any Pac-12 team since 2015 (us again).  And this time, we didn't have CHristian McCaffrey.

Now the bad news... Stanford was 12th in third down conversion percentage allowed: 51.3%.  It's the highest third down conversion percentage allowed since OSU in 2017.

BC

[BostonCard]

OK, raise your hand if you expected the Pac-12 leader in third down conversion percentage to be... Stanford

At 48%, we actually led the league.  Moreover, 48% was a higher third down conversion percentage than any Pac-12 team since 2015 (us again).  And this time, we didn't have CHristian McCaffrey.

Now the bad news... Stanford was 12th in third down conversion percentage allowed: 51.3%.  It's the highest third down conversion percentage allowed since OSU in 2017.

BC

[CowboyIndian]

And 4th down may have been worse. Just a feeling.

[CowboyIndian]

And 4th down may have been worse. Just a feeling.

[lex24]

Yeah, but they were excellent in defending end of game conversions..... :)

[lex24]

Yeah, but they were excellent in defending end of game conversions..... :)

[OutsiderFan]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

[OutsiderFan]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

[lex24]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

What is obvious is the precipitous drop in talent on the defensive side of the ball.  

Jimbo is  trying to save his own ass.  Brown’s defenses have been strong every year save this one.

[lex24]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

What is obvious is the precipitous drop in talent on the defensive side of the ball.  

Jimbo is  trying to save his own ass.  Brown’s defenses have been strong every year save this one.

[BostonCard]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

[BostonCard]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

[PAsportsfan]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

You keep mentioning “Shavita” and the playcalling.

Well I guess it is the problem. LOL

[PAsportsfan]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

You keep mentioning “Shavita” and the playcalling.

Well I guess it is the problem. LOL

[winflop]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

[winflop]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

[SamuelMcF]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.

Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe. Defense is so clearly the elephant in the room to me. Say what you will about the talent level dropping, but it hasn't dropped to the level of a crappy G5 team, for Christ's sake!

Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

[SamuelMcF]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.

Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe. Defense is so clearly the elephant in the room to me. Say what you will about the talent level dropping, but it hasn't dropped to the level of a crappy G5 team, for Christ's sake!

Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

[BostonCard]

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.


Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe.



Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

BC

[BostonCard]

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.


Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe.



Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

BC

[winflop]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.

Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe. Defense is so clearly the elephant in the room to me. Say what you will about the talent level dropping, but it hasn't dropped to the level of a crappy G5 team, for Christ's sake!

Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

True. If someone is going to go, it needs to be Anderson. And Reynolds. And I wouldn't shed a tear if Akina retired.

Kudos to Coach Sanders. ILB was a pleasant surprise, especially Damuni.

[winflop]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.

Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe. Defense is so clearly the elephant in the room to me. Say what you will about the talent level dropping, but it hasn't dropped to the level of a crappy G5 team, for Christ's sake!

Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

True. If someone is going to go, it needs to be Anderson. And Reynolds. And I wouldn't shed a tear if Akina retired.

Kudos to Coach Sanders. ILB was a pleasant surprise, especially Damuni.

[lex24]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Yet but/for a screw up at Pac 12 testing site, Stanford quite possibly would have won the North.

[lex24]

It is obvious which coach is the weakest link on the coaching staff.  I've been calling for a new DC for three years, or is it four now?

Jim Harbaugh has now hired and fired Don Brown as DC in that time span at Michigan. Today, a year after winning the NC, Ed Orgeron cashiered his DC Bo Pelini.

I don’t know.  Reading this board you would get a sense that the problem was “Shavita” and the playcalling.

BC

There is no "the" problem. There are several problems on both sides of the ball, and in S&C

Yet but/for a screw up at Pac 12 testing site, Stanford quite possibly would have won the North.

[teejers1]

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.


Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe.



Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

BC

It's not confirmation bias.
Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.

So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.

But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O. But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions. The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it).

The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed. I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .

P.S. I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw. OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

[teejers1]

Agree, but one side of the ball was ranked #16 in FEI and the other was #100 this season. Doesn't take a shrewd football mind to figure out which was which.


Problems can have magnitudes of severity, and people seem to continually hone in on the one(s) I would argue is/are less severe.



Not quite related, but in terms of "making changes," Shaw deferred the opening coin toss in the last 3 games (in which we won the coin toss). He has never done it before. Ever.

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

BC

It's not confirmation bias.
Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.

So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.

But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O. But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions. The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it).

The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed. I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .

P.S. I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw. OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

[donkey687]

[quote="BostonCard" pid='302736' dateline='1608746590']
[quote="SamuelMcF" pid='302731' dateline='1608745876']

The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .

P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

In the last two games, our front 7 on D were iron men. DWP would come out in the nickel, but other than that, the rest of the guys played just about every play which is very unsual for DL and LBs to not rotate.  I think Herron passed Keck on the depth chart, but Keck didn't play at all against UCLA so I assume he was hurt. It isn't a surprise that our defense wore down in the second half and it was a good strategy for Shaw to defer and try and limit second half defensive possessions. As bad as our defense was, Damuni, Robinson, Shaffer, Booker, Reid and Herron played pretty well given how much they had to play.

[donkey687]

[quote="BostonCard" pid='302736' dateline='1608746590']
[quote="SamuelMcF" pid='302731' dateline='1608745876']

The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .

P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

In the last two games, our front 7 on D were iron men. DWP would come out in the nickel, but other than that, the rest of the guys played just about every play which is very unsual for DL and LBs to not rotate.  I think Herron passed Keck on the depth chart, but Keck didn't play at all against UCLA so I assume he was hurt. It isn't a surprise that our defense wore down in the second half and it was a good strategy for Shaw to defer and try and limit second half defensive possessions. As bad as our defense was, Damuni, Robinson, Shaffer, Booker, Reid and Herron played pretty well given how much they had to play.

[BostonCard]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC

[BostonCard]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC

[teejers1]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC

BC, we go round and round on this.  You seem to think that scheme and 'coaching 'em up' doesn't matter - unless you have the horses, you can't win.  I disagree; even though it's a truism that the more horses you have, the greater the chances for winning/being successful.  You can say Jessie's and Joe's more important than Xs and Os - and that's entirely possible (especially if you're talking really good players vs. really not good players).  But on game day, none of us can change or comment or encourage or bitch about the roster.  It is what it is.  

It's what you do with the roster, once it's set, that matters.

But I do not want to belabor my long-held beliefs on Shaw as an offensive mind.  But I do want to reiterate that the management of the O (including getting plays in on time; not needlessly burning TOs or scrambling to avoid DOGs) appeared better; as did the kinds of plays run.  It wasn't perfect, by any means (it never is for any team), but it was noticeably better.  And you may think that's only because "the plays worked" a fair amount and/or Stanford finished 4-2 - but that is not at all how I evaluate things.

[teejers1]

It's not confirmation bias.

Game day commentary is limited to the roster you have.  The Defenses under Shaw, except for the very early years with the Harbaugh recruits, had WAY less talent than the O side of the ball - and that discrepancy has only increased as of late.



So yeah, problem #1 is improving roster talent, especially on D.



But when the roster is what the roster is, you need to maximize your game day talent to optimize your chances of winning.  That has not been Shaw's strength, imo, on O.  But I fully acknowledge and applaud that this year the O, to my eye test anyway, appeared better run with fewer "we're doing this on this play" decisions.  The heavy side bunch formation from a center hike still is overly-telegraphed - but I think Shaw knows that and doesn't care, possibly because the play has had some success (though it's also subject to stuffage at or behind LOS when teams sell out on it). 



The D talent is so unimpressive that I favored way more blitzing this year (and last) than we saw.  Doing something to create scheme advantage when you can't play straight up is what my gut says was needed.  I also think, however, that the DL performed pretty well, all things considered (including lack of depth - so a lot of guys played a ton).  That was a pleasant surprise.  The rest of the D? . . .



P.S.  I also noticed the deferral practice by Shaw.  OMG, you mean it might be possible to teach an old dog a new trick?

I think that's what we've been saying for going on five years now.  Shaw has repeatedly demonstrated that he can build Pac-12 championship calliber teams when he has Pac-12 championship players, but that when he doesn't have such players, his teams are going to struggle.  So the solution to me seems to focus less on the play-calling, which seems to be your bugaboo, and worry about the recruiting and development of players.

The Bloomgren to Tavita transition probably will result in a more consistent offense not because Pritchard is a better playcaller than Bloomgren, but because Carberry is a better OL recruiter than Bloomgren who struggled to recruit depth behind high profile guys like Walker Little.  Likewise, I think the Hansen to Turner transition will (eventually) wind up being an upgrade, because I don't expect to have an empty cupboard again.  But, we need to see more recruitment on defensive line and better recruitment at safety.  I think we can get there, but it will take a few years to rebuild the defense.  The reason I am lukewarm on Anderson is not that he doesn't blitz enough, but rather that for years now we have under-recruited at defensive positions.

BC

BC, we go round and round on this.  You seem to think that scheme and 'coaching 'em up' doesn't matter - unless you have the horses, you can't win.  I disagree; even though it's a truism that the more horses you have, the greater the chances for winning/being successful.  You can say Jessie's and Joe's more important than Xs and Os - and that's entirely possible (especially if you're talking really good players vs. really not good players).  But on game day, none of us can change or comment or encourage or bitch about the roster.  It is what it is.  

It's what you do with the roster, once it's set, that matters.

But I do not want to belabor my long-held beliefs on Shaw as an offensive mind.  But I do want to reiterate that the management of the O (including getting plays in on time; not needlessly burning TOs or scrambling to avoid DOGs) appeared better; as did the kinds of plays run.  It wasn't perfect, by any means (it never is for any team), but it was noticeably better.  And you may think that's only because "the plays worked" a fair amount and/or Stanford finished 4-2 - but that is not at all how I evaluate things.

[CowboyIndian]

But I do not want to belabor my long-held beliefs on Shaw as an offensive mind. 

Haha! Good one!

[CowboyIndian]

But I do not want to belabor my long-held beliefs on Shaw as an offensive mind. 

Haha! Good one!

[BobK]

Maybe a new year resolution? Lol.

[BobK]

Maybe a new year resolution? Lol.