[gailtate]

Thanks msqueri for the time and effort to post thoughtful analysis. I don’t know where you find the energy but appreciate that you do. 

That said, there is no moral victory here. Passing for a few tenths more on average is meaningless in a game where one of our star “student athletes” watched the other guy catch and run for a game winning TD like it was a TV show.  We got problems right here.

That play was a fluke.   It was just one play, and that guy learned most of his football at Oklahoma, not here.  (If we had 11 with his fight and skills, we’d be fine.)  

The really depressing truth is that we’re desperate for a win over the likes of Oregon State, and we have so little margin of error to get that win or any others.  That is a sign of how low we’ve sunk.

Oklahoma hasn’t been a good defensive program for years. Patrick Fields does not rank very high on our list of best players. He’s not the total bum he looked like on both of the most important plays of Saturday’s game, but he’s excruciatingly mediocre. Probably the worst player of our three starting safety/nickel guys and certainly not better than Williamson. 

On moral victories, I’m not saying there’s such a thing as moral victories but Shaw and, to be honest, our players act like there is.

This, in one stark statement, is the essence of the Loser Culture that Shaw has brought on. And fosters! This HC cannot step down fast enough. I cannot believe the university will stand mute and tolerate another year of this travesty but I fear that it will. What are those big thinkers thinking right now?!

[gailtate]

Thanks msqueri for the time and effort to post thoughtful analysis. I don’t know where you find the energy but appreciate that you do. 

That said, there is no moral victory here. Passing for a few tenths more on average is meaningless in a game where one of our star “student athletes” watched the other guy catch and run for a game winning TD like it was a TV show.  We got problems right here.

That play was a fluke.   It was just one play, and that guy learned most of his football at Oklahoma, not here.  (If we had 11 with his fight and skills, we’d be fine.)  

The really depressing truth is that we’re desperate for a win over the likes of Oregon State, and we have so little margin of error to get that win or any others.  That is a sign of how low we’ve sunk.

Oklahoma hasn’t been a good defensive program for years. Patrick Fields does not rank very high on our list of best players. He’s not the total bum he looked like on both of the most important plays of Saturday’s game, but he’s excruciatingly mediocre. Probably the worst player of our three starting safety/nickel guys and certainly not better than Williamson. 

On moral victories, I’m not saying there’s such a thing as moral victories but Shaw and, to be honest, our players act like there is.

This, in one stark statement, is the essence of the Loser Culture that Shaw has brought on. And fosters! This HC cannot step down fast enough. I cannot believe the university will stand mute and tolerate another year of this travesty but I fear that it will. What are those big thinkers thinking right now?!

[Row80Critic]

That play was a fluke.  [....]

But the thing is, it really wasn't.  Against FBS teams, Stanford has consistently given up 'fluke' plays.  In fact, they have given up big-gainers consistently, every single FBS outing, with no exceptions.  Oregon's State's biggest-gainer was actually the shortest of the season.

USC:  
75-yard TD pass,  1-play possession for TD
43-yard pass, as part of 7-play, 98-yard drive
27-yard TD run, as part of 7-play, 75-yard drive

Washington:
34-yard TD run, as part of 2-play, 43-yard drive
30-yard TD pass, as part of 5-play, 69 yard drive
61-yard pass, as part of 5-play, 66 yard drive

Oregon:
80-yard TD run (by QB) on 1-play possession
49-yard TD pass, as part of 2-pay 59-yard drive
35-yard run, as part of 8-pay, 75-yard drive

Based on that, there's nothing remotely unusual or fluke-like about Oregon State's drives:

43-yard TD run, as part of 3-play, 66-yard drive; and
56-yard TD pass, as part of 3-play, 76-yard drive


No fluke, just bad football consistent with past results. :(

[Row80Critic]

That play was a fluke.  [....]

But the thing is, it really wasn't.  Against FBS teams, Stanford has consistently given up 'fluke' plays.  In fact, they have given up big-gainers consistently, every single FBS outing, with no exceptions.  Oregon's State's biggest-gainer was actually the shortest of the season.

USC:  
75-yard TD pass,  1-play possession for TD
43-yard pass, as part of 7-play, 98-yard drive
27-yard TD run, as part of 7-play, 75-yard drive

Washington:
34-yard TD run, as part of 2-play, 43-yard drive
30-yard TD pass, as part of 5-play, 69 yard drive
61-yard pass, as part of 5-play, 66 yard drive

Oregon:
80-yard TD run (by QB) on 1-play possession
49-yard TD pass, as part of 2-pay 59-yard drive
35-yard run, as part of 8-pay, 75-yard drive

Based on that, there's nothing remotely unusual or fluke-like about Oregon State's drives:

43-yard TD run, as part of 3-play, 66-yard drive; and
56-yard TD pass, as part of 3-play, 76-yard drive


No fluke, just bad football consistent with past results. :(

[CardinalSagehen]

That play was a fluke.  [....]

But the thing is, it really wasn't.  Against FBS teams, Stanford has consistently given up 'fluke' plays.  In fact, they have given up big-gainers consistently, every single FBS outing, with no exceptions.  Oregon's State's biggest-gainer was actually the shortest of the season.

USC:  
75-yard TD pass,  1-play possession for TD
43-yard pass, as part of 7-play, 98-yard drive
27-yard TD run, as part of 7-play, 75-yard drive

Washington:
34-yard TD run, as part of 2-play, 43-yard drive
30-yard TD pass, as part of 5-play, 69 yard drive
61-yard pass, as part of 5-play, 66 yard drive

Oregon:
80-yard TD run (by QB) on 1-play possession
49-yard TD pass, as part of 2-pay 59-yard drive
35-yard run, as part of 8-pay, 75-yard drive

Based on that, there's nothing remotely unusual or fluke-like about Oregon State's drives:

43-yard TD run, as part of 3-play, 66-yard drive; and
56-yard TD pass, as part of 3-play, 76-yard drive


No fluke, just bad football consistent with past results. :(

Who said our defense is good? It isn't.  It sucks badly.  That's the point.  This isn't about any one play or any one player, it's about the sad level that we've reached when we're dying to steal a win over Oregon State.  

If Fields tackles that receiver on Saturday and we win the game, I'd be a little less grumpy but I would not feel differently about where we are as a program.

[CardinalSagehen]

That play was a fluke.  [....]

But the thing is, it really wasn't.  Against FBS teams, Stanford has consistently given up 'fluke' plays.  In fact, they have given up big-gainers consistently, every single FBS outing, with no exceptions.  Oregon's State's biggest-gainer was actually the shortest of the season.

USC:  
75-yard TD pass,  1-play possession for TD
43-yard pass, as part of 7-play, 98-yard drive
27-yard TD run, as part of 7-play, 75-yard drive

Washington:
34-yard TD run, as part of 2-play, 43-yard drive
30-yard TD pass, as part of 5-play, 69 yard drive
61-yard pass, as part of 5-play, 66 yard drive

Oregon:
80-yard TD run (by QB) on 1-play possession
49-yard TD pass, as part of 2-pay 59-yard drive
35-yard run, as part of 8-pay, 75-yard drive

Based on that, there's nothing remotely unusual or fluke-like about Oregon State's drives:

43-yard TD run, as part of 3-play, 66-yard drive; and
56-yard TD pass, as part of 3-play, 76-yard drive


No fluke, just bad football consistent with past results. :(

Who said our defense is good? It isn't.  It sucks badly.  That's the point.  This isn't about any one play or any one player, it's about the sad level that we've reached when we're dying to steal a win over Oregon State.  

If Fields tackles that receiver on Saturday and we win the game, I'd be a little less grumpy but I would not feel differently about where we are as a program.

[qwerty49]

Thanks msqueri for the time and effort to post thoughtful analysis. I don’t know where you find the energy but appreciate that you do. 

That said, there is no moral victory here. Passing for a few tenths more on average is meaningless in a game where one of our star “student athletes” watched the other guy catch and run for a game winning TD like it was a TV show.  We got problems right here.

That play was a fluke.   It was just one play, and that guy learned most of his football at Oklahoma, not here.  (If we had 11 with his fight and skills, we’d be fine.)  

The really depressing truth is that we’re desperate for a win over the likes of Oregon State, and we have so little margin of error to get that win or any others.  That is a sign of how low we’ve sunk.

Oklahoma hasn’t been a good defensive program for years. Patrick Fields does not rank very high on our list of best players. He’s not the total bum he looked like on both of the most important plays of Saturday’s game, but he’s excruciatingly mediocre. Probably the worst player of our three starting safety/nickel guys and certainly not better than Williamson. 

On moral victories, I’m not saying there’s such a thing as moral victories but Shaw and, to be honest, our players act like there is.

Amen. Starting on the Okie D is not exactly a compelling line on a résumé.  OK seemingly scored 40+ every game for years: no need to develop 5-star defenders when you expect to win 42-28 or 56-35 routinely.

I’m sure Fields is a great young man and I’m sure he kicks himself when he sees the film of that last play, but  as Pac10 safeties go, IMHO he’s average at best.

Sadly, if he makes that play, we win. But as others have pointed out, there are a lot of other reasons why we lost.

[qwerty49]

Thanks msqueri for the time and effort to post thoughtful analysis. I don’t know where you find the energy but appreciate that you do. 

That said, there is no moral victory here. Passing for a few tenths more on average is meaningless in a game where one of our star “student athletes” watched the other guy catch and run for a game winning TD like it was a TV show.  We got problems right here.

That play was a fluke.   It was just one play, and that guy learned most of his football at Oklahoma, not here.  (If we had 11 with his fight and skills, we’d be fine.)  

The really depressing truth is that we’re desperate for a win over the likes of Oregon State, and we have so little margin of error to get that win or any others.  That is a sign of how low we’ve sunk.

Oklahoma hasn’t been a good defensive program for years. Patrick Fields does not rank very high on our list of best players. He’s not the total bum he looked like on both of the most important plays of Saturday’s game, but he’s excruciatingly mediocre. Probably the worst player of our three starting safety/nickel guys and certainly not better than Williamson. 

On moral victories, I’m not saying there’s such a thing as moral victories but Shaw and, to be honest, our players act like there is.

Amen. Starting on the Okie D is not exactly a compelling line on a résumé.  OK seemingly scored 40+ every game for years: no need to develop 5-star defenders when you expect to win 42-28 or 56-35 routinely.

I’m sure Fields is a great young man and I’m sure he kicks himself when he sees the film of that last play, but  as Pac10 safeties go, IMHO he’s average at best.

Sadly, if he makes that play, we win. But as others have pointed out, there are a lot of other reasons why we lost.

[old spanish trail]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

[old spanish trail]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

[martyup]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

[martyup]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

[msqueri]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

[msqueri]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

[gailtate]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

[gailtate]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

[msqueri]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

Not high on my list of most cringe-worthy premature praise from Shaw, though. Kyu Blu Kelly as one of the best cornerbacks in America and EJ Smith and Casey Filkins as one of the best 1-2 punches in America is pretty hard to beat. Or the way he talked about Thomas Booker last year.

The one that comes the closest to outright gaslighting is Kelly.

[msqueri]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

Not high on my list of most cringe-worthy premature praise from Shaw, though. Kyu Blu Kelly as one of the best cornerbacks in America and EJ Smith and Casey Filkins as one of the best 1-2 punches in America is pretty hard to beat. Or the way he talked about Thomas Booker last year.

The one that comes the closest to outright gaslighting is Kelly.

[BostonCard]

Yeah, you guys like it much better when Shaw throws the kids under the bus.

Shaw is diplomatic in the extreme. He’s not going to bluntly critique his players.

BC

[BostonCard]

Yeah, you guys like it much better when Shaw throws the kids under the bus.

Shaw is diplomatic in the extreme. He’s not going to bluntly critique his players.

BC

[qwerty49]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

Some of the confusion on Fields is due to, as msqueri points out, the fact that he's good on run support but below average at coverage.  Who knows the difference between the Okie D coverage scheme and ours, but 5 games into the season it shouldn't be a learning curve problem.

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

[qwerty49]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

Some of the confusion on Fields is due to, as msqueri points out, the fact that he's good on run support but below average at coverage.  Who knows the difference between the Okie D coverage scheme and ours, but 5 games into the season it shouldn't be a learning curve problem.

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

[cardcrimson]

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

Hasn't he done just that before? "The game plan was fine; it was execution". . . .

[cardcrimson]

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

Hasn't he done just that before? "The game plan was fine; it was execution". . . .

[CardinalSagehen]

Some of the confusion on Fields is due to, as msqueri points out, the fact that he's good on run support but below average at coverage.  Who knows the difference between the Okie D coverage scheme and ours, but 5 games into the season it shouldn't be a learning curve problem.

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

Agree completely.  Maybe Fields is not great in coverage, but he tackles better than most of our team.  

I'm not bothered by his feistiness.  He may be trying to inject some life and pride into players that have barely experienced any winning on the collegiate level.  Personally, I enjoy watching players that care enough about winning to show some emotion when things are going well (or badly). Fields has been to the CFP twice and has gone to four bowl games - he can be excused for having to tolerate the mess that is Stanford Football right now. 

Yes, on Saturday, he took bad angles twice on TD plays (although I still submit that the last play was super odd and unpredictable.)  But he was All Big-12 honorable mention twice.  Off the top of my head, I don't think we've had any safeties with any level of all-conference honors since Justin Reid.  I agree that Williamson has been our best safety so far this season, and he may receive honors.

[CardinalSagehen]

Some of the confusion on Fields is due to, as msqueri points out, the fact that he's good on run support but below average at coverage.  Who knows the difference between the Okie D coverage scheme and ours, but 5 games into the season it shouldn't be a learning curve problem.

Shaw's hyperbole is just ignorable coachspeak.  As BC says, he's not gonna throw his guys under the bus.  There may be an element of motivation behind praising someone like Kelly or EJ.   I guess our task as fans and spectators is not to attach great expectations to the blah blah blah of coachspeak.

Agree completely.  Maybe Fields is not great in coverage, but he tackles better than most of our team.  

I'm not bothered by his feistiness.  He may be trying to inject some life and pride into players that have barely experienced any winning on the collegiate level.  Personally, I enjoy watching players that care enough about winning to show some emotion when things are going well (or badly). Fields has been to the CFP twice and has gone to four bowl games - he can be excused for having to tolerate the mess that is Stanford Football right now. 

Yes, on Saturday, he took bad angles twice on TD plays (although I still submit that the last play was super odd and unpredictable.)  But he was All Big-12 honorable mention twice.  Off the top of my head, I don't think we've had any safeties with any level of all-conference honors since Justin Reid.  I agree that Williamson has been our best safety so far this season, and he may receive honors.

[msqueri]

Fields is in a competition with Edwards, Antoine, and McGill for #3 post-Reid. He’s not in the conversation with Buncom and Williamson.

[msqueri]

Fields is in a competition with Edwards, Antoine, and McGill for #3 post-Reid. He’s not in the conversation with Buncom and Williamson.

[gailtate]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

Not high on my list of most cringe-worthy premature praise from Shaw, though. Kyu Blu Kelly as one of the best cornerbacks in America and EJ Smith and Casey Filkins as one of the best 1-2 punches in America is pretty hard to beat. Or the way he talked about Thomas Booker last year.

The one that comes the closest to outright gaslighting is Kelly.

His crap comes so thick and fast right now I cannot keep up with it. He has devolved from an up-and-coming hotshot  (2011-15) to a aging member of "Stanford Cheer". I respect the guy but my admiration got up and left. #MuirAndShawMustGo

[gailtate]

That unfortunate play apart, I think Fields is better than you guys do. He has made a number of nice one on one tackles, which our guys often have some trouble negotiating.

Aside from some terrible missed tackles, Fields runs his mouth too much.  He was dangerously close to being flagged for unsportsmanlike conduct several times in this game.  IMO, his performance doesn't warrant his cockiness.

Recall it's gone past "dangerously close" as he's literally cost the team a touchdown by getting an unsportsmanlike conduct at the end of the half against Oregon. I don't think we win being down 24-3 rather than 31-3 but he did cost the team.

In addition to completely freezing and costing us the game Saturday, he also was arguably the biggest victim of the other long fourth quarter touchdown Oregon had in the comeback (the rushing one), though numerous players got walled off before Fields' bad angle/inability to get an open field tackle sealed the play.

More generally, he's been an asset coming toward the line of scrimmage and a liability in coverage. Among 36 Pac-12 safeties, PFF ranks Williamson #6, Fields #27, and McGill #28. That comports with my eye test - Williamson makes us better, Fields and McGill hold us back. Of course, we face a likelihood all three will be gone next year, which is really scary. McGill coming back is probably a top five roster ask for me going into next season.

And it's galling to remember Shaw's generous praise for the guy during pre-season.  Right there with " a tiger in the weeds". He went on at length predicting how it was the kind of addition to the roster that would amount to a force multiplier.  Cringe-worthy in retrospect.

Not high on my list of most cringe-worthy premature praise from Shaw, though. Kyu Blu Kelly as one of the best cornerbacks in America and EJ Smith and Casey Filkins as one of the best 1-2 punches in America is pretty hard to beat. Or the way he talked about Thomas Booker last year.

The one that comes the closest to outright gaslighting is Kelly.

His crap comes so thick and fast right now I cannot keep up with it. He has devolved from an up-and-coming hotshot  (2011-15) to a aging member of "Stanford Cheer". I respect the guy but my admiration got up and left. #MuirAndShawMustGo

[JohnR34231]

I think we had ourselves convinced that when we got Fields we had ourselves a defensive superstar. The fact that things haven't turned out that way has just been one more disappointment associated with the season.
We all make mistakes, but it would be interesting to know what was going on in his mind in that last play.

[JohnR34231]

I think we had ourselves convinced that when we got Fields we had ourselves a defensive superstar. The fact that things haven't turned out that way has just been one more disappointment associated with the season.
We all make mistakes, but it would be interesting to know what was going on in his mind in that last play.