[washingtonismoney]

Shaw says Hogan is getting...even more plays against Colorado.

It's almost as if he's sending a signal about the assessment of the quarterback position and who would be best positioned to step up. Never that, though. Reliable sources on this board have assured me otherwise.

EDIT: That was before I saw this particular take:

"Possible for Kevin Hogan to take over as starting QB? Shaw: Anything is possible." https://twitter.com/KyleBonagura/status/...7289618432

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw says Hogan is getting...even more plays against Colorado.

It's almost as if he's sending a signal about the assessment of the quarterback position and who would be best positioned to step up. Never that, though. Reliable sources on this board have assured me otherwise.

EDIT: That was before I saw this particular take:

"Possible for Kevin Hogan to take over as starting QB? Shaw: Anything is possible." https://twitter.com/KyleBonagura/status/...7289618432

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw says Hogan is getting...even more plays against Colorado.

It's almost as if he's sending a signal about the assessment of the quarterback position and who would be best positioned to step up. Never that, though. Reliable sources on this board have assured me otherwise.

EDIT: That was before I saw this particular take:

"Possible for Kevin Hogan to take over as starting QB? Shaw: Anything is possible." https://twitter.com/KyleBonagura/status/...7289618432

[washingtonismoney]

Shaw says Hogan is getting...even more plays against Colorado.

It's almost as if he's sending a signal about the assessment of the quarterback position and who would be best positioned to step up. Never that, though. Reliable sources on this board have assured me otherwise.

EDIT: That was before I saw this particular take:

"Possible for Kevin Hogan to take over as starting QB? Shaw: Anything is possible." https://twitter.com/KyleBonagura/status/...7289618432

[ChicagoCard]

Is there anything to take away from the fact that Hogan was taken out right after he was sacked, other than that he wasn't able to avoid the sack? Shaw commented on it in the post-game interviews, basically that it had been a stunt by the defense that Stanford failed to pick up. I only heard the audio, didn't see the play.

[ChicagoCard]

Is there anything to take away from the fact that Hogan was taken out right after he was sacked, other than that he wasn't able to avoid the sack? Shaw commented on it in the post-game interviews, basically that it had been a stunt by the defense that Stanford failed to pick up. I only heard the audio, didn't see the play.

[ChicagoCard]

Is there anything to take away from the fact that Hogan was taken out right after he was sacked, other than that he wasn't able to avoid the sack? Shaw commented on it in the post-game interviews, basically that it had been a stunt by the defense that Stanford failed to pick up. I only heard the audio, didn't see the play.

[ChicagoCard]

Is there anything to take away from the fact that Hogan was taken out right after he was sacked, other than that he wasn't able to avoid the sack? Shaw commented on it in the post-game interviews, basically that it had been a stunt by the defense that Stanford failed to pick up. I only heard the audio, didn't see the play.

[washingtonismoney]

Not sure if Shaw just has a short leash on Hogan at the moment, but my memory of the play was that Hogan could've done a better job throwing the ball away on that play. Not sure if the line should've done a better job on that play; I'm sure a better eye than mine would be able to tell you.

[washingtonismoney]

Not sure if Shaw just has a short leash on Hogan at the moment, but my memory of the play was that Hogan could've done a better job throwing the ball away on that play. Not sure if the line should've done a better job on that play; I'm sure a better eye than mine would be able to tell you.

[washingtonismoney]

Not sure if Shaw just has a short leash on Hogan at the moment, but my memory of the play was that Hogan could've done a better job throwing the ball away on that play. Not sure if the line should've done a better job on that play; I'm sure a better eye than mine would be able to tell you.

[washingtonismoney]

Not sure if Shaw just has a short leash on Hogan at the moment, but my memory of the play was that Hogan could've done a better job throwing the ball away on that play. Not sure if the line should've done a better job on that play; I'm sure a better eye than mine would be able to tell you.

[AlbanyCardinal]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Shaw had scripted X number of plays for Hogan, and they were over.

That's what I heard, in fact. Maybe even Shaw said as much in a post-game interview (?). That seems to be how Shaw has used Hogan thus far, so it didn't surprise me. I hope we see more than 10-12 plays of Hogan in the Colorado game, since it's clear we'll never see Nottingham.

[AlbanyCardinal]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Shaw had scripted X number of plays for Hogan, and they were over.

That's what I heard, in fact. Maybe even Shaw said as much in a post-game interview (?). That seems to be how Shaw has used Hogan thus far, so it didn't surprise me. I hope we see more than 10-12 plays of Hogan in the Colorado game, since it's clear we'll never see Nottingham.

[AlbanyCardinal]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Shaw had scripted X number of plays for Hogan, and they were over.

That's what I heard, in fact. Maybe even Shaw said as much in a post-game interview (?). That seems to be how Shaw has used Hogan thus far, so it didn't surprise me. I hope we see more than 10-12 plays of Hogan in the Colorado game, since it's clear we'll never see Nottingham.

[AlbanyCardinal]

I wouldn't rule out the possibility that Shaw had scripted X number of plays for Hogan, and they were over.

That's what I heard, in fact. Maybe even Shaw said as much in a post-game interview (?). That seems to be how Shaw has used Hogan thus far, so it didn't surprise me. I hope we see more than 10-12 plays of Hogan in the Colorado game, since it's clear we'll never see Nottingham.

[socalstanfan1]

It seems to me the "Hogan Package" may be the coaching staff's equivalent of the "Jumbo" packages for O-linemen: a way to get players into the game in specific situations, get them accustomed to the speed, intensity, noise, and everything else associated with big-time college football, so they can take on a more expanded role later.  IF that is the case, then maybe it indicates that, in the long run, Hogan is seen by the coaches as having more upside than Nunes, and he is being prepped for a very serious consideration, either later this year (if he progresses fast enough), or next year. 

If that is in fact the case, it would be the first really positive set of coaching decisions regarding the QB position I have seen in a long time, and would go a long ways toward reviving my faith in Shaw.  He wouldn't appear as, possibly, a guy with too much ego invested in "his guy," but a coach managing a situation with one eye on the present, and another on the future.  Until further developments, I'm choosing to embrace this view of the situation, and watch the team (and Hogan) develop.  It seems to make more sense than just declaring Shaw to be an asshole, as has been done earlier.

[socalstanfan1]

It seems to me the "Hogan Package" may be the coaching staff's equivalent of the "Jumbo" packages for O-linemen: a way to get players into the game in specific situations, get them accustomed to the speed, intensity, noise, and everything else associated with big-time college football, so they can take on a more expanded role later.  IF that is the case, then maybe it indicates that, in the long run, Hogan is seen by the coaches as having more upside than Nunes, and he is being prepped for a very serious consideration, either later this year (if he progresses fast enough), or next year. 

If that is in fact the case, it would be the first really positive set of coaching decisions regarding the QB position I have seen in a long time, and would go a long ways toward reviving my faith in Shaw.  He wouldn't appear as, possibly, a guy with too much ego invested in "his guy," but a coach managing a situation with one eye on the present, and another on the future.  Until further developments, I'm choosing to embrace this view of the situation, and watch the team (and Hogan) develop.  It seems to make more sense than just declaring Shaw to be an asshole, as has been done earlier.

[socalstanfan1]

It seems to me the "Hogan Package" may be the coaching staff's equivalent of the "Jumbo" packages for O-linemen: a way to get players into the game in specific situations, get them accustomed to the speed, intensity, noise, and everything else associated with big-time college football, so they can take on a more expanded role later.  IF that is the case, then maybe it indicates that, in the long run, Hogan is seen by the coaches as having more upside than Nunes, and he is being prepped for a very serious consideration, either later this year (if he progresses fast enough), or next year. 

If that is in fact the case, it would be the first really positive set of coaching decisions regarding the QB position I have seen in a long time, and would go a long ways toward reviving my faith in Shaw.  He wouldn't appear as, possibly, a guy with too much ego invested in "his guy," but a coach managing a situation with one eye on the present, and another on the future.  Until further developments, I'm choosing to embrace this view of the situation, and watch the team (and Hogan) develop.  It seems to make more sense than just declaring Shaw to be an asshole, as has been done earlier.

[socalstanfan1]

It seems to me the "Hogan Package" may be the coaching staff's equivalent of the "Jumbo" packages for O-linemen: a way to get players into the game in specific situations, get them accustomed to the speed, intensity, noise, and everything else associated with big-time college football, so they can take on a more expanded role later.  IF that is the case, then maybe it indicates that, in the long run, Hogan is seen by the coaches as having more upside than Nunes, and he is being prepped for a very serious consideration, either later this year (if he progresses fast enough), or next year. 

If that is in fact the case, it would be the first really positive set of coaching decisions regarding the QB position I have seen in a long time, and would go a long ways toward reviving my faith in Shaw.  He wouldn't appear as, possibly, a guy with too much ego invested in "his guy," but a coach managing a situation with one eye on the present, and another on the future.  Until further developments, I'm choosing to embrace this view of the situation, and watch the team (and Hogan) develop.  It seems to make more sense than just declaring Shaw to be an asshole, as has been done earlier.

[ATLCard]

There are a couple ways to look at the Hogan package:

1) Shaw was the OC when the Loukas package was installed back in 2008.  So he likes the idea of this change-of-pace, even if only to give defenses more to prepare for.
2) And/or, it appears to me that Shaw's statements and body language have changed regarding Nunes.  I think eight games in he has also come to the realization that Josh isn't going to let him sleep at night after all.

While I was happy to see Hogan's plays the last couple games, he didn't show me anything that says we wouldn't have equal or more newbie QB issues with him as starter for the final four games.  Shaw may now wish he picked differently to start, or switched earlier, but he's not likely to say it and at this point I expect he believes the best bet for the final four games is sticking with Josh as starter rather than taking the team through another new QB start-up experience.

I would have subbed Nottingham starting the second half of UW (as would most on this board), and would still be willing to take the Nottingham/Hogan start-up risk now with the Colorado game (as would most on the board).  However I'm not ready to throw Shaw under the bus for doing it his way (yet).  And at a minimum I agree that he has his eye on Hogan for next year.

[ATLCard]

There are a couple ways to look at the Hogan package:

1) Shaw was the OC when the Loukas package was installed back in 2008.  So he likes the idea of this change-of-pace, even if only to give defenses more to prepare for.
2) And/or, it appears to me that Shaw's statements and body language have changed regarding Nunes.  I think eight games in he has also come to the realization that Josh isn't going to let him sleep at night after all.

While I was happy to see Hogan's plays the last couple games, he didn't show me anything that says we wouldn't have equal or more newbie QB issues with him as starter for the final four games.  Shaw may now wish he picked differently to start, or switched earlier, but he's not likely to say it and at this point I expect he believes the best bet for the final four games is sticking with Josh as starter rather than taking the team through another new QB start-up experience.

I would have subbed Nottingham starting the second half of UW (as would most on this board), and would still be willing to take the Nottingham/Hogan start-up risk now with the Colorado game (as would most on the board).  However I'm not ready to throw Shaw under the bus for doing it his way (yet).  And at a minimum I agree that he has his eye on Hogan for next year.

[ATLCard]

There are a couple ways to look at the Hogan package:

1) Shaw was the OC when the Loukas package was installed back in 2008.  So he likes the idea of this change-of-pace, even if only to give defenses more to prepare for.
2) And/or, it appears to me that Shaw's statements and body language have changed regarding Nunes.  I think eight games in he has also come to the realization that Josh isn't going to let him sleep at night after all.

While I was happy to see Hogan's plays the last couple games, he didn't show me anything that says we wouldn't have equal or more newbie QB issues with him as starter for the final four games.  Shaw may now wish he picked differently to start, or switched earlier, but he's not likely to say it and at this point I expect he believes the best bet for the final four games is sticking with Josh as starter rather than taking the team through another new QB start-up experience.

I would have subbed Nottingham starting the second half of UW (as would most on this board), and would still be willing to take the Nottingham/Hogan start-up risk now with the Colorado game (as would most on the board).  However I'm not ready to throw Shaw under the bus for doing it his way (yet).  And at a minimum I agree that he has his eye on Hogan for next year.

[ATLCard]

There are a couple ways to look at the Hogan package:

1) Shaw was the OC when the Loukas package was installed back in 2008.  So he likes the idea of this change-of-pace, even if only to give defenses more to prepare for.
2) And/or, it appears to me that Shaw's statements and body language have changed regarding Nunes.  I think eight games in he has also come to the realization that Josh isn't going to let him sleep at night after all.

While I was happy to see Hogan's plays the last couple games, he didn't show me anything that says we wouldn't have equal or more newbie QB issues with him as starter for the final four games.  Shaw may now wish he picked differently to start, or switched earlier, but he's not likely to say it and at this point I expect he believes the best bet for the final four games is sticking with Josh as starter rather than taking the team through another new QB start-up experience.

I would have subbed Nottingham starting the second half of UW (as would most on this board), and would still be willing to take the Nottingham/Hogan start-up risk now with the Colorado game (as would most on the board).  However I'm not ready to throw Shaw under the bus for doing it his way (yet).  And at a minimum I agree that he has his eye on Hogan for next year.

[deepred]

Apparently a QB change is not "asinine" anymore.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...josh-nunes

[deepred]

Apparently a QB change is not "asinine" anymore.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...josh-nunes

[deepred]

Apparently a QB change is not "asinine" anymore.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...josh-nunes

[deepred]

Apparently a QB change is not "asinine" anymore.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...josh-nunes

[ATLCard]

Well, I thought Shaw was shaken by the WSU performance and now we see the proof.  Even if Hogan doesn't play any better than Nunes, Shaw is sending a message to the team that needed to be sent.

[ATLCard]

Well, I thought Shaw was shaken by the WSU performance and now we see the proof.  Even if Hogan doesn't play any better than Nunes, Shaw is sending a message to the team that needed to be sent.

[ATLCard]

Well, I thought Shaw was shaken by the WSU performance and now we see the proof.  Even if Hogan doesn't play any better than Nunes, Shaw is sending a message to the team that needed to be sent.

[ATLCard]

Well, I thought Shaw was shaken by the WSU performance and now we see the proof.  Even if Hogan doesn't play any better than Nunes, Shaw is sending a message to the team that needed to be sent.

[washingtonismoney]

The curious thing about the performance is that Nunes had by far the fewest pass attempts of any game this year. The curious-er thing is that the three games with the fewest Nunes passes--SJSU, WSU, ND--were the worst games for the offense.

[washingtonismoney]

The curious thing about the performance is that Nunes had by far the fewest pass attempts of any game this year. The curious-er thing is that the three games with the fewest Nunes passes--SJSU, WSU, ND--were the worst games for the offense.

[washingtonismoney]

The curious thing about the performance is that Nunes had by far the fewest pass attempts of any game this year. The curious-er thing is that the three games with the fewest Nunes passes--SJSU, WSU, ND--were the worst games for the offense.

[washingtonismoney]

The curious thing about the performance is that Nunes had by far the fewest pass attempts of any game this year. The curious-er thing is that the three games with the fewest Nunes passes--SJSU, WSU, ND--were the worst games for the offense.

[ATLCard]

Where did you rank the UW game for offense?  My ranking was...rank.

If your point is that the offense would be better if Nunes passed more, I don't necessarily disagree.  That was the game plan for UW to open up the run.  However we didn't hit on the passes (not all Nunes fault as the receivers didn't help).

If your point is why be frustrated now after WSU when Nunes didn't pass much, two points:  1) there is the progression/improvement thing -- this stage of the season at home against a mediocre defense if you aren't clicking yet are you ever going to?  2)  The limited number of passes is related to the low number of overall plays which is because the offense couldn't sustain drives which is related to < 50% completion rate.

[ATLCard]

Where did you rank the UW game for offense?  My ranking was...rank.

If your point is that the offense would be better if Nunes passed more, I don't necessarily disagree.  That was the game plan for UW to open up the run.  However we didn't hit on the passes (not all Nunes fault as the receivers didn't help).

If your point is why be frustrated now after WSU when Nunes didn't pass much, two points:  1) there is the progression/improvement thing -- this stage of the season at home against a mediocre defense if you aren't clicking yet are you ever going to?  2)  The limited number of passes is related to the low number of overall plays which is because the offense couldn't sustain drives which is related to < 50% completion rate.

[ATLCard]

Where did you rank the UW game for offense?  My ranking was...rank.

If your point is that the offense would be better if Nunes passed more, I don't necessarily disagree.  That was the game plan for UW to open up the run.  However we didn't hit on the passes (not all Nunes fault as the receivers didn't help).

If your point is why be frustrated now after WSU when Nunes didn't pass much, two points:  1) there is the progression/improvement thing -- this stage of the season at home against a mediocre defense if you aren't clicking yet are you ever going to?  2)  The limited number of passes is related to the low number of overall plays which is because the offense couldn't sustain drives which is related to < 50% completion rate.

[ATLCard]

Where did you rank the UW game for offense?  My ranking was...rank.

If your point is that the offense would be better if Nunes passed more, I don't necessarily disagree.  That was the game plan for UW to open up the run.  However we didn't hit on the passes (not all Nunes fault as the receivers didn't help).

If your point is why be frustrated now after WSU when Nunes didn't pass much, two points:  1) there is the progression/improvement thing -- this stage of the season at home against a mediocre defense if you aren't clicking yet are you ever going to?  2)  The limited number of passes is related to the low number of overall plays which is because the offense couldn't sustain drives which is related to < 50% completion rate.