[Stymie]

I expected the negativity when I made my post re Hogan vs. Burns (or Chryst...), as this is a homer site, but I was living in Palo Alto when Elway first came to town and he was then the finest quarterback I had ever seen, and ever will see (sorry Andrew....).  Those of you who are too young will never remember that Elway had to battle for his starting position in his Freshman year with Turk Schonert, and Elway lost.  Schonert was a very good quarterback who had a decent NFL career with the Bengals, but (to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen vs. Dan Quayle) he was no John Elway.

To me, Hogan is Hogan.  A competent quarterback, but not even Schonert quality.  A solid citizen that suits Coach Shaw's conservatism, but not somebody who will get us to the final 4 next year.  Burns, however, as I read the runes, might be somebody special, as were Brodie and Plunkett and Benjamin and Elway and Luck.

We shall see....

[Stymie]

I expected the negativity when I made my post re Hogan vs. Burns (or Chryst...), as this is a homer site, but I was living in Palo Alto when Elway first came to town and he was then the finest quarterback I had ever seen, and ever will see (sorry Andrew....).  Those of you who are too young will never remember that Elway had to battle for his starting position in his Freshman year with Turk Schonert, and Elway lost.  Schonert was a very good quarterback who had a decent NFL career with the Bengals, but (to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen vs. Dan Quayle) he was no John Elway.

To me, Hogan is Hogan.  A competent quarterback, but not even Schonert quality.  A solid citizen that suits Coach Shaw's conservatism, but not somebody who will get us to the final 4 next year.  Burns, however, as I read the runes, might be somebody special, as were Brodie and Plunkett and Benjamin and Elway and Luck.

We shall see....

[Red State]

Schonert started the opening game in '79, but then Dowhower went a platoon system with Turk playing Quarters 1 and 3, and Elway 2 and 4.

[Red State]

Schonert started the opening game in '79, but then Dowhower went a platoon system with Turk playing Quarters 1 and 3, and Elway 2 and 4.

[ChicagoCard]

There was an amazing game that year, the Stanford at .s.c game in which the score going into halftime had been 0-21 in favor of .s.c, then ended 21-21. GoStanford.com offers a look back here.

[ChicagoCard]

There was an amazing game that year, the Stanford at .s.c game in which the score going into halftime had been 0-21 in favor of .s.c, then ended 21-21. GoStanford.com offers a look back here.

[washingtonismoney]

It's kind of weird to me that an offense predicated on throwing deep all the time gets both the quarterback and the coach a reputation of conservatism, but the term has always been super vague anyway.*

*(actually, that's not true. For football, "conservative" means "offense or defense I do not like." "Aggressive" means "offense or defense I do like.")

[washingtonismoney]

It's kind of weird to me that an offense predicated on throwing deep all the time gets both the quarterback and the coach a reputation of conservatism, but the term has always been super vague anyway.*

*(actually, that's not true. For football, "conservative" means "offense or defense I do not like." "Aggressive" means "offense or defense I do like.")

[FarmBoy]

Hogan not starting would mean either (a) he's injured or (b) the wheels have fallen off the bus. I have a higher opinion of Hogan than most, I suspect, but I agree he's not a stellar QB. But he's definitely in the top half of the league. If Ryan Burns is the second coming of Andrew Luck, perhaps he could unseat Hogan without injury/faltering, but I haven't seen or heard anything that supports that view. You just can't make up for the experience gap, regardless of whether Burns has a higher ceiling or is even more skilled today.

My question is, will this be Hogan's last year under center at Stanford?

[FarmBoy]

Hogan not starting would mean either (a) he's injured or (b) the wheels have fallen off the bus. I have a higher opinion of Hogan than most, I suspect, but I agree he's not a stellar QB. But he's definitely in the top half of the league. If Ryan Burns is the second coming of Andrew Luck, perhaps he could unseat Hogan without injury/faltering, but I haven't seen or heard anything that supports that view. You just can't make up for the experience gap, regardless of whether Burns has a higher ceiling or is even more skilled today.

My question is, will this be Hogan's last year under center at Stanford?

[Bruce Wang]

I still think Hogan will play on Sundays.  He's a damn good QB and I think he suffers from the comparison to Andrew Luck, who had been tutored by an NFL quarterback his entire life.  Hogan is still learning and I've seen improvement every year.  Hogan's RS Frosh year he didn't have strong deep passing receivers.  Hogan's RS Soph year he didn't have TEs.  This year he has a more balanced receiving corps, but the running game MIGHT not be the same as recent years.  If one of the RBs steps up, watch out.  This offense could be special. 

I'm excited about Burns (and Chryst), but their time has not come yet.  Man, am I excited to see the Spring Game to see a glimpse of the near and not so distant future.

[Bruce Wang]

I still think Hogan will play on Sundays.  He's a damn good QB and I think he suffers from the comparison to Andrew Luck, who had been tutored by an NFL quarterback his entire life.  Hogan is still learning and I've seen improvement every year.  Hogan's RS Frosh year he didn't have strong deep passing receivers.  Hogan's RS Soph year he didn't have TEs.  This year he has a more balanced receiving corps, but the running game MIGHT not be the same as recent years.  If one of the RBs steps up, watch out.  This offense could be special. 

I'm excited about Burns (and Chryst), but their time has not come yet.  Man, am I excited to see the Spring Game to see a glimpse of the near and not so distant future.

[terry]

The game-by-game statistics for the 1979 season show that Schonert got most of the playing time in the first three games, Schonert and Elway split time in the next four games, and Schonert got the bulk of the playing time in the last four games. Here are their passing stats (completions and attempts):

                    Schonert    Elway
Tulane              6-11        2-8
San Jose St.    14-22        2-3
Army              18-29        0-0
Boston College  11-20    12-21
UCLA                10-13  16-23
U,S,C                16-27    9-16
Arizona            17-20    4-12
Oregon St.        17-20      3-4
Arizona St.        13-18      0-5
Oregon                4-9        2-4
C'al                  22-32      0-0

Total              148-221  50-96

[terry]

The game-by-game statistics for the 1979 season show that Schonert got most of the playing time in the first three games, Schonert and Elway split time in the next four games, and Schonert got the bulk of the playing time in the last four games. Here are their passing stats (completions and attempts):

                    Schonert    Elway
Tulane              6-11        2-8
San Jose St.    14-22        2-3
Army              18-29        0-0
Boston College  11-20    12-21
UCLA                10-13  16-23
U,S,C                16-27    9-16
Arizona            17-20    4-12
Oregon St.        17-20      3-4
Arizona St.        13-18      0-5
Oregon                4-9        2-4
C'al                  22-32      0-0

Total              148-221  50-96

[Red State]

Elway sprained his ankle in the 1st Half vs SJSU and missed the following week's game vs Army. I remember his breakout game vs BC when he fired 3 TD passes in the 2nd Half. I also recall how he smoothly ran a no-huddle offense vs UCLA, especially in a tension-packed Q4. Schonert got red hot vs SC and Dowhower told Elway he was sticking with him in Q4--#7 had no objections. Schonert's numbers were largely spectacular from the SC game forward.

[Red State]

Elway sprained his ankle in the 1st Half vs SJSU and missed the following week's game vs Army. I remember his breakout game vs BC when he fired 3 TD passes in the 2nd Half. I also recall how he smoothly ran a no-huddle offense vs UCLA, especially in a tension-packed Q4. Schonert got red hot vs SC and Dowhower told Elway he was sticking with him in Q4--#7 had no objections. Schonert's numbers were largely spectacular from the SC game forward.

[yvonne]

this is a homer site,

Being a homer site has nothing to do with it. On the contrary, it's a site with knowledgeable fans. There were plenty of complaints when Shaw kept Nunes in longer than we would have liked. There are fans who have complained last year that we didn't have a serviceable pass-catching tight end. The general unspoken rule seems to be not to criticize the student-athlete, but criticizing the coach, who is being paid handsomely is fair. Student athletes are busting their butts for the team with very little recompense. If a player lacks talent, he can't help it.

All that being said, those of us who watch the team from closer than 8,000 miles away know Shaw well enough to know that barring an injury to the starter, he's not going to bench a guy who's led the team to consecutive Rose Bowls in favor of one who has trouble receiving the snap from center.

[yvonne]

this is a homer site,

Being a homer site has nothing to do with it. On the contrary, it's a site with knowledgeable fans. There were plenty of complaints when Shaw kept Nunes in longer than we would have liked. There are fans who have complained last year that we didn't have a serviceable pass-catching tight end. The general unspoken rule seems to be not to criticize the student-athlete, but criticizing the coach, who is being paid handsomely is fair. Student athletes are busting their butts for the team with very little recompense. If a player lacks talent, he can't help it.

All that being said, those of us who watch the team from closer than 8,000 miles away know Shaw well enough to know that barring an injury to the starter, he's not going to bench a guy who's led the team to consecutive Rose Bowls in favor of one who has trouble receiving the snap from center.

[stupac2]

has trouble receiving the snap from center.

What kind of offense was Burns running in high school? I know it's a weird one, but surely he got the snap somehow. Was it normally from the shotgun, so he has trouble taking snaps under center? None of the reporting I've seen on this has really clarified that.

[stupac2]

has trouble receiving the snap from center.

What kind of offense was Burns running in high school? I know it's a weird one, but surely he got the snap somehow. Was it normally from the shotgun, so he has trouble taking snaps under center? None of the reporting I've seen on this has really clarified that.

[washingtonismoney]

What kind of offense was Burns running in high school? I know it's a weird one, but surely he got the snap somehow. Was it normally from the shotgun, so he has trouble taking snaps under center? None of the reporting I've seen on this has really clarified that.

So I think that one was a bit overblown. The context for that factoid was that on the first day of the second session of spring practice Burns had trouble with the snaps from under center. But if you put people in stressful situations they often struggle with seemingly basic tasks; so, for instance, Burns was probably thinking not just "oh, I've got to take the snap here" but "oh, I've got to take the snap here AND WHAT IS TARPLEY DOING HE'S MOVING AROUND AND NOW HENRY ANDERSON JUST SHIFTED A GAP OMGGGGGGGGGGGGGG." The most famous example I can think of, of such temporary incompetence, is Elway lining up behind the guard in his first professional snap.

To answer your other question, Burns ran what was basically a Wing-T offense, which is part of what makes him such a high-risk (he hasn't had the same experience as other young QBs) prospect. But the reward, fortunately, is also apparently quite high as everyone seems to love his physical tools. That may have contributed to the wide range of recruiting rankings (ESPN and Rivals thought he was a top 5 QB...while Scout thought he was #38.)

[washingtonismoney]

What kind of offense was Burns running in high school? I know it's a weird one, but surely he got the snap somehow. Was it normally from the shotgun, so he has trouble taking snaps under center? None of the reporting I've seen on this has really clarified that.

So I think that one was a bit overblown. The context for that factoid was that on the first day of the second session of spring practice Burns had trouble with the snaps from under center. But if you put people in stressful situations they often struggle with seemingly basic tasks; so, for instance, Burns was probably thinking not just "oh, I've got to take the snap here" but "oh, I've got to take the snap here AND WHAT IS TARPLEY DOING HE'S MOVING AROUND AND NOW HENRY ANDERSON JUST SHIFTED A GAP OMGGGGGGGGGGGGGG." The most famous example I can think of, of such temporary incompetence, is Elway lining up behind the guard in his first professional snap.

To answer your other question, Burns ran what was basically a Wing-T offense, which is part of what makes him such a high-risk (he hasn't had the same experience as other young QBs) prospect. But the reward, fortunately, is also apparently quite high as everyone seems to love his physical tools. That may have contributed to the wide range of recruiting rankings (ESPN and Rivals thought he was a top 5 QB...while Scout thought he was #38.)

[Leftcoast]

Lots of variables can impact the center-QB exchange.  Even professionals fumble when a new center is injected into a game situation.  Heck, we saw a near professional struggle mightily when Matt Barkley came to town with his long time center out in a game where the U.SC QB never looked comfortable, bobbled the ball repeatedly while dealing with an unfamiliar snapper and whose troubles were compounded by a pass rush that got to him at the same time as the ball.

(Wait a minute, since Barkley played for USC he probably WAS a professional.)

[Leftcoast]

Lots of variables can impact the center-QB exchange.  Even professionals fumble when a new center is injected into a game situation.  Heck, we saw a near professional struggle mightily when Matt Barkley came to town with his long time center out in a game where the U.SC QB never looked comfortable, bobbled the ball repeatedly while dealing with an unfamiliar snapper and whose troubles were compounded by a pass rush that got to him at the same time as the ball.

(Wait a minute, since Barkley played for USC he probably WAS a professional.)

[Bruce Wang]

The general unspoken rule seems to be not to criticize the student-athlete, but criticizing the coach, who is being paid handsomely is fair. Student athletes are busting their butts for the team with very little recompense. If a player lacks talent, he can't help it.

This seems to distinguish our site from other fan boards.  Is it because the a$$hole factor is low here? Or is it that Stanford athletes typically don't provide much room for criticism on the effort front?  If Stanford athlete fails to meet expectations, it seems to be either due to injury, talent misjudgement, or academics (in rare instances).

In terms of the other college program I cheer for, effort does surface as a problem because some of these athletes rely almost entirely on talent.  Criminality is also a problem over there.

[Bruce Wang]

The general unspoken rule seems to be not to criticize the student-athlete, but criticizing the coach, who is being paid handsomely is fair. Student athletes are busting their butts for the team with very little recompense. If a player lacks talent, he can't help it.

This seems to distinguish our site from other fan boards.  Is it because the a$$hole factor is low here? Or is it that Stanford athletes typically don't provide much room for criticism on the effort front?  If Stanford athlete fails to meet expectations, it seems to be either due to injury, talent misjudgement, or academics (in rare instances).

In terms of the other college program I cheer for, effort does surface as a problem because some of these athletes rely almost entirely on talent.  Criminality is also a problem over there.

[Leftcoast]

At your other site posters demonstrate low effort AND criminality?  What do they do ?  Leave out every other letter when they threaten gross bodily mayhem?

Nope, that doesn't happen over here.

[Leftcoast]

At your other site posters demonstrate low effort AND criminality?  What do they do ?  Leave out every other letter when they threaten gross bodily mayhem?

Nope, that doesn't happen over here.

[CTcard]

It's kind of weird to me that an offense predicated on throwing deep all the time gets both the quarterback and the coach a reputation of conservatism, but the term has always been super vague anyway.*

*(actually, that's not true. For football, "conservative" means "offense or defense I do not like." "Aggressive" means "offense or defense I do like.")

I have noted this as well, particularly the part in your asterisk.

Shaw definitely has conservative, meaning risk averse, tendencies personally and in his play to play decisions. I think he really doesn't like turnovers, he really doesn't like allowing sacks/tackles for loss, and when he has a strong defense (2012, 2013) is not overly concerned about punting. He also is conservative in how he talks about making personnel decisions, though I am less convinced than others that these comments should be taken at face value. Altogether that mostly just makes him a coach - as I think that attitude is more common than not.

Describing the offense of 2011-2012-2013 as conservative as in unchanging is certainly wrong. Describing the overall plan over those years as conservative as in risk averse is complicated. We certainly run toward the center of the field a lot - which is typically viewed as a low risk, low reward type of play. However, our passing game early 2012 and most of 2013 was based upon the long ball which tends to be the opposite. We don't run a lot of pass plays with completions within 5 yards of the LOS - which is a staple of a lot of the pass-a-lot-but-still-kind-of-conservative offenses out there. I am not sure whether the slow-down-the-game gambit is necessarily conservative in the usual meaning of that word - but it is something Shaw took to the extreme last year.

Hogan on the other hand I see fairly little reason to call conservative - though what that really means in a player is not so clear to me.
Some aspects of his game that seem the opposite of conservative: he likes throwing the long ball, he's willing to throw into coverage, he gives up on plays early and improvises (mostly scrambling).
Some aspects of his game that seem conservative: he hands the ball off a lot, ... others? 

[CTcard]

It's kind of weird to me that an offense predicated on throwing deep all the time gets both the quarterback and the coach a reputation of conservatism, but the term has always been super vague anyway.*

*(actually, that's not true. For football, "conservative" means "offense or defense I do not like." "Aggressive" means "offense or defense I do like.")

I have noted this as well, particularly the part in your asterisk.

Shaw definitely has conservative, meaning risk averse, tendencies personally and in his play to play decisions. I think he really doesn't like turnovers, he really doesn't like allowing sacks/tackles for loss, and when he has a strong defense (2012, 2013) is not overly concerned about punting. He also is conservative in how he talks about making personnel decisions, though I am less convinced than others that these comments should be taken at face value. Altogether that mostly just makes him a coach - as I think that attitude is more common than not.

Describing the offense of 2011-2012-2013 as conservative as in unchanging is certainly wrong. Describing the overall plan over those years as conservative as in risk averse is complicated. We certainly run toward the center of the field a lot - which is typically viewed as a low risk, low reward type of play. However, our passing game early 2012 and most of 2013 was based upon the long ball which tends to be the opposite. We don't run a lot of pass plays with completions within 5 yards of the LOS - which is a staple of a lot of the pass-a-lot-but-still-kind-of-conservative offenses out there. I am not sure whether the slow-down-the-game gambit is necessarily conservative in the usual meaning of that word - but it is something Shaw took to the extreme last year.

Hogan on the other hand I see fairly little reason to call conservative - though what that really means in a player is not so clear to me.
Some aspects of his game that seem the opposite of conservative: he likes throwing the long ball, he's willing to throw into coverage, he gives up on plays early and improvises (mostly scrambling).
Some aspects of his game that seem conservative: he hands the ball off a lot, ... others? 

[stupac2]

Publius, why do you think Shaw was scared stiff to pass in the last Rose Bowl?

Whaaaa??? Our third play from scrimmage (IIRC, it was in the first set of downs) was a 30+ yard bomb, I think to Rector. We weren't afraid to pass, we were just playing our standard game.

[stupac2]

Publius, why do you think Shaw was scared stiff to pass in the last Rose Bowl?

Whaaaa??? Our third play from scrimmage (IIRC, it was in the first set of downs) was a 30+ yard bomb, I think to Rector. We weren't afraid to pass, we were just playing our standard game.

[ChicagoCard]

I hope this isn't old news...

- Dallas Lloyd is listed at strong safety instead of free safety, where he initially expected to play. The Cardinal like Lloyd's big, physical frame and may be looking at him as the heir apparent to Jordan Richards at strong safety.

- On that note, Kyle Olugbode has officially changed listings from strong safety to free safety, where he has been taking snaps this spring. This move, combined with the move of Lloyd to strong safety, may indicate that Stanford is silently pleased with the progress that Olugbode and Kodi Whitfield are showing at the free safety spot.

[ChicagoCard]

I hope this isn't old news...

- Dallas Lloyd is listed at strong safety instead of free safety, where he initially expected to play. The Cardinal like Lloyd's big, physical frame and may be looking at him as the heir apparent to Jordan Richards at strong safety.

- On that note, Kyle Olugbode has officially changed listings from strong safety to free safety, where he has been taking snaps this spring. This move, combined with the move of Lloyd to strong safety, may indicate that Stanford is silently pleased with the progress that Olugbode and Kodi Whitfield are showing at the free safety spot.

[81alum]

There was an amazing game that year, the Stanford at .s.c game in which the score going into halftime had been 0-21 in favor of .s.c, then ended 21-21. GoStanford.com offers a look back here.

I remember it well.  I was listening to the game on the radio that weekend, my junior year, and turned it off when we were 21 points behind.  I turned the radio back on just in time to hear Gordie Banks block the kick to preserve the tie at the last second. 

[81alum]

There was an amazing game that year, the Stanford at .s.c game in which the score going into halftime had been 0-21 in favor of .s.c, then ended 21-21. GoStanford.com offers a look back here.

I remember it well.  I was listening to the game on the radio that weekend, my junior year, and turned it off when we were 21 points behind.  I turned the radio back on just in time to hear Gordie Banks block the kick to preserve the tie at the last second.