09-10-2014, 05:18 AM
Here is David Shaw's Tuesday Press Conference:
http://www.gostanford.com/mediaPortal/pl...id=3393197
I don't think this was posted until late in the evening, although quotes from it began to trickle out during the day.
The basic message is right at the beginning--he was very happy with the defense and the coverage units, said there were bright spots on the offense. He says he takes responsibility for the red zone woes but talks mainly about execution issues. When there was a follow up question that asked specifically "what you mean" by taking the blame for the red zone problems "is it execution, is it play calling" Shaw said it was all those and more. Sometimes when a play doesn't work "we wish we could have the call back" but sometimes it was the right call if it were executed better, and sometimes better preparation was needed to be enable the execution. He made no distinction between calling the wrong play and executing poorly, because if there is poor execution "That's on me that we didn't practice it enough to enable good execution." In reviewing the tape, he distinguishes between those plays he will not call again and those that they will continue to work on so that they can be called again even though they did not work the last time. I think it was a thoughtful answer that reflected the complexity of football, and pointed out in a friendly way that fans can't possibly know all the problems that might exist behind a given call not working at a given time. (Some of this is my construction and not Shaw's, so don't blame him if I got it wrong.)
As for the punts instead of field goal attempts, Shaw says he has not lost confidence in Williamson. He says the wind had picked up and was significant, and while they took a long field goal attempt early, kicking into the wind changed the calculation. There was no wind at all half an hour before the game and it picked up after the first attempt. That explains why he would not attempt the field goals in those two situations. As for going for it rather than punting, he suggested he might have if the yardage has been shorter. In any case, those calls and many others were part of a field position strategy which mainly worked--allowing us to play on the SC side of the field for the majority of the game. The strategy worked and should have been enough to win the game had we executed better in the red zone.
With regard to the offensive line, "we have talent but not experience. For the most part we played well. The errors were critical errors."Â
With regard to the linebackers, he had high praise for all of them, one by one.
With regard to the defensive line, he played just 5 "and would love to have a sixth" "but it is a position that has to be earned."Â Ideally he would like to rest David and Henry a little more.
With regard to Kevin, "He wasn't perfect but he was pretty doggone good." He is far more confident about knowing what he needs to do mentally, compared with a year ago. Hogan is running the no huddle--Shaw is not doing it from the sidelines. Three times during the game he audibled into a new play, including the throw down the middle to Hooper.
With regard to Daniel Marx "He was the best at executing that play in training camp."
With regard to Cajuste "He played extremely well."Â He made some great blocks and catches.
With regard to David Parry, he is playing as well as he ever has, and "It is a sign of respect" that SC opened with a "wham play" to hit him from the side.
With regard to the wildcat "The big thing with the wildcat is it creates one more blocker." He also said that when Ty decided to come back for his final year the staff decided to figure out ways to let him touch the ball as often as possible. Ty has learned the blocking scheme and knows where the ball is supposed to go. "He's not just an athlete" in that situation.
With the chop block penalty Shaw came close to defending the call. He explained that it is such a serious problem--that can end someone's career--that in the professional game a referee once explained to him that if someone were being cut while another player was "touching his shoulder" it would be called. Shaw said if it was a questionable or marginal call then "it should be called."Â
It sounds to me, in contrast to the presser right after the loss, that he is attempting to be as upbeat and positive as possible in an effort to get his team to move on. I think he strikes the right tone as you would expect from a coach whose primary concern is changing the focus to the next opponent. In fact, this was in my view a stunningly effective press conference that answered nearly all my gripes in an honest, professional way. The press sounded like they got their questions from this board--nearly all questions asked on this board were put to Shaw--and Shaw sounded like a patient but determined educator. A far better effort than in the immediate aftermath of the loss.
http://www.gostanford.com/mediaPortal/pl...id=3393197
I don't think this was posted until late in the evening, although quotes from it began to trickle out during the day.
The basic message is right at the beginning--he was very happy with the defense and the coverage units, said there were bright spots on the offense. He says he takes responsibility for the red zone woes but talks mainly about execution issues. When there was a follow up question that asked specifically "what you mean" by taking the blame for the red zone problems "is it execution, is it play calling" Shaw said it was all those and more. Sometimes when a play doesn't work "we wish we could have the call back" but sometimes it was the right call if it were executed better, and sometimes better preparation was needed to be enable the execution. He made no distinction between calling the wrong play and executing poorly, because if there is poor execution "That's on me that we didn't practice it enough to enable good execution." In reviewing the tape, he distinguishes between those plays he will not call again and those that they will continue to work on so that they can be called again even though they did not work the last time. I think it was a thoughtful answer that reflected the complexity of football, and pointed out in a friendly way that fans can't possibly know all the problems that might exist behind a given call not working at a given time. (Some of this is my construction and not Shaw's, so don't blame him if I got it wrong.)
As for the punts instead of field goal attempts, Shaw says he has not lost confidence in Williamson. He says the wind had picked up and was significant, and while they took a long field goal attempt early, kicking into the wind changed the calculation. There was no wind at all half an hour before the game and it picked up after the first attempt. That explains why he would not attempt the field goals in those two situations. As for going for it rather than punting, he suggested he might have if the yardage has been shorter. In any case, those calls and many others were part of a field position strategy which mainly worked--allowing us to play on the SC side of the field for the majority of the game. The strategy worked and should have been enough to win the game had we executed better in the red zone.
With regard to the offensive line, "we have talent but not experience. For the most part we played well. The errors were critical errors."Â
With regard to the linebackers, he had high praise for all of them, one by one.
With regard to the defensive line, he played just 5 "and would love to have a sixth" "but it is a position that has to be earned."Â Ideally he would like to rest David and Henry a little more.
With regard to Kevin, "He wasn't perfect but he was pretty doggone good." He is far more confident about knowing what he needs to do mentally, compared with a year ago. Hogan is running the no huddle--Shaw is not doing it from the sidelines. Three times during the game he audibled into a new play, including the throw down the middle to Hooper.
With regard to Daniel Marx "He was the best at executing that play in training camp."
With regard to Cajuste "He played extremely well."Â He made some great blocks and catches.
With regard to David Parry, he is playing as well as he ever has, and "It is a sign of respect" that SC opened with a "wham play" to hit him from the side.
With regard to the wildcat "The big thing with the wildcat is it creates one more blocker." He also said that when Ty decided to come back for his final year the staff decided to figure out ways to let him touch the ball as often as possible. Ty has learned the blocking scheme and knows where the ball is supposed to go. "He's not just an athlete" in that situation.
With the chop block penalty Shaw came close to defending the call. He explained that it is such a serious problem--that can end someone's career--that in the professional game a referee once explained to him that if someone were being cut while another player was "touching his shoulder" it would be called. Shaw said if it was a questionable or marginal call then "it should be called."Â
It sounds to me, in contrast to the presser right after the loss, that he is attempting to be as upbeat and positive as possible in an effort to get his team to move on. I think he strikes the right tone as you would expect from a coach whose primary concern is changing the focus to the next opponent. In fact, this was in my view a stunningly effective press conference that answered nearly all my gripes in an honest, professional way. The press sounded like they got their questions from this board--nearly all questions asked on this board were put to Shaw--and Shaw sounded like a patient but determined educator. A far better effort than in the immediate aftermath of the loss.
