[TrumpCard]

Does UW have a future NFL punter or did UW expose a weakness in Stanford's punt return game?  If the latter, would Stanford prevent some of those long rolls by having two return men on opposite sides of the field?  C-Mac would be a good partner for Ty back there.

[TrumpCard]

Does UW have a future NFL punter or did UW expose a weakness in Stanford's punt return game?  If the latter, would Stanford prevent some of those long rolls by having two return men on opposite sides of the field?  C-Mac would be a good partner for Ty back there.

[StanfordMatt]

Stanford has in fact deployed McCaffrey back deep with Ty on multiple occasions to limit the effectiveness of rugby style punts. I would guess the reason we didn't use this approach yesterday was because of Petersen's penchant for trick plays. When you're trying to stop a fake punt it's much easier to do so with 10 men near the LOS as opposed to 9.

[StanfordMatt]

Stanford has in fact deployed McCaffrey back deep with Ty on multiple occasions to limit the effectiveness of rugby style punts. I would guess the reason we didn't use this approach yesterday was because of Petersen's penchant for trick plays. When you're trying to stop a fake punt it's much easier to do so with 10 men near the LOS as opposed to 9.

[81alum]

Stanford has in fact deployed McCaffrey back deep with Ty on multiple occasions to limit the effectiveness of rugby style punts. I would guess the reason we didn't use this approach yesterday was because of Petersen's penchant for trick plays. When you're trying to stop a fake punt it's much easier to do so with 10 men near the LOS as opposed to 9.

That is interesting, and it worked, obviously. 

During the game I kept wondering why we did not put two men back to combat the long punt rolls, and that is the first plausible answer I have heard.

[81alum]

Stanford has in fact deployed McCaffrey back deep with Ty on multiple occasions to limit the effectiveness of rugby style punts. I would guess the reason we didn't use this approach yesterday was because of Petersen's penchant for trick plays. When you're trying to stop a fake punt it's much easier to do so with 10 men near the LOS as opposed to 9.

That is interesting, and it worked, obviously. 

During the game I kept wondering why we did not put two men back to combat the long punt rolls, and that is the first plausible answer I have heard.

[TrumpCard]

That explanation does make some sense.  Would it make some sense to have Whitfield line up as a very deep safety where he could also handle some short punts?  We know that Whitfield is capable of returning punts. Or would lining up that deep not really put him in position to defend a fake punt?

[TrumpCard]

That explanation does make some sense.  Would it make some sense to have Whitfield line up as a very deep safety where he could also handle some short punts?  We know that Whitfield is capable of returning punts. Or would lining up that deep not really put him in position to defend a fake punt?

[CompSci87]

I was wondering why Ty didn't call for a fair catch and field some of the punts that he let roll.

[CompSci87]

I was wondering why Ty didn't call for a fair catch and field some of the punts that he let roll.

[Hurlburt88]

I was wondering why we didn't put McCaffrey back there with Ty to cut the field in half . . .  but then we stuffed the fake punt and I got my answer.  By my count that is 2 fake punts and two utter rejections by the good guys.  Does this fall under the defensive coaching staff or special teams?  I assume special teams:  hats off to them! 

[Hurlburt88]

I was wondering why we didn't put McCaffrey back there with Ty to cut the field in half . . .  but then we stuffed the fake punt and I got my answer.  By my count that is 2 fake punts and two utter rejections by the good guys.  Does this fall under the defensive coaching staff or special teams?  I assume special teams:  hats off to them! 

[washingtonismoney]

I assume special teams:  hats off to them!

Yeah, Alamar. Jordan Williamson aside, Alamar's special teams have been consistently excellent and have won us more than a few games. The Polian-for-Alamar swap has possibly been Shaw's best coaching move in his career thus far.

[washingtonismoney]

I assume special teams:  hats off to them!

Yeah, Alamar. Jordan Williamson aside, Alamar's special teams have been consistently excellent and have won us more than a few games. The Polian-for-Alamar swap has possibly been Shaw's best coaching move in his career thus far.

[PrinceLightfoot]

I would LOVE to see more punt returns given the weapons we have in Montgomery and McCaffrey. The following are our punt return stats per game:

	Punts	Returned	Total Yards	Long
UC Davis	11	5	134	62
USC	4	1	44	44
Army	6	2	11	8
Washington	8	1	2	2
__________	_____	________	___________	____
Total	29	9	191	62

About 31% of punts returned; against FBS teams, 22%. Of course, some of these can be attributed to excellent punting or making sure we do not return the punt, but it can also be attributed by not blocking the gunners well enough or holding blocks right after the kick. It seems like defenders are swarming our returner far too quickly.

I will go back and review each punt vs. Washington and see which ones could have been returnable.

[PrinceLightfoot]

I would LOVE to see more punt returns given the weapons we have in Montgomery and McCaffrey. The following are our punt return stats per game:

	Punts	Returned	Total Yards	Long
UC Davis	11	5	134	62
USC	4	1	44	44
Army	6	2	11	8
Washington	8	1	2	2
__________	_____	________	___________	____
Total	29	9	191	62

About 31% of punts returned; against FBS teams, 22%. Of course, some of these can be attributed to excellent punting or making sure we do not return the punt, but it can also be attributed by not blocking the gunners well enough or holding blocks right after the kick. It seems like defenders are swarming our returner far too quickly.

I will go back and review each punt vs. Washington and see which ones could have been returnable.