The CardBoard

Full Version: Morning After Season Thoughts
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Still processing what we've seen so far this season, but in-progress thoughts ...

- Last night was as wide a gap between performance and expectation as I can remember for Stanford football.
In some ways more than the 2007 SC upset. In that game, while Stanford was big on pluckiness and grit, they were still clearly an inferior team overall but won on some key plays and a 5-1 TO advantage. This game, Stanford stomped SC. The late give-away scores will make it less impressive for those who didn't watch, but that was thorough.

- It seems we can put the KSU game into the category of a terrible performance rather than the performance of a terrible team. At this point, I simply expect a rotten egg for any game scheduled for 9:00 am pacific, with a sliding scale of terribleness up until about 1:00 pm pacific.
Yes, from time to time you see other teams manage the issue, but I don't recall ever seeing Stanford manage. In fact, in the post-KSU news conference where Shaw went into coach-speak about how the start time wasn't an issue, the example he chose to prove Stanford could handle such a start time was 2009 vs Wake Forest - a game we lost to an inferior team.

- I am still convinced SC is a much better team than KSU. That will be even more true with the KSU QB now out indefinitely with a knee injury. Fortunately for frustration if not overall, quality wins/bad losses is unlikely to be an issue this year.

- Biggest concerns after two games:
On offense the OL not consistently getting a push in the run game.
On defense, often no QB pressure at all without a blitz to the point where it occasionally seems the opposing QB could simply never throw the ball and would never get pressed (I am imagining something like the old, pre-shot clock basketball stall strategy).

- Still worried about Vanderbilt game, almost solely because of travel. Fortunately, it is a Tennessee night game.

- The toughest stretch of the season seems to be after the Vandy game, where we play UCLA, Oregon, ASU in a row. Fortunately, the first two are at home. Unfortunately, it comes after a tiring trip.

- Still worried about surviving the season. Between injuries and exhaustion I can imagine that over the final several games the team is held together by spit and baling wire.

- There is some subtlety here, but Shaw has now cemented his place in being bad at initially figuring out who is the best QB on his team. On the other hand, on the scale of football coaches overall, he seems fairly good at correcting the bad initial choice. So we had:
2012  Nunes --> Hogan
2016  Burns --> Chryst
2017  Chryst --> Costello
2019  Costello --> Mills*
2021  West --> McKee

*2019 may not really belong here. There was no question that Costello should have been the starter at first. Mills only took over because of injury. While at the end of 2019 he was better than injured Costello, it's not clear that during that year he was as good as 2018 Costello.
(09-12-2021, 07:30 AM)CTcard Wrote: [ -> ]Still processing what we've seen so far this season, but in-progress thoughts ...

- Last night was as wide a gap between performance and expectation as I can remember for Stanford football.
In some ways more than the 2007 SC upset. In that game, while Stanford was big on pluckiness and grit, they were still clearly an inferior team overall but won on some key plays and a 5-1 TO advantage. This game, Stanford stomped SC. The late give-away scores will make it less impressive for those who didn't watch, but that was thorough.

- It seems we can put the KSU game into the category of a terrible performance rather than the performance of a terrible team. At this point, I simply expect a rotten egg for any game scheduled for 9:00 am pacific, with a sliding scale of terribleness up until about 1:00 pm pacific.
Yes, from time to time you see other teams manage the issue, but I don't recall ever seeing Stanford manage. In fact, in the post-KSU news conference where Shaw went into coach-speak about how the start time wasn't an issue, the example he chose to prove Stanford could handle such a start time was 2009 vs Wake Forest - a game we lost to an inferior team.

- I am still convinced SC is a much better team than KSU. That will be even more true with the KSU QB now out indefinitely with a knee injury. Fortunately for frustration if not overall, quality wins/bad losses is unlikely to be an issue this year.

- Biggest concerns after two games:
On offense the OL not consistently getting a push in the run game.
On defense, often no QB pressure at all without a blitz to the point where it occasionally seems the opposing QB could simply never throw the ball and would never get pressed (I am imagining something like the old, pre-shot clock basketball stall strategy).

- Still worried about Vanderbilt game, almost solely because of travel. Fortunately, it is a Tennessee night game.

- The toughest stretch of the season seems to be after the Vandy game, where we play UCLA, Oregon, ASU in a row. Fortunately, the first two are at home. Unfortunately, it comes after a tiring trip.

- Still worried about surviving the season. Between injuries and exhaustion I can imagine that over the final several games the team is held together by spit and baling wire.

- There is some subtlety here, but Shaw has now cemented his place in being bad at initially figuring out who is the best QB on his team. On the other hand, on the scale of football coaches overall, he seems fairly good at correcting the bad initial choice. So we had:
2012  Nunes --> Hogan
2016  Burns --> Chryst
2017  Chryst --> Costello
2019  Costello --> Mills*
2021  West --> McKee

*2019 may not really belong here. There was no question that Costello should have been the starter at first. Mills only took over because of injury. While at the end of 2019 he was better than injured Costello, it's not clear that during that year he was as good as 2018 Costello.

Pattern pretty obvious.  More experienced guy gets first shot.  I’ll always argue 2012. Question was when Hogan was ready. He came somewhat out of nowhere. The initial competition was Nunes- Nottingham. Then we began to hear a bit more about this Hogan guy. I’ll also question to a lesser extent ‘16. Burns actually may have been the better QB. As for ‘17, I think the prevailing wisdom coming in was that Chyst the potential to be very good. Although I do remember a lot of talk that he’d faced very poor opposition in ‘16. And while I think there was no way most coaches would bench a very highly recruited guy that had helped turn the prior season around, it should have been clear earlier that KJ was better.

 I didn’t see KSU.  But I understand he rotated. Which I never like.  But at least that ended quickly.

Agree (as usual) with your overall points. One add, Peat needs to play much more.  He’s the more explosive back. Maybe using both in the backfield. A la Wright and McCaffrey in the latter part of 2014.
(09-12-2021, 07:30 AM)CTcard Wrote: [ -> ]Still processing what we've seen so far this season, but in-progress thoughts ...

- Last night was as wide a gap between performance and expectation as I can remember for Stanford football.
In some ways more than the 2007 SC upset. In that game, while Stanford was big on pluckiness and grit, they were still clearly an inferior team overall but won on some key plays and a 5-1 TO advantage. This game, Stanford stomped SC. The late give-away scores will make it less impressive for those who didn't watch, but that was thorough.

- It seems we can put the KSU game into the category of a terrible performance rather than the performance of a terrible team. At this point, I simply expect a rotten egg for any game scheduled for 9:00 am pacific, with a sliding scale of terribleness up until about 1:00 pm pacific.
Yes, from time to time you see other teams manage the issue, but I don't recall ever seeing Stanford manage. In fact, in the post-KSU news conference where Shaw went into coach-speak about how the start time wasn't an issue, the example he chose to prove Stanford could handle such a start time was 2009 vs Wake Forest - a game we lost to an inferior team.

- I am still convinced SC is a much better team than KSU. That will be even more true with the KSU QB now out indefinitely with a knee injury. Fortunately for frustration if not overall, quality wins/bad losses is unlikely to be an issue this year.

- Biggest concerns after two games:
On offense the OL not consistently getting a push in the run game.
On defense, often no QB pressure at all without a blitz to the point where it occasionally seems the opposing QB could simply never throw the ball and would never get pressed (I am imagining something like the old, pre-shot clock basketball stall strategy).

- Still worried about Vanderbilt game, almost solely because of travel. Fortunately, it is a Tennessee night game.

- The toughest stretch of the season seems to be after the Vandy game, where we play UCLA, Oregon, ASU in a row. Fortunately, the first two are at home. Unfortunately, it comes after a tiring trip.

- Still worried about surviving the season. Between injuries and exhaustion I can imagine that over the final several games the team is held together by spit and baling wire.

- There is some subtlety here, but Shaw has now cemented his place in being bad at initially figuring out who is the best QB on his team. On the other hand, on the scale of football coaches overall, he seems fairly good at correcting the bad initial choice. So we had:
2012  Nunes --> Hogan
2016  Burns --> Chryst
2017  Chryst --> Costello
2019  Costello --> Mills*
2021  West --> McKee

*2019 may not really belong here. There was no question that Costello should have been the starter at first. Mills only took over because of injury. While at the end of 2019 he was better than injured Costello, it's not clear that during that year he was as good as 2018 Costello.

I haven't read or posted anything on the USC game so will just drop my thoughts here, in your "morning after" post - most of which I agree with (still don't buy the 9:00 a.m. excuse).  Apologies if others have made these same points in other threads:

 First, that was a great win for the program.  Congratulations to Shaw and the entire staff – the team looked very well prepared for the matchup.

Second, congratulations to the players, who executed the plan incredibly well.  And there wasn’t a whole lot of margin for error (at least from what I saw – i.e., the second half).

Third, what Andy Dufresne said is the best of things:  hope.  This game gave the team, but particularly the fans, hope for the rest of the season.  Look,  this team’s ultimate record this season could be anything from poor to great, still, but the latter is now in play.  And that hope is the best of things.

Fourth, McKee was unbelievably good.  I lost count of the number of great (not good, but great) balls he threw last night, including on third downs.  He was putting the ball right where it had to be, often while under duress.  And the receivers caught a lot of one-on-one balls where they just beat the defender for possession and/or made difficult catches (2 TD passes come immediately to mind).  And there were a couple times where the receives could have made the catch (or maybe even should have made the catch) when a ball was delivered into good coverage. Just an incredible performance by McKee (and the receivers) – it’s hard to overstate how well they played.  [And Peat, of course, showed well in the game, and it looks like Filkins has some wiggle to him, too].

Fifth, and this is one of two cautionary/negative things I’ll say about the game – because who else will raise negative points in these parts if not I? – because there was such a small margin for error, I caution against fans expecting this kind of play week after week.  It’s hard to be that precise in your throws; it’s hard to catch the ball when always contested; and if just a few of those third down plays had gone the other way, then this game would have had a completely different feel to it.  But last night, it was all clicking for Stanford, so congrats to all for that.  We should all enjoy that quality game on a pretty big (if not, late-night) stage.

Sixth, offensive game management was WAY better last night.  Again, from what I saw, ZERO complaints about getting plays in and off, using clock before snapping, etc.  Good job coach! (or coaches).

P.S.  Didn’t see the 1H so couldn’t get sense of “feel” or “flow” of the game.  But I was surprised to read – or my daughter to relay Gamecast to me, to be precise – that Stanford went for it on fourth and goal from the 5 yard line in 1H in a close game.  That strikes me as an erroneous decision, even if it worked.  And the highlight actually bolstered that opinion (incredible throw under duress by McKee and great catch by the WR).   I don’t know what the rationale was for going for it there – I’ll only say that I hope Shaw wasn’t motivated by outside pressures to “be bold” on offense or what have you.  Still need to make the sound decisions.  That one worked out for Stanford, but did any of you think that was the “correct” call real time?  [Maybe there was something in flow of game that would support that call, so . . .].

P.P.S.  Take care of things at Vandy, and the first home game against UCLA shapes up to be a rather important game.

P.P.P.S.  Must finish how I started - congrats all around, to coaches and players, for an incredible W at SC.  Impressive!
(09-12-2021, 08:18 AM)teejers1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-12-2021, 07:30 AM)CTcard Wrote: [ -> ]Still processing what we've seen so far this season, but in-progress thoughts ...

- Last night was as wide a gap between performance and expectation as I can remember for Stanford football.
In some ways more than the 2007 SC upset. In that game, while Stanford was big on pluckiness and grit, they were still clearly an inferior team overall but won on some key plays and a 5-1 TO advantage. This game, Stanford stomped SC. The late give-away scores will make it less impressive for those who didn't watch, but that was thorough.

- It seems we can put the KSU game into the category of a terrible performance rather than the performance of a terrible team. At this point, I simply expect a rotten egg for any game scheduled for 9:00 am pacific, with a sliding scale of terribleness up until about 1:00 pm pacific.
Yes, from time to time you see other teams manage the issue, but I don't recall ever seeing Stanford manage. In fact, in the post-KSU news conference where Shaw went into coach-speak about how the start time wasn't an issue, the example he chose to prove Stanford could handle such a start time was 2009 vs Wake Forest - a game we lost to an inferior team.

- I am still convinced SC is a much better team than KSU. That will be even more true with the KSU QB now out indefinitely with a knee injury. Fortunately for frustration if not overall, quality wins/bad losses is unlikely to be an issue this year.

- Biggest concerns after two games:
On offense the OL not consistently getting a push in the run game.
On defense, often no QB pressure at all without a blitz to the point where it occasionally seems the opposing QB could simply never throw the ball and would never get pressed (I am imagining something like the old, pre-shot clock basketball stall strategy).

- Still worried about Vanderbilt game, almost solely because of travel. Fortunately, it is a Tennessee night game.

- The toughest stretch of the season seems to be after the Vandy game, where we play UCLA, Oregon, ASU in a row. Fortunately, the first two are at home. Unfortunately, it comes after a tiring trip.

- Still worried about surviving the season. Between injuries and exhaustion I can imagine that over the final several games the team is held together by spit and baling wire.

- There is some subtlety here, but Shaw has now cemented his place in being bad at initially figuring out who is the best QB on his team. On the other hand, on the scale of football coaches overall, he seems fairly good at correcting the bad initial choice. So we had:
2012  Nunes --> Hogan
2016  Burns --> Chryst
2017  Chryst --> Costello
2019  Costello --> Mills*
2021  West --> McKee

*2019 may not really belong here. There was no question that Costello should have been the starter at first. Mills only took over because of injury. While at the end of 2019 he was better than injured Costello, it's not clear that during that year he was as good as 2018 Costello.

I haven't read or  posted anything on the USC game so will just drop my thoughts here, in your "morning after" post - most of which I agree with (still don't buy the 9:00 a.m. excuse).  Apologies if others have made these same points in other threads:

 First, that was a great win for the program.  Congratulations to Shaw and the entire staff – the team looked very well prepared for the matchup.

Second, congratulations to the players, who executed the plan incredibly well.  And there wasn’t a whole lot of margin for error (at least from what I saw – i.e., the second half).

Third, what Andy Dufresne said is the best of things:  hope.  This game gave the team, but particularly the fans, hope for the rest of the season.  Look,  this team’s ultimate record this season could be anything from poor to great, still, but the latter is now in play.  And that hope is the best of things.

Fourth, McKee was unbelievably good.  I lost count of the number of great (not good, but great) balls he threw last night, including on third downs.  He was putting the ball right where it had to be, often while under duress.  And the receivers caught a lot of one-on-one balls where they just beat the defender for possession and/or made difficult catches (2 TD passes come immediately to mind).  And there were a couple times where the receives could have made the catch (or maybe even should have made the catch) when a ball was delivered into good coverage. Just an incredible performance by McKee (and the receivers) – it’s hard to overstate how well they played.  [And Peat, of course, showed well in the game, and it looks like Filkins has some wiggle to him, too].

Fifth, and this is one of two cautionary/negative things I’ll say about the game – because who else will raise negative points in these parts if not I? – because there was such a small margin for error, I caution against fans expecting this kind of play week after week.  It’s hard to be that precise in your throws; it’s hard to catch the ball when always contested; and if just a few of those third down plays had gone the other way, then this game would have had a completely different feel to it.  But last night, it was all clicking for Stanford, so congrats to all for that.  We should all enjoy that quality game on a pretty big (if not, late-night) stage.

Sixth, offensive game management was WAY better last night.  Again, from what I saw, ZERO complaints about getting plays in and off, using clock before snapping, etc.  Good job coach! (or coaches).

P.S.  Didn’t see the 1H so couldn’t get sense of “feel” or “flow” of the game.  But I was surprised to read – or my daughter to relay Gamecast to me, to be precise – that Stanford went for it on fourth and goal from the 5 yard line in 1H in a close game.  That strikes me as an erroneous decision, even if it worked.  And the highlight actually bolstered that opinion (incredible throw under duress by McKee and great catch by the WR).   I don’t know what the rationale was for going for it there – I’ll only say that I hope Shaw wasn’t motivated by outside pressures to “be bold” on offense or what have you.  Still need to make the sound decisions.  That one worked out for Stanford, but did any of you think that was the “correct” call real time?  [Maybe there was something in flow of game that would support that call, so . . .].

P.P.S.  Take care of things at Vandy, and the first home game against UCLA shapes up to be a rather important game.

P.P.P.S.  Must finish how I started - congrats all around, to coaches and players, for an incredible W at SC.  Impressive!

I suspect that your “who else” comment was sarcasm.  As for going for it on 4th and 5, there is more.  They had made a FG.  He took the points off the board. Was it correct decision? I don’t know. Maybe he was sending his team and his QB a message. That he trusts them. And that he’s gonna be more aggressive. And that he trusts them. I’m relatively confident he didn’t say, “hmmm, what would the Cardboard do….” But I find your comment to be perplexing. You’ve complained about him not being bold enough forever. So now that he does something bold, it’s the wrong move and you hope he didn’t bow under pressure. But he’s stubborn - another complaint. Never listens, never changes. And yet, when he does something allegedly out of character it’s the wrong move for the wrong reason. Well. “A lot of poor boys got the Cumberland blues, they can’t win for losing..”

BTW no sign of a turtle last night.  Far from it.  He kept the pedal down all night. More indication that he was sending a message. Or perhaps bowing to pressure…..

So, maybe this signals some change. Or maybe it was a one off. Time will tell.
(09-12-2021, 08:18 AM)teejers1 Wrote: [ -> ]P.S.  Didn’t see the 1H so couldn’t get sense of “feel” or “flow” of the game.  But I was surprised to read – or my daughter to relay Gamecast to me, to be precise – that Stanford went for it on fourth and goal from the 5 yard line in 1H in a close game.  That strikes me as an erroneous decision, even if it worked.  And the highlight actually bolstered that opinion (incredible throw under duress by McKee and great catch by the WR).   I don’t know what the rationale was for going for it there – I’ll only say that I hope Shaw wasn’t motivated by outside pressures to “be bold” on offense or what have you.  Still need to make the sound decisions.  That one worked out for Stanford, but did any of you think that was the “correct” call real time?  [Maybe there was something in flow of game that would support that call, so . . .].

not only did he go for it but he took points off the board to go for it as SC lined up in the neutral zone on the made FG....
(09-12-2021, 07:30 AM)CTcard Wrote: [ -> ]Still processing what we've seen so far this season, but in-progress thoughts ...

- Last night was as wide a gap between performance and expectation as I can remember for Stanford football.
In some ways more than the 2007 SC upset. In that game, while Stanford was big on pluckiness and grit, they were still clearly an inferior team overall but won on some key plays and a 5-1 TO advantage. This game, Stanford stomped SC. The late give-away scores will make it less impressive for those who didn't watch, but that was thorough.

- It seems we can put the KSU game into the category of a terrible performance rather than the performance of a terrible team. At this point, I simply expect a rotten egg for any game scheduled for 9:00 am pacific, with a sliding scale of terribleness up until about 1:00 pm pacific.
Yes, from time to time you see other teams manage the issue, but I don't recall ever seeing Stanford manage. In fact, in the post-KSU news conference where Shaw went into coach-speak about how the start time wasn't an issue, the example he chose to prove Stanford could handle such a start time was 2009 vs Wake Forest - a game we lost to an inferior team.

- I am still convinced SC is a much better team than KSU. That will be even more true with the KSU QB now out indefinitely with a knee injury. Fortunately for frustration if not overall, quality wins/bad losses is unlikely to be an issue this year.

- Biggest concerns after two games:
On offense the OL not consistently getting a push in the run game.
On defense, often no QB pressure at all without a blitz to the point where it occasionally seems the opposing QB could simply never throw the ball and would never get pressed (I am imagining something like the old, pre-shot clock basketball stall strategy).

- Still worried about Vanderbilt game, almost solely because of travel. Fortunately, it is a Tennessee night game.

- The toughest stretch of the season seems to be after the Vandy game, where we play UCLA, Oregon, ASU in a row. Fortunately, the first two are at home. Unfortunately, it comes after a tiring trip.

- Still worried about surviving the season. Between injuries and exhaustion I can imagine that over the final several games the team is held together by spit and baling wire.

- There is some subtlety here, but Shaw has now cemented his place in being bad at initially figuring out who is the best QB on his team. On the other hand, on the scale of football coaches overall, he seems fairly good at correcting the bad initial choice. So we had:
2012  Nunes --> Hogan
2016  Burns --> Chryst
2017  Chryst --> Costello
2019  Costello --> Mills*
2021  West --> McKee

*2019 may not really belong here. There was no question that Costello should have been the starter at first. Mills only took over because of injury. While at the end of 2019 he was better than injured Costello, it's not clear that during that year he was as good as 2018 Costello.

Not sure I agree with a few things:
- I'd say 2009 @ U$C was a greater gap between performance and expectation, but this was certainly among the biggest
- I'm not ready to bury the KSU game until Shaw can sustain the level of trust in his QB1 and the aggressive gameplanning and playcalling. We've seen this happen before. His needs to more strongly resist the Dark Side that pulls him back to the turtle offense.
- Still to early to judge whether U$C or KSU is the better team. KSU was the better team last Saturday night than U$C was last night, but the transitive property doesn't work in sports, especially after only 2 games
- Your concerns about the trenches are very valid, but the DL side was a known concern going into the season. The OL run blocking has been a bit of a surprise
- Vandy just lost to East Tennesse St, but see #1 and #2 above. I'm not taking any game for granted, and I sure as hell hope the coaching staff & team aren't either or we could see another KSU-like performance
- I hope and pray this is the LAST time we play 12 P5 teams. We don't need it. We don't get credit for it. There's plenty of challenge in the 9 conference games + UFDG to "sharpen the iron" especially with the thinner rosters of recent years
- Thankfully this year it appears Shaw found his QB1 faster than in the past and it likely didn't cost us any wins. And 2019 doesn't belong on that list.
The FG to TD call was very bold. Probably even the "wrong" call from the stats point of view. I thought it was going to be 4th and goal from like the 2, when I saw it was even further out I was very surprised with the decision.

But as a road dog with a slim early lead, I thought it was a fantastic if out of character call.

I thought the 2 minute drill at end of 1st half was similarly impressive, and mildly surprising. Was expecting a few run plays.

I think Shaw simply realized McKee was feeling it, and let the reins loose. When Shaw trusts the QB to let it rip, our offense functions much much smoother.
(09-12-2021, 08:38 AM)dabigv13 Wrote: [ -> ]The FG to TD call was very bold. Probably even the "wrong" call from the stats point of view. I thought it was going to be 4th and goal from like the 2, when I saw it was even further out I was very surprised with the decision.


But as a road dog with a slim early lead, I thought it was a fantastic if out of character call.

I thought the 2 minute drill at end of 2nd half was similarly impressive, and mildly surprising. Was expecting a few run plays.

I think Shaw simply realized McKee was feeling it, and let the reins loose. When Shaw trusts the QB to let it rip, our offense functions much much smoother.

I think he also realized they could not run consistently and SC is always potentially explosive. So he kept the gas pedal down. Even when up 22 in the 4th. 

Defense BTW did a tremendous job of avoiding big plays. SC got nothing downfield. And until the last drivecwhen game was over, had no big runs to speak of.

Meanwhile Stanford attacked downfield all game. Stanford was the far more aggressive team.
(09-12-2021, 08:36 AM)winflop Wrote: [ -> ]- I hope and pray this is the LAST time we play 12 P5 teams. We don't need it. We don't get credit for it. There's plenty of challenge in the 9 conference games + UFDG to "sharpen the iron" especially with the thinner rosters of recent years
- Thankfully this year it appears Shaw found his QB1 faster than in the past and it likely didn't cost us any wins. And 2019 doesn't belong on that list.

BYU joining the Big 12 means our future series with them is now a P5 series. That said, there are no 12 P5 game schedules coming up. Some 11 game ones that would've been 10 had BYU stayed independent.

Agree with your last point. I expected us to be 1-1 at this point anyways, and the fact that we won "the wrong one" doesn't matter. Hell, it's actually better since it was a conference game!
(09-12-2021, 08:18 AM)teejers1 Wrote: [ -> ]Fourth, McKee was unbelievably good.  I lost count of the number of great (not good, but great) balls he threw last night, including on third downs.  He was putting the ball right where it had to be, often while under duress.  

McKee delivered some beautiful balls under duress -- most memorable for me was early in the 4th quarter when we were trying to milk the clock but were penalized with a holding call that put us at 1st and 20.  Drake Jackson beat Hinton around the edge and was bearing down quickly on McKee, but McKee's quick release while falling away got it out of there, completing a 10 yard pass to Yurosek in between 2 defenders.  It kept the drive alive, and we eventually ended up scoring on a 10 play drive that chewed up 5:44 and put the game completely out of reach.
(09-12-2021, 08:28 AM)lex24 Wrote: [ -> ]I suspect that your “who else” comment was sarcasm.  As for going for it on 4th and 5, there is more.  They had made a FG.  He took the points off the board. Was it correct decision?  I don’t know. Maybe he was sending his team and his QB a message.  That he trusts them. And that he’s gonna be more aggressive.  And that he trusts them. I’m relatively confident he didn’t say, “hmmm, what would the Cardboard do….”  But I find your comment to be perplexing.  You’ve complained about him not being bold enough forever.  So now that he does something bold, it’s the wrong move and you hope he didn’t bow under pressure.  But he’s stubborn - another complaint.  Never listens, never changes.  And yet, when he does something allegedly out of character it’s the wrong move for the wrong reason.  Well. “A lot of poor boys got the Cumberland blues, they can’t win for losing..”

BTW  no sign of a turtle last night.  Far from it.  He kept the pedal down all night. More indication that he was sending a message. Or perhaps bowing to pressure…..

So, maybe this signals some change. Or maybe it was a one off.  Time will tell.

I don't want to bog down this thread with negative commentary after such a glowing W last night.  So I'll only say that the above bolded language is an inaccurate portrayal of my complaints about Shaw's historic running of the offense.  It isn't bold or not bold; it's making decisions that are myopic and/or so confounding to the game dictates/situations.  And I'll just leave it at that.

Again, from what I saw last night, no complaints.  

P.S.  Thanks for the heads up on context of taking points off the board.  Yeah, I in all likelihood would not have done that (4th and goal from the 8 to 4th and goal from the 4, if my math is right).  Hmm.  BTW, Lex, would you have gone for it?
- Surprised at how much the middle of the field was open. Higgins dropped a throw and they came back to the same play on the next down. Where were the SC safeties? Nobody covered Jones out of the backfield on one of the game’s key plays.
- Treymayne not offered any D1 scholie. Shows that you never know. Really knows how to use his body. A stud.
- Last SC drive against guys who haven’t played. Many of them also on the penultimate drive. People who didn’t watch since it was almost dawn on the East Coast won’t realize how big a beatdown this was.
- The new SC DC was a deer in the headlights. Loved the shots of him in the fourth Q.
- Not much edge. But Slovis has great ability to slide in the pocket. What has happened to Andres Fox. I would argue that Umeroh’s retirement is more important than the injury to McGill.
- Shocked to see Shaw take points off the board. Remember that he has years of NFL coaching experience and it’s a mortal sin in the League. Loved it however.
- Finally never happier that my prediction was way off.
(09-12-2021, 09:03 AM)teejers1 Wrote: [ -> ]
(09-12-2021, 08:28 AM)lex24 Wrote: [ -> ]I suspect that your “who else” comment was sarcasm.  As for going for it on 4th and 5, there is more.  They had made a FG.  He took the points off the board. Was it correct decision?  I don’t know. Maybe he was sending his team and his QB a message.  That he trusts them. And that he’s gonna be more aggressive.  And that he trusts them. I’m relatively confident he didn’t say, “hmmm, what would the Cardboard do….”  But I find your comment to be perplexing.  You’ve complained about him not being bold enough forever.  So now that he does something bold, it’s the wrong move and you hope he didn’t bow under pressure.  But he’s stubborn - another complaint.  Never listens, never changes.  And yet, when he does something allegedly out of character it’s the wrong move for the wrong reason.  Well. “A lot of poor boys got the Cumberland blues, they can’t win for losing..”

BTW  no sign of a turtle last night.  Far from it.  He kept the pedal down all night. More indication that he was sending a message. Or perhaps bowing to pressure…..

So, maybe this signals some change. Or maybe it was a one off.  Time will tell.

I don't want to bog down this thread with negative commentary after such a glowing W last night.  So I'll only say that the above bolded language is an inaccurate portrayal of my complaints about Shaw's historic running of the offense.  It isn't bold or not bold; it's making decisions that are myopic and/or so confounding to the game dictates/situations.  And I'll just leave it at that.

Again, from what I saw last night, no complaints.  

P.S.  Thanks for the heads up on context of taking points off the board.  Yeah, I in all likelihood would not have done that (4th and goal from the 8 to 4th and goal from the 4, if my math is right).  Hmm.  BTW, Lex, would you have gone for it?

No.   But I think he wanted to send a broader message.
First, I find myself unexpectedly having to agree with a lot of Teejers comments. McKee did exhibit great accuracy last night, which we had not seen before. If he can keep doing it, we have a great weapon. We also find ourselves with big receivers that can win the 50/50 battles. This is JJAW all over again I fear. It is a great weapon, but if it is your only weapon you will have games like Utah where the secondary wins most of those battles. KJ developed the habit of throwing into coverage because it often worked. Not a good thing. Fortunately, we also had some plays where the receivers were actually open. We need a Simi Fehoko which we don't have ATM. Hopefully we can continue to improve at getting separation with what we have.

Shaw taking the field goal off the board and going for it was a psych play that worked. I think McKee was feeling it and Shaw was feeling it and he let his emotions overrule his coaching conservatism. It worked, so he is a hero, but I am sure he is asking himself was it wise.

We have to realize that USC lost this game as much or more than we won it. It appears they had no real game plan, just assuming that whatever they did would work. Their DBs committed penalty after penalty on plays where the receiver was going to have a tough time reaching the ball anyway. On offense, if SC had just run the ball right at us all night, they probably win. We weren't giving up 50 yard plays but we were giving up 6 yard ones. At least they should have run until we adjusted to stop it. They didn't do that, they threw the ball and were not efficient in doing so. Part of that was our defense was doing a surprisingly good job in coverage, but most of that was Slovis was throwing the ball behind receivers. In general, he was not on target. Perhaps he was throwing into a small window, but it wasn't working well.

Stanford got one Bryce Love style long run, but otherwise our run game wasn't what we want it to be. Jones never really got going, and IMHO we need him to be a reliable option. He ran 10 times for a 1.9 yard average. KSU game numbers. Not good. Peat did much better, but it was mostly one carry. This needs to improve if we expect to beat UCLA/Oregon class teams (as far was we actually know how good they are).

So yes, we won the game and that is great. There are lots of positives. AFAIR there was only one holding call. We had a false start on a punt, which was caused by the play clock being almost 0 and the player assuming we must be snapping the ball by now! Otherwise, pretty clean. The defense showed that if you can keep them off the field much of the game they have just enough to make a few stops. When you are as offensively efficient as we were most of last night, that can be enough.
Boy, sometimes when you think you have it figured out...you really don't.
McKee’s accuracy and release are first rate. Haven’t see anything like that in a college QB in a long time. 

Kelly played another superb game against one of the conference’s best receivers. 

As always with this team, it’s all about avoiding injuries. If we can do that, this team could have a great season.
After the K-State game, I threw in the towel on this season. When I saw that Oregon had won and that Colorado and Cal were ahead in their games, I turned on the TV. Got to root for the Pac-12. Big letdown. No way I would watch the SC game - then I read that Peat had scored. Okay, let's watch. McKee looked like the second coming. Great game to watch and I'm back on the bandwagon. 
to my eyes, the long catch-and-run to austin jones on the last drive of the first half was pretty much the same play hogan threw to christian mccaffrey for a long td on the first play from scrimmage of the rose bowl against iowa. running back out of the backfield curls over the middle, faking a crossing route, jukes back towards the post, leaving the defender flat-footed as you catch the ball in stride.  perfectly placed quick throws both times.

Jones couldn't outrun the secondary last night though.  No knock against him -- McCaffrey was transcendent.  Peat's speed reminded me of that.  Peat has earned some snaps imo, and maybe we need a RBBC to keep our guys fresh and uninjured?  Much as I'd like to have a Voldemort contender...

Run blocking still doesn't look imposing.  I saw a pulling guard shuffling laterally to his hole a couple of times -- why not turn the hips and actually run with some momentum?

So Heffernan, the incoming OL coach, has OC experience, and it was hinted in the hiring announcement that such OC experience would be valuable to the coaching staff.  I wonder if Shaw is trying to burnish Pritchard's OC chops with Heffernan's experience.  

Regarding taking points off the board -- y'all realize how close that TD was to not actually happening?  McKee was being chased down by a defender, and he had to throw off his back foot while running backward.  That TD pass was scooped off the ground by Higgins (good hands, thankfully), and between the lame duck throw and the uncertainty of a receiver bending over for a low reception...yeah, we got kind of lucky.  Experience will help in the future.
Yeah, the similarities to the McCaffrey play were noted in the game thread.

BC
Pages: 1 2 3 4