The CardBoard
The short intro to Iowa Football... - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: The short intro to Iowa Football... (/thread-11042.html)

Pages: 1 2

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - fullmetal - 12-11-2015

I dunno about Shaw's record against teams that play like we play.  Anyone want to correct me with numbers?  I'm thinking of U$C under Orgeron where we got out-Shaw'ed.

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - BostonCard - 12-11-2015

OK, here are my quick thoughts on Stanford offensively (defense coming in a separate post).

Stanford on offense is a pro-style, run-first football team.  For example, we have run 296 times (75%) on first down and passed only 101 times.  Overall, we have rushed 576 times (74%) and passed 201 times.  I don't know if it is still true, but we have led the NCAA in time of possession for most of the year.  We show a lot of different formations, everything from our jumbo package that features 20 offensive linemen (j/k, but six and sometimes seven OL is common) to four wideouts.  Our most common looks are the classic I-formation with Hogan under center, Marx (our fullback) lead blocking, and McCaffrey dotting the I, one or two tight ends, and one or two receivers.  We tend to run both straight ahead blocking schemes and Power, where Josh Garnett will pull.  We also frequently line up in a shotgun with McCaffrey as the single back, two tight ends and two receivers, or 1 tight end three receivers; we can pass or run out of the formation and even do some read option (Hogan's running can get overlooked).  We are probably one of the few teams that still keeps the wildcat (excuse me, WildCaff) in our playbook, and use it both straight up, where McCaffrey's vision and patience can usually get some good yards, and with motion (most frequently Love coming across).

I think it is fair to say we are one of the best running teams in the country (225 yards per game, 19th in the country).  It certainly helps that we have a Voldemort finalist (Christian McCaffrey) at running back and the Outland trophy winner at left guard (Josh Garnett).  McCaffrey is not a big bruising back that Stanford is known for, but is big enough to break tackles and run between the tackles if there is a crease.  While he is not a burner (Love is our speed back), he is fast enough to get outside against most teams and will easily outrun a linebacker in a footrace.  Where McCaffrey excels is his patience and vision, allowing holes to form and hitting them hard. He can cut back to the weak side well if teams overpursue, which means that you need a very disciplined defense with a solid front seven to slow him down, and (usually) bringing the safeties up in run support.  Even then, McCaffrey leads the country in runs of 10-plus yards against boxes containing eight or more defenders this year. 

However, our penchant for running does not betray a weakness in the passing game.  While we've only averaged 210 passing yards a game, we've been very efficient when we do pass.  Our team has a PER of 170.5, good for fourth in the country (and second best among Power 5 teams).  Kevin Hogan is very experienced and is already the winningest quarterback in Stanford history.  He is very accurate (7th in the nation in completion percentage at 78.6%, tied with Baker Mayfield), and is capable of hitting a variety of receivers.  As has been mentioned in the Voldemort hype, McCaffrey leads the team in rushing and receiving.  Our wide receivers are serviceable (Cajuste is a bigger body that many teams recruited as a tight end, Rector is smaller and faster), and once again we have very good tight ends (Austin Hooper stands out here, leading the team with 6 TD catches).

The MO for a well oiled Stanford scoring drive (and we are one of the best teams in scoring on a per possession basis, but because we tend to chew up clock we don't have as many possessions as other teams, and thus you don't routinely see scores in the 50's), is to get solid runs of four to seven yards on first down and leave second and third and short, which we convert at a high level (Our third down conversion of 51% is third in the country).  We chip away methodically with medium gains until either McCaffrey finds a seam for a big run by McCaffrey (who has 50 10+ yard runs and 15 20+ yard runs, both of which rank in the top-10 in the NCAA), or pass on play action for big gain (we have 13 40+ yard passing plays this year, which is good for 22nd, and impressive given that we don't pass that often).

When the offense stalls, it is usually because we are stopped for short gain or a loss on first down, or have a penalty, and face third and long.  We are only 19/65 converting third down and 7 or more.  We tend to be fairly conservative on fourth down, almost always electing to punt unless in field goal range, despite a fourth down conversion rate of 86% (12/14).  Shaw definitely plays the field position game, and for better or for worse (I tend to think we ought to be going for it more often on fourth and short), it has resulted in us getting a significant field position advantage vis a vis our opponents (it helps we have one of the best kickoff returners in college football).  The best template of how to beat us in the past is probably the 2014 Michigan State Rose Bowl team that had elite cornerbacks who were able to cover our receivers one-on-one, allowing the safeties to crash the line.  However, compared to 2014, McCaffrey is more adept at running wide than Gaffney (who was a big back), and we have much better pass catching tight ends than back then, when we relied on a bruising running attack and play action passes to wide receivers.  The only teams to really stop our offense consistently this year were Northwestern and Washington State.  The WSU game was played in a windy downpour, which makes it unusual.  Northwestern somewhat adopted Michigan State's tactics, but also there was the early start time (not an excuse, but likely a contributing factor).

When Stanford's offense goes up against Iowa's defense, it will be strength versus strength.

BC

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - MustardtheBallCarrier - 12-11-2015

(12-11-2015, 05:11 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:I dunno about Shaw's record against teams that play like we play.  Anyone want to correct me with numbers?  I'm thinking of U$C under Orgeron where we got out-Shaw'ed.

Not sure, but against teams that play like we play from the Big 10 in Rose Bowl games: 1-1*

* A win is a win, but the Rose Bowl victory came against a Wisconsin team that was unranked in the AP poll, 8-5 coming into the game and without a QB.  Stanford played as ugly a game offensively (particularly the second half) as I remember during the Shaw era, given the level of competition.  I had a dead-on view from the stands as Hogan overthrew a wide open 6'8" Levine Toilolo in the end zone by at least another 6"8", which would have salted away the game.  Yikes.

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - CompSci87 - 12-11-2015

(12-11-2015, 02:47 PM)TrumpCard link Wrote:There isn't a scholarship FB on the roster

I'm pretty sure Marx is a scholarship FB.  But he's out for the rest of the season after being injured recently, so the effect is the same.


Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - stupac2 - 12-11-2015

(12-11-2015, 05:40 PM)MustardtheBallCarrier link Wrote:[quote author=fullmetal link=topic=14022.msg147614#msg147614 date=1449879078]
I dunno about Shaw's record against teams that play like we play.  Anyone want to correct me with numbers?  I'm thinking of U$C under Orgeron where we got out-Shaw'ed.

Not sure, but against teams that play like we play from the Big 10 in Rose Bowl games: 1-1*

* A win is a win, but the Rose Bowl victory came against a Wisconsin team that was unranked in the AP poll, 8-5 coming into the game and without a QB.  Stanford played as ugly a game offensively (particularly the second half) as I remember during the Shaw era, given the level of competition.  I had a dead-on view from the stands as Hogan overthrew a wide open 6'8" Levine Toilolo in the end zone by at least another 6"8", which would have salted away the game.  Yikes.
[/quote]

I know not everyone here likes advanced stats, but per FEI that Wisconsin team was probably better than this Iowa team. Definitely had a better defense. Remember that Iowa is 5-1 in one-score games, that Wisconsin team was 2-5 prior to the Rose Bowl. Give both of them .500 records and we're looking at pretty even teams.

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - fullmetal - 12-11-2015

Sure hope you're right.  Assuming that MSU team we played two years ago is similar to this year's MSU team, we could be in for a bit of trench warfare.

Or McCaffrey will show us all his final evolved form (300+ yds, 3 TDs) and prove all Voldemort voters wrong as Derrick Henry gets stuffed by MSU's defense.

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - ChicagoCard - 12-12-2015

Fun fact: The Hawkeyes have had exactly 2 head coaches over the course of the past 37 seasons.

Re: The short intro to Iowa Football... - Leftcoast - 12-12-2015

Well Big 12 teams are often tougher than we credit them to be and stats are inconclusive when the two leagues seldomly play each other.  I remember a lot of confidence on this board prior to our last two Big 10 games (MSU and NU).  Count me as nervous.