What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - 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: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? (/thread-16468.html)
+- 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: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? (/thread-16468.html)
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - stupac2 - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 07:30 AM)Hulk01 Wrote: And we all must have noticed there was no tribute to him, of any kind, when he left. Silence. I think that meant something.
I dunno, it seems odd that Shaw would have enough faith in his abilities to promote him and keep him on but then spite him on his way out. Also, I thought I had seen things from the AD promoting him at Rice.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - CowboyIndian - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 07:45 AM)Velodoc Wrote: We should have won by 2 to 3 TD's.
Last night was a great victory. Legendary really. But it should have been routine.
When you say or write these things I've got to wonder what game you were watching. Oregon played lights out, probably as well as they can play. We didn't play well (on O or D) in 1H but took their best shot and got a couple of really lucky breaks late. Complaints about the 4th and 1 are justified, certainly, but our O was dominant in the 2H...and the D matched it in crunch time. 31-7 in the 2H.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 06:41 AM)stupac2 Wrote:(09-23-2018, 06:29 AM)81alum Wrote: Another possibility is to rest this on Carberry, who is the new offensive line coach and running game coordinator. Those are obvious weaknesses of our offense at this point, and it is not as if Carberry has had less talent to work with than Bloomgren did.
This is kind of interesting to me because we had a lot of OL issues early last year as well. Part of the reason we were optimistic about the offense this year was that things were basically settled, we returned 4/5 guys and had excellent candidates to fill in the remaining spot.
...And then everyone got hurt. So we're basically in the same situation as last year, except we haven't even had the most talented players available. I can see that causing a lot of issues, especially combined with your later point of defenses keying hard on Love.
It seemed like last season's "OL issues early" dissipated once KC replaced Chryst. I don't know if this was due to the QB change, coincidental timing, or both.
I seem to recall that last season KJ was rolling out quite often and this season he's standing within a (collapsing) pocket while making throws.
KJ knows what he is doing , moving players around at the line of scrimmage, staying calm within a loud, hostile environment.
Osiris St. Brown can step up, late in the game, and make a a big play !
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - winflop - 09-23-2018
(09-22-2018, 10:01 PM)BostonCard Wrote: It tells us how much we miss Bloomgren.
BC
Give me a break. Bloomgren would've told Shaw to keep running the ball in the second half. I had hoped that Pritchard would get in Shaw's ear sooner but at least they made a big adjustment at halftime, and Oregon gave them opportunities that they were able to seize.
Luck will bring you opportunities, but it takes, talent, training, heart, etc to seize them.
This is a special team - next weekend will say a lot about just how special. Oregon is a very good team despite their second half blunders
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - Austroturf - 09-23-2018
Since I live overseas, I only managed to watch the game this afternoon/early evening. Here are my takes:
1) Herbert is an incredible QB and sliced and diced our defense in the first half.
2) Oregon is back: the Ducks looked good; and Cristobal has instilled a new spirit in that team.
3) I do not want to blame the play-calling in the first half too much, but it appears evident at this stage of the season that a) most teams can find a way to scheme against our over-usage of Bryce Love in the run-game and b) the current state of our O-line does not make this part of the offense effective. Watching Herbert and the Ducks, I saw clearly that they were using the pass to set up the run. The Oregon O-line looked more solid than ours; but it helps the running backs a lot when they can often be the second option and not always the first.
4) Shaw needs to get more creative in how he uses Love. I believe he owes it to Love to get him in more favorable situations in space that allow him to use his acceleration and speed. Simply hammering him into the brick wall of defenders does a brobdingnagian disservice to him.
5) Costello is maturing excellently. What a clutch performance in the second half with the team completely standing with their backs to the wall.
6) His receivers were equally stellar. I hope the learning from this game is that it's OK to evolve the offense and use the strengths of the personnel without totally abandoning Stanford's identity. Shaw has often been called stubborn. Now is a moment of truth: when we travel to South Bend next weekend, we cannot hope for a miracle comeback largely based on the opponent's own self-inflicted wounds. We need to win straight up.
7) I was shocked at how effortlessly Herbert moved the offense against our defense. I think I counted only two sacks (maybe three). The defense that led the nation in PPG per game (23 in total this year) gave up 31 in this game alone. Credit to Herbert and the Oregon offense, but it makes me worry about our battles with UW and Notre Dame.
8) Overall, I was impressed with the resilience the team showed. That game risked being UW 2016 redux; but, with the help of some Oregon gaffes, the team clawed its way back into the game and never gave up. Duck fans are crying foul at the officiating, but I only saw one truly legitimate miss, which was a no-call on a PI on the first play of OT (Adebo in the end-zone).
9) Going forward, the two major issues this team needs to solve is a) the O-line and its run blocking (or lack thereof) and b) shifting Bryce Love's role in the offense. The way he is now being used is ineffective and risks getting him injured. Plus, it is destroying his draft stock.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - fullmetal - 09-23-2018
How much of the game was played with Herbig at RT instead of Hall? I missed that transition. I was on the Carberry-stinks bandwagon until Hulk's assertion that this was all just a long hangover from Bloomgren (in which case, I still expect Carberry, with his NFL credentials, to be making a big positive impact).
I feel like the OL is losing a lot of 1-on-1 battles with the DL that is resulting in the disappearance of the run game. This is most of the same starting OL that put Bryce Love in the Voldemort conversation last year...how did they get this bad minus David Bright?
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - stupac2 - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 01:20 PM)Austroturf Wrote: 4) Shaw needs to get more creative in how he uses Love. I believe he owes it to Love to get him in more favorable situations in space that allow him to use his acceleration and speed. Simply hammering him into the brick wall of defenders does a of immense proportions disservice to him.
I mean, we tried to get it to Love on a wheel route and he was double-covered (I'm not sure I've ever seen that before). We also got it to him in space to set up the game-tying FG. So they have spots for it, clearly.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - Row80Critic - 09-23-2018
On another front -- how good is Adebo? Holy cow, he'll be playing bigtime on Sundays...
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - Hulk01 - 09-23-2018
Again, Bloomgren's OL in the first half of 2014 was much more frustrating than this one. They prompted me to do something I've never done before or since: keep a file headed "OL mistakes". Tracked them by game--sacks allowed, penalties (that team specialized in false stats and illegal chop blocks.)
Last year's OL was reason enough to consider getting rid of him. Perhaps strongly recommending him for head coaching jobs was the best way of doing that. And the fact that Bloomgren did not issue a final note of thanks and goodbye may be a hint that that is what happened.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - Spiny_Norman - 09-23-2018
One other thing we learned - the offense seemed (at least to me) to be much the same as the first three games. The sets, the play calls seemed pretty familiar. Stanford rarely runs play action. I don't think I have seen any motion this season. Running plays start deep in the backfield and are slow to develop presumably to give Love a chance to pick a hole (which is rarely there). The passing game generally favors one-on-one isolations and seam passes to Kaden Smith.
Everyone who expected (hoped) that the offense was holding back some plays from the first few games was likely not satisfied. In the words of the late Dennis Green, they are who we thought they were.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - Goose - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 01:45 PM)fullmetal Wrote: I feel like the OL is losing a lot of 1-on-1 battles with the DL that is resulting in the disappearance of the run game. This is most of the same starting OL that put Bryce Love in the Voldemort conversation last year...how did they get this bad minus David Bright?Me too. We just aren't moving anybody. Part of this is the fact that nobody has outright won the Left Guard position. This is compounded by the fact we are a "left handed" running team. This is historically true, I believe, during Shaw's time here. Notice that on fourth and one we ran left, just like we did on the goal line vs SC last year. Against Oregon, it was worse because we had some injuries, but all year so far we haven't won the physical battles reliably. We have a good play here or there, but usually when the DL slants the wrong way or something similar. Stanford, in the past, was money on fourth and one. We are not ATM.
We are also slow at the point of attack. Our runs take forever to develop. Some of this is the way our plays are designed, but we are even "slower than that". For instance, on one play against Oregon, Love didn't wait for the pulling guard but just hit the hole. If he had waited, the play would have been stopped. We have problems like this much more often than we can afford. If we don't get a basic push and are slow at the point of attack, you get a poor running game, which is what we have seen repeatedly. Love took it on himself to just run through people on the one TD drive. He was very effective, but he will for certain get hurt doing that, and it won't work against a bigger DL (UW).
What we learned about our OL in this game is that they for sure have issues. It isn't the stacked box case. It was mostly us.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - CornFed - 09-23-2018
Does anyone have any insight into the reason David Shaw made a shoutout "I love you" to his brother Eric? I hope it had some positive explanation. Shaw seemed fairly matter-of-fact. It just stood out as I was re-watching everythuing.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - muiron - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 03:43 PM)CornFed Wrote: Does anyone have any insight into the reason David Shaw made a shoutout "I love you" to his brother Eric? I hope it had some positive explanation. Shaw seemed fairly matter-of-fact. It just stood out as I was re-watching everythuing.
I wondered too. I don't know anything about his brother. I found a mention in a 2013 SF Comical article but that's all I could find. Eric must be about 44.
"Shaw was the middle child, two years younger than sister Tawnya, now an elementary school teacher in Union City, and two years older than Eric, a marketing manager at Wells Fargo in San Francisco"
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 09-23-2018
There are certainly quite a few deserving "if this play did not happen ....." comments for last night's game.
I think the top of the list is #32 Alfieri picking up the loose ball and running the length of the field with it.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - pcgoode - 09-23-2018
From the notes of one Oregon writer, Stanford is 40-of-54 passing for 583 yards and seven touchdowns against Oregon in the last two games in the series.
https://goducks.com/news/2018/9/23/football-sunday-notebook-aggressive-to-the-end-rebounding-quickly-and-more.aspx
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - CTcard - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 02:25 PM)Hulk01 Wrote: Again, Bloomgren's OL in the first half of 2014 was much more frustrating than this one. They prompted me to do something I've never done before or since: keep a file headed "OL mistakes". Tracked them by game--sacks allowed, penalties (that team specialized in false stats and illegal chop blocks.)
Last year's OL was reason enough to consider getting rid of him. Perhaps strongly recommending him for head coaching jobs was the best way of doing that. And the fact that Bloomgren did not issue a final note of thanks and goodbye may be a hint that that is what happened.
Going into this year, I expected that of recent years, it would be the 2015 team that would most resemble what we'd see in 2018.
At least through half time I was starting to think there might be an unhealthy sprinkling of 2014 as well.
One similarity is that while Stanford is passing more in 2018 than in any year since Gerhart emerged while Harbaugh was coach, the other year we really tried to move to a more pass-oriented office was the first 3/4 of 2014.
However, the OL in 2014 was in many ways quite different than in 2018; some of this in the manner they underperformed.
- 4 of 5 were new starters in 2014. In 2018, 4 of 5 return.
- Not the OL, but related, in 2014 wise had less at tailback (that the coaches realized - McCaffrey was sitting around mostly unused) than in any other year since Gerhart emerged. In 2018 we have Love.
- In 2014 the OL actually performed pretty well on some advanced stats related to run blocking - #23 in Power Success Rate, #23 in Stuff Rate, #32 in Line Yds on Standard Downs. [All from Football Outsiders "NCAA Offensive Line Stat".] These aren't out yet for 2018, but can't imagine they are good for us. In 2017 (as you more or less noted) we were poor in these categories - #49 in Power Success Rate, #105 in Stuff Rate, #93 in Line Yds on Standard Downs.
- Going by memory, and therefore not necessarily reliable, a predominant fraction of the holding and illegal blocking penalties in 2014 were in pass protection. In 2018 they appear to be on run plays.
I am not sure what that means for an overall evaluation of Bloomgren, and I note your comments suggest some grumbling from inside the program. It's certainly too early to have to strong an opinion on the coaching abilities of Carberry - for example it still seems possible that much of the current struggles are primarily due to injuries with guys either out or hobbled. However, I do think the differences I described mean that the potential solutions are quite different.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - fullmetal - 09-23-2018
Garvin pushed back against my suggestion on The Council regarding Carberry as the primary cause of the OL woes -- reading all the threads here has caused me to walk back my accusations. The injuries, lack of solid replacement for David Bright, and general lack of "jell" (I like gel better) are all probably more important.
I still maintain that the 1-on-1 blocking situations need to be won. Herbig, Little, and Burkett need to be winning their battles like the studs they are. The OL needs to get back to the point where they're blowing defenders off the ball. Instead, it's rather the opposite. That's my main problem. I feel like they used to win those battles.
Hulk could be right about this being the last part of the Bloomgren hangover. But at least last year, Love was able to rush for scads of yards behind a Bloomgren-coached line (or in spite of Bloomgren...).
In 2014, I think there was a mid-season change in blocking emphasis to feature the pin-and-pull tactic: https://www.stanforddaily.com/2014/10/27/instant-replay-searching-for-daylight-in-the-run-game/
I'd like to see the coaching braintrust stay flexible and do what works instead of trying over and over to make "fetch" happen.
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - d4cohn - 09-23-2018
I went back and watched film from the game yesterday. Most of the following thoughts will be on the defensive side of the ball, but there are a couple of thoughts on offense sprinkled in:
1) I know the first half result was awful yesterday, but watching the film back today, we had a ton of chances to mitigate the damage in the first half (i.e. allowing some long 3rd down conversions instead of getting off the field). I also felt that many of the miscues were from a couple of consistent positions, rather than from all 11 positions. That doesn't change the fact that Oregon dropped 24 on us in the first half, or that they still moved the ball pretty well in the third and fourth quarters, but it does provide some perspective.
2) While I thought the adjustments at halftime by Stanford were pretty solid, I felt both the offensive and defensive gameplans left something to be desired in the first half. In particular, I thought the rather vanilla defensive gameplan in the first half (without as many edge pressures and stunt blitzes) played into the Ducks' hands. On offense, I watched film on only two Oregon games prior to yesterday (Boise State Las Vegas Bowl, and Bowling Green this year), and even from that film, I could tell that edge rushes would be a potential problem for our OL. In the end, the Ducks were even faster last night than they were in those two games, and even when we started to put points on the board in the 4th quarter and OT, it felt like our OL was being held together by tape in the face of a consistent edge rush onslaught. While we have the personnel that we have, and we ultimately made adjustments, if we wait that long to make adjustments against ND and UW during the course of a game, we will lose.
3) I want to avoid being overly critical, so I will list jersey numbers instead of last names, but Oregon was consistently targeting No.3 and No.4 in coverage (on second TD for Oregon, No. 4 was actually out-run to the spot by a TE). I am so happy No.4 got the INT to finish off the game in OT, and I know he is an experienced player who provides great leadership to the team, but No.4 also had trouble with the speed of TCU's receivers in the Alamo Bowl (got beat on long TD, nearly beat on a second TD after falling down). I wonder whether Obi Eboh could provide something with additional snaps at CB.
No. 3 is a great player, and it was his first game back from injury, but he appeared rusty and out of position on plays.
No. 5 had a tough assignment in having to potentially clean up plays after mistakes/errors in front of him, but he took very poor angles on three plays that led to the third TD of the game (as opposed to a potential 15-20 yard run), on the pylon run (originally TD, ultimately out at 1), and the long pass play to convert 4th and 1 that set up Oregon's last TD. Again, in all three instances, none were his primary responsibility, but it turned potential bends in the defense into breaks.
While we are on the pylon run, that play was initially caused by another over-aggressive pass-rush from No.90 (he had a couple against SDSU and USC that led to long runs), thereby vacating the space that sprung the Oregon back. No.90 has great potential, and is still in his first couple of games, but that is something that I am sure the coaches will be working with him on.
All in all, it was a rough rough night for the safetys, and we really missed Ben Edwards with his injury. However, Noah Williams was a big bright spot at safety (most notably on the Verdell forced fumble). Hopefully, he will see some additional PT moving forward.
I also thought No. 27, after playing extremely well in the first three games, had a rough night, despite a tall ask to keep up with Oregon's receivers in coverage. In particular, No.27 was beat on three plays on Oregon's last TD drive, including the fourth and 1 where he pursued Herbert instead of staying with his man. Again, I know Herbert had a sensational night, and it is a tall order to defend Oregon, but lapses in coverage by ILB led to some big plays in the center of the field. I am glad for No. 27 that he came up with the biggest fumble recovery of the game though, and I fully expect him to bounce back.
4) I thought Dalyn Wade Perry had a great game last night. With his size, I think he was able to hold up better against Oregon's massive OL than some of our smaller DT, but he also had one chase down tackle of a speed RB, and nearly pulled off a second. With ND's large OL, DWP might be a good play for additional snaps in the game next week.
5) Paulson Adebo, particularly in OT, had a special night. He nearly forced a fumble on an Oregon RB in the third quarter, and his PBU on 2nd and goal in OT was nothing short of spectacular (wish I could upload a screenshot of the play). With the exception of maybe 1-2 plays (particularly on first play after we were stopped on 4th and 1 in 4th quarter, where Adebo didn't follow his man in motion, and nobody picked him up, leading to a big pass play), even when he was beat for a completion, it was still extremely tight coverage.
6) While we made mistakes (some of which were listed above), Herbert produced an all-time performance from the QB position. There were countless throws where the coverage was pretty tight, and he threw a perfect ball. The good news is that I expect that Herbert is the best QB we will end up facing this year (Browning and Ian Book included).
I actually think it speaks to the talent on our team that Oregon had 11 more minutes of possession, nearly ran 80 plays (32 more than us), had a QB post a 92% completion percentage in regulation, and we still managed to win (albeit with some luck).
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - qwerty49 - 09-23-2018
Excellent observations, and let’s hope the defensive lapses by the individuals can be minimized, or at least learnt from.
The injury situation at safety appears significant. If Antoine can come back, and if Williams continues to get his number called, that might mitigate until Edwards and Simmons can return.
Our ILBs don’t appear to shed blockers that well. That, coupled with them being a tad undersized, could be a problem moving forward.
(09-23-2018, 09:55 PM)d4cohn Wrote: I went back and watched film from the game yesterday. Most of the following thoughts will be on the defensive side of the ball, but there are a couple of thoughts on offense sprinkled in:
1) I know the first half result was awful yesterday, but watching the film back today, we had a ton of chances to mitigate the damage in the first half (i.e. allowing some long 3rd down conversions instead of getting off the field). I also felt that many of the miscues were from a couple of consistent positions, rather than from all 11 positions. That doesn't change the fact that Oregon dropped 24 on us in the first half, or that they still moved the ball pretty well in the third and fourth quarters, but it does provide some perspective.
2) While I thought the adjustments at halftime by Stanford were pretty solid, I felt both the offensive and defensive gameplans left something to be desired in the first half. In particular, I thought the rather vanilla defensive gameplan in the first half (without as many edge pressures and stunt blitzes) played into the Ducks' hands. On offense, I watched film on only two Oregon games prior to yesterday (Boise State Las Vegas Bowl, and Bowling Green this year), and even from that film, I could tell that edge rushes would be a potential problem for our OL. In the end, the Ducks were even faster last night than they were in those two games, and even when we started to put points on the board in the 4th quarter and OT, it felt like our OL was being held together by tape in the face of a consistent edge rush onslaught. While we have the personnel that we have, and we ultimately made adjustments, if we wait that long to make adjustments against ND and UW during the course of a game, we will lose.
3) I want to avoid being overly critical, so I will list jersey numbers instead of last names, but Oregon was consistently targeting No.3 and No.4 in coverage (on second TD for Oregon, No. 4 was actually out-run to the spot by a TE). I am so happy No.4 got the INT to finish off the game in OT, and I know he is an experienced player who provides great leadership to the team, but No.4 also had trouble with the speed of TCU's receivers in the Alamo Bowl (got beat on long TD, nearly beat on a second TD after falling down). I wonder whether Obi Eboh could provide something with additional snaps at CB.
No. 3 is a great player, and it was his first game back from injury, but he appeared rusty and out of position on plays.
No. 5 had a tough assignment in having to potentially clean up plays after mistakes/errors in front of him, but he took very poor angles on three plays that led to the third TD of the game (as opposed to a potential 15-20 yard run), on the pylon run (originally TD, ultimately out at 1), and the long pass play to convert 4th and 1 that set up Oregon's last TD. Again, in all three instances, none were his primary responsibility, but it turned potential bends in the defense into breaks.
While we are on the pylon run, that play was initially caused by another over-aggressive pass-rush from No.90 (he had a couple against SDSU and USC that led to long runs), thereby vacating the space that sprung the Oregon back. No.90 has great potential, and is still in his first couple of games, but that is something that I am sure the coaches will be working with him on.
All in all, it was a rough rough night for the safetys, and we really missed Ben Edwards with his injury. However, Noah Williams was a big bright spot at safety (most notably on the Verdell forced fumble). Hopefully, he will see some additional PT moving forward.
I also thought No. 27, after playing extremely well in the first three games, had a rough night, despite a tall ask to keep up with Oregon's receivers in coverage. In particular, No.27 was beat on three plays on Oregon's last TD drive, including the fourth and 1 where he pursued Herbert instead of staying with his man. Again, I know Herbert had a sensational night, and it is a tall order to defend Oregon, but lapses in coverage by ILB led to some big plays in the center of the field. I am glad for No. 27 that he came up with the biggest fumble recovery of the game though, and I fully expect him to bounce back.
4) I thought Dalyn Wade Perry had a great game last night. With his size, I think he was able to hold up better against Oregon's massive OL than some of our smaller DT, but he also had one chase down tackle of an RB, and nearly pulled off a second. With ND's large OL, DWP might be a good play for additional snaps in the game next week.
5) Paulson Adebo, particularly in OT, had a special night. He nearly forced a fumble on an Oregon RB in the third quarter, and his PBU on 2nd and goal in OT was nothing short of spectacular (wish I could upload a screenshot of the play). With the exception of maybe 1-2 plays (particularly on first play after we were stopped on 4th and 1 in 4th quarter, where Adebo didn't follow his man in motion, and nobody picked him up, leading to a big pass play), even when he was beat for a completion, it was still extremely tight coverage.
6) While we made mistakes (some of which were listed above), Herbert produced an all-time performance from the QB position. There were countless throws where the coverage was pretty tight, and he threw a perfect ball. The good news is that I expect that Herbert is the best QB we will end up facing this year (Browning and Ian Book included).
I actually think it speaks to the talent on our team that Oregon had 11 more minutes of possession, nearly ran 80 plays (32 more than us), had a QB post a 92% completion percentage in regulation, and we still managed to win (albeit with some luck).
RE: What does the Oregon win tell us about our team? - CTcard - 09-23-2018
(09-23-2018, 01:20 PM)Austroturf Wrote:
3) ... Watching Herbert and the Ducks, I saw clearly that they were using the pass to set up the run. The Oregon O-line looked more solid than ours; but it helps the running backs a lot when they can often be the second option and not always the first.
I don't see that is what Oregon did, at least as a strategy.
In this game, Oregon ran on a high percentage of their plays overall, a high percentage of first down plays, and a high percentage of first down plays in the first half when they were still determining what was establishing what.
Oregon ran on over 65% of their plays overall, 69% of their first downs overall, and 66% of their first down plays in the first half. All big fractions (and all much higher than Stanford).
Oregon did pass very successfully, so in that sense may have had the Stanford D looking pass more than run. However, it wasn't a strategy so much as simply a matter of success.
Quote:6) … I hope the learning from this game is that it's OK to evolve the offense and use the strengths of the personnel without totally abandoning Stanford's identity.
Stanford's offense has evolved significantly over the years and some over the course of this season, though isn't the common narrative. Not all of these evolutions have been for the better, IMO, but have clearly happened. A few of the most blatant:
- Over the past few years Stanford has moved to largely operating out of the shotgun instead of heavily favoring the I.
- Over the past few years Stanford has moved to being more a zone blocking team and less man blocking.
- This year Stanford started off intending to rely primarily upon Love, and other backs, carrying most of the load. Now they have evolved into team that passes more than it runs (51%). In recent years that fraction was 43% (2017), 37% (2016), 34% (2015).
I am not sure that it is possible to go further along this route without abandoning what has been Stanford's identity.
In fact, that train may have already left the station. We're really more of a down-field-passing-run-to-keep-the-defense-honest offense right now.
While personally I am hoping that improved health and re-establishing coordination along the OL will get us back some of our identity, I guess I don't care if we win with a deep-ball happy offense.
Quote:7) ... I think I counted only two sacks (maybe three).
Stanford had 4 sacks of Herbert for 28 yards.
Oregon had 2 sacks of Costello for 8 yards.
Quote:9) ... The way he is now being used is ... destroying his draft stock.
I have been wondering about this, or at least whether the drop in his productivity might do this.
The NFL clearly doesn't draft players purely based upon their college stats but in many cases on what they imagine a player could become.
With Love, it is already clear to NFL scouts he can have a big season and threaten a TD on any play, so doing that over and over by itself probably won't help much. This year he is showing he can pass protect much better, which might be key for a third-down back as many seem to have pegged him.
I guess the dangers are a general lack of hype, and allowing for the idea to be planted that he may have lost his special burst.