David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - 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: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... (/thread-16520.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: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... (/thread-16520.html)
Pages:
1
2
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Goose - 10-01-2018
(10-01-2018, 12:43 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:I am not positive, but I think the hurry up was aimed at not letting ND substitute. We thought we had some kind of personnel advantage that we wanted to preserve. That is the only thing that makes any sense to me. Didn't work out that way though.(10-01-2018, 12:22 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I think they made some play-calling mistakes on that last drive of the first half.
Can you elaborate? I thought it was odd for them to be going into hurry up mode with 2 mins left when at midfield. They acted like they had a sense of urgency that they didn't really have, that would ensure ND got the ball back with plenty of time to score if they didn't get the next first down. This is exactly what happened.
If Stanford scored on the final drive of the half, or at least doesn't let ND score, does that change anything in terms of the W-L outcome? Probably not, but it likely is one that would make Stanford look less flattened.
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - Snorlax94 - 10-01-2018
(10-01-2018, 12:43 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote:Shaw critical of his before-the-half playcalling. I tried to jump it to the 1m mark, but it didn't work in the embed, so you can listen to the whole thing or jump to 1m mark to hear his comments on that last drive before halftime.(10-01-2018, 12:22 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: I think they made some play-calling mistakes on that last drive of the first half.
Can you elaborate? I thought it was odd for them to be going into hurry up mode with 2 mins left when at midfield. They acted like they had a sense of urgency that they didn't really have, that would ensure ND got the ball back with plenty of time to score if they didn't get the next first down. This is exactly what happened.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34nphV1zRts&t=1m0s
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - towen883 - 10-01-2018
I think the turning point was the colossal screwup trying to down the punt on the 1 yard line. If we successfully start ND out there, they must be conservative, or maybe even we get a pick. A lot of our wins have come by a timely turnover. The whole game changes if we stop them deep.
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - CTcard - 10-03-2018
(10-01-2018, 02:23 PM)Snorlax94 Wrote: Shaw critical of his before-the-half playcalling. I tried to jump it to the 1m mark, but it didn't work in the embed, so you can listen to the whole thing or jump to 1m mark to hear his comments on that last drive before halftime.
There is a lot of interesting stuff here that I am surprised has not received a lot more discussion on the board. [Though I was away from the web for several days and haven't seen all the post game discussion.]
First of all, what we did towards the end of the half was very un-Stanford and un-Shaw like. And it ended up exactly as Shaw fears.
We got the ball back with 3:11 left on our own 20. Score tied 14-14.
A typical Stanford move at this point would be to carefully try to move the ball down the field, but with priority #1 to run the clock and keep the opponent from having a decent chance to score again.
That might not be quite possible from the 20, but after the first pass to Parkingon across midfield the situation was right in the careful-Stanford wheelhouse. I would have expected Stanford to run the clock each play and call a mixture of runs and safe passes.
Instead we go to the hurry up, throw every play, and after two incompletions, punt and mess up the downing of the ball inside the 5. und scores to take the lead.
That's so unShaw-like that I figured he had to be beating himself up over it. Looks like he was.
The next interesting tidbit of just what play was called on third down. Shaw notes that they tried for something overly aggressive that they wouldn't normally do. The play that unfolded on third down was a WR screen to Wilson with no blocking at all. However, that was clearly a checkdown. The primary call looked like it was a deep ball to either JJAW or Smith who ran crossing routes on the left side. Smith in particular was open early but it looked like there was likely a safety over the top outside of the TV frame. The other annoying thing is that Wilson was originally uncovered and if he had been the primary target it appears he would have had no trouble going for a first down. As it unfolded, the MLB had plenty of time to come over and crush him.
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - OutsiderFan - 10-03-2018
I commented similarly on the last drive of half play calling in another thread.
The Wilson throw was painful to see unfold. He was totally wide open and a quick throw easily gets the first down. But Costello never should have thrown the ball at the point he did. It was way too late. He would have been better served running to the outside and making the LB choose between himself and covering Wilson. The downed punt flub was quite a bad omen for things to come.
RE: David Shaw won't discuss, but we will... - CTcard - 10-03-2018
(10-03-2018, 07:01 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: The Wilson throw was painful to see unfold. He was totally wide open and a quick throw easily gets the first down. But Costello never should have thrown the ball at the point he did. It was way too late. He would have been better served running to the outside and making the LB choose between himself and covering Wilson. The downed punt flub was quite a bad omen for things to come.
Well, Wilson was the check down on the play, so there was no way he was going to get a quick throw.
Costello had no running lane to the left (Wilson's side).
If Costello could run, it appears he might have made a first down running to the other side - it would have required Love to make an effective block.
However, I don't think we're going to see Costello doing any running for awhile.