The CardBoard
Nunes - 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: Nunes (/thread-3692.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Re: Nunes - yvonne - 09-01-2012

Nunes. It's Portuguese, not Spanish.

Re: Nunes - oman - 09-01-2012

Great point.  Rep given.


Re: Nunes - JohnR34231 - 09-01-2012

I think Nunes performance was a good news/bad news thing.

The good news is that it looks like he is capable of running the offense without making a lot of egregious mistakes.

The bad news is that unless we get dramatically better play out of the rest of the team, he's going to have to do a lot more than that if we are to have the kind of season we are hoping for.

It will be interesting to see how much we improve (we will improve, won't we?) when we meet Duke.

P.S. Funny comment on the "other" board. Jordan Williamson's performance last night was referred to as the "Shaw-shank Redemption".

Re: Nunes - KartyFan - 09-01-2012

Agree 100% with garvin, well said.

I don't think any of us can pretend to know better than Shaw which QB should be playing. But hey, it's a message board!

Re: Nunes - pcgoode - 09-01-2012

Nunes didn't do too badly for a first start.  I also think there are going to be some growing pains with the O line. The big disappointment was the front seven.  They were ok in the first quarter, and then completely ineffective in the second and third quarters. They looked a lot better in the fourth quarter. If the Card are going to win more than six games this year, they will have to put up a much more consistent and effective effort. 

Re: Nunes - yvonne - 09-01-2012

I don't have any problem at all with Nunes. He did what he needed to.

I'm angry at the defense because they were touted as being good.

Re: Nunes - oman - 09-01-2012

(09-01-2012, 09:06 AM)Yvonne link Wrote:I don't have any problem at all with Nunes. He did what he needed to.

I'm angry at the defense because they were touted as being good.

This opinion makes more and more sense to me.  Not so much because of how it may reflect on the defenses overall quality, which I still think is good, but more of how it may have affected Nunes and the offense and the number of snaps they got.



Re: Nunes - stanfan - 09-01-2012

Nunes did a fine job for his first start.  On offense, he principal problem was the O line.  It's a new group and there was a lot of rotation.  Basically, the O line play was very poor.  To do what Stanford likes to do, run power, we have to have dominant O line play.  We were at the other end of the spectrum.  We got stuffed in key situations running power.  If that doesn't change, we are in for a very long season.  On the other side of the ball, it was lousy play by the D line...not enough pressure.  Thank goodness for Usua and Lancaster.  They finally got the crew to wake up.

Re: Nunes - Hurlburt88 - 09-01-2012

While definitely shaken by last night, improvement in 2 key areas is definitely possible.

1)  blocking:  Getting Hewitt and Meinken back, plus finalizing the OL will help.  I am cautiously optimistic
2)  Safety play:  my biggest concern.  Feel like we may see some moves here . . . but we'll see

Re: Nunes - biggles95 - 09-01-2012

Stanfan has no idea what he's talking about, Josh played pretty well for his first start all things considered.  He made several good pre snap reads and threw a great TD pass to Drew Terrell.  The O-line needs to improve on its power run blocking and the secondary needs to get alot better very quickly in preperation for the University of South Central's Draco Malfoy/Woods duo.

Re: Nunes - CowboyIndian - 09-01-2012

(09-01-2012, 11:19 AM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:While definitely shaken by last night, improvement in 2 key areas is definitely possible.

1)  blocking:  Getting Hewitt and Meinken back, plus finalizing the OL will help.

I thought Meinken was out for the year

Meinken - JohnR34231 - 09-01-2012

The last I heard was that while he wasn't out for the season, he was going to miss so much of it that he was considering redshirting.
Never heard what the final determination on that was, but I think the bottom line is don't expect him back any time soon.



Re: Nunes - stan01 - 09-01-2012

(09-01-2012, 11:19 AM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:2)  Safety play:  my biggest concern.  Feel like we may see some moves here . . . but we'll see

Both true freshmen safeties played at times last night.  With the poor safety play, I especially expect Zach Hoffpauir to see a lot of playing time this year.

Re: Nunes - unclechuck - 09-01-2012

(09-01-2012, 08:36 AM)garvin link Wrote:I was appalled by last night's game. But I don't think Josh Nunes played badly. He didn't have Andrew Luck's authority to create his own game plan out there; he had to run the plays David Shaw called. He didn't make any bad mistakes, and the small ones were certainly nothing you wouldn't expect from a guy taking his first meaningful snaps in D-1 football.

He completed 61 percent of his passes and that jumps to near 70 if you deduct the drops. His one or two deep throws had distance, mustard and accuracy. Shaw just needs to unleash him a little bit.

Like optimistic, I concur completely. TD to Terrell was beautiful. If Montgomery holds on  to the long ball we'd all be commenting about the two nice TD passes while modestly disappointed in the run game & defense.

A related point: in the Pac12 pregame show Neuheisel, who recruited them both, profiled Nunes and Nottingham and specifically mentioned Nunes big arm as contrasted with Nottingham's ability with the touch and intermediate pass. Huh? This is just the opposite of the prevalent view on this board. Any insights?

For those of you who can't get the P12Net my condolences. Besides the games of course, Neuheisel is so much better than, say, Lou & Mark. Its been a pleasant surprise. Some of the other guys still have room for improvement, but Rick seems to have found a pretty good fit.

Re: Nunes - stanfan - 09-01-2012

Biggles95.  You misunderstood my post to start this thread.  The smiley face at the end of the post means it was a jest.  I made the post right after Josh threw his beautiful touchdown pass to Drew T and had led Stanford on two good scoring drives.  I was joshing the people on this Board who said the choice of Nunes over Nottingham was a bad decision by Shaw.  As I noted in a later post in  response to people criticizing Nunes, I thought he played very well in his first start.  Line play, not QB, was the problem.

Re: Nunes - scorecard - 09-02-2012

I thought Nunes actually played decently as well.  The unfortunate drop by Montgomery made us sweat that game a lot longer than we needed to.  I think we have been spoiled by seeing Luck and his amazing accuracy as well as leading the receiver perfectly.  Nunes generally threw pretty good balls overall.  Well, except for almost anything directed to Ertz.  Ertz made 2 absolutely amazing catches (a diving snag of a ball that was gunned a bit high and wide, and the 1 handed grab of the ball behind him), but the one that was glaring was the 3rd down in the 4th quarter in the red zone where if Nunes waited just a little longer for Ertz to come open behind the linebacker, it's an easy touchdown.  Instead, he fired a ball so fast that I don't know if anyone could have caught it even if they were open.  Hopefully, that is just first game jitters, and that timing and touch gets worked out.  And hopefully a couple less balls batted down as well.

The other part that I felt was missing on third down was the threat of the running QB -- there were so many times when Luck would just bust out of the pocket and squeeze out the extra yard needed for a first down.  Wow, I miss that guy.  I know it is just a pipe dream, but can you imagine what this year would have been like if Luck, Martin, and Decastro had all stayed for one more year?  And they all had eligibility as well.  Sigh...

Re: Nunes - teejers1 - 09-03-2012

You all must have watched a different game than I did Friday night.  Specifically,

1.  Nunes was not good, or even "fine."  The YPA stat was awful, he threw too many bad balls (even the bomb to Montgomery was underthrown, though Ty should have hauled it in), and he didn't ever look to even threaten to tuck and run.  At best, I would say Nunes was "okay," but only because I think the "dink and dunk" play calling was crappy.

2.  The defense was good to very good.  I don't get why people are bitching about a team that held SJSU to under 300 yards and 17 points, AND they came up h-u-g-e in Q4 when I, for one, was certain that SJSU would score the go-ahead points and leave Stanford Stadium with a W.  And if you factor in the fact that this defense was on the field WAY MORE than Cardinal defenses of the last few seasons, and I think it is very easy to give this unit an A- (B+ at worst). 

The problem is on offense.  And if that $hit doesn't get fixed - and soon - Stanford is staring at a losing season (a prospect I thought unfathomable going into Friday night).  I'm already in the "just eke out a W, any kind of W" mode - which is not where I expected to be until Week 3.

Re: Nunes - StannyBoy - 09-03-2012

the question is if Nunes doesn't improve on the last game does Shaw throw Nottingham to the wolves when SC comes to town?

Re: Nunes - fullmetal - 09-03-2012

I would expect Nottingham to go in halfway through the $C game if Nunes isn't getting it done.  But it looks like the weak link here right now is the OL blocking, and if that's not fixed, ain't no one goin' nowhere.

I have faith that the Stanford OL will figure things out for Duke, and then buoyed by confidence, hold their own against $C.

Re: Nunes - dabigv13 - 09-03-2012

There is no way Nottingham plays against USC unless Nunes is hurt. Shaw would never pull the plug on his chosen QB unless the season really was going down the tubes. Game 6 at the earliest.