Shaw on Chryst... - Printable Version

Shaw on Chryst... - 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: Shaw on Chryst... (/thread-14687.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - winflop - 10-28-2017

(10-27-2017, 05:17 PM)SpokaneLee link Wrote:[quote author=RobinsonsHeave link=topic=17799.msg208745#msg208745 date=1509144142] Secondly, when asked during the halftime interview if Costello was going to play in the second half, Shaw had a weird smirk on his face.

When you see that David Shaw weird smirk, dont you just want to knock his block off?
[/quote]

Never. Take your trolling to the WSU board please

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - cardcrimson - 10-28-2017

[Image: 17073126_Alt04?wid=520&hei=520&fmt=pjpeg]

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Hurlburt88 - 10-28-2017

Speculating . . .

I suspect Shaw intended to get KJ in during the 1st half, but didn't for whatever momentum/mental confidence reason.Â Then wanted to stick in the 2nd half with "best prepped" player.Â I do expect to see KJ in first half of WSU game, and whoever handles the snow best from there on out.Â We'll see . . .

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - ChicagoCard - 10-28-2017

[Image: knocksock.jpg]

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - lex24 - 10-28-2017

No, but when I see WSUs asbergers inflicted coach publicly ream his players, I want to vomit. Maybe he needs places to lock them up.

(10-27-2017, 05:17 PM)SpokaneLee link Wrote:[quote author=RobinsonsHeave link=topic=17799.msg208745#msg208745 date=1509144142] Secondly, when asked during the halftime interview if Costello was going to play in the second half, Shaw had a weird smirk on his face.

When you see that David Shaw weird smirk, dont you just want to knock his block off?
[/quote]

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - ChicagoCard - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 09:59 AM)lex24 link Wrote:No, but when I see WSUs asbergers inflicted coach publicly ream his players, I want to vomit.

Exactly. Enough with the Shaw-as-smug trope which by now appears obviously to have been something contrived by Pacific Northwest fans resentful of Stanford having a pulse.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Goose - 10-28-2017

(10-27-2017, 11:18 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:But I think the problem with Chryst is not that he has a limited ceiling; it's that he very frequently plays below it.

Quote: But what we can't have is a guy who plays as badly as Chryst has played multiple times a season, because that will lose us games.
BC

Totally agree. Costello just needs to not totally suck to be an improvement over what we saw at SDSU and OSU from Chryst. Interesting to see which risk Shaw decides to take against WSU. I guess it is possible Costello can't get us into the correct play call, and that messes up our running game.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - BostonCard - 10-28-2017

Contra that, Love had his best running games against UCLA and ASU, the two games Costello played the most.Â Correlation does not equal causation, but it probably disproves the notion that Costellos LOS calls mess up our running game.

BC

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - washingtonismoney - 10-28-2017

I'm a bit skeptical Chryst gets the team into the right plays anyway. Like I distinctly remember Wedington getting two of those quick bubble-screen type plays against Oregon State in which the numbers and formation didn't favor him at all. I'm not sure what the alternative was there, but I'm skeptical it was worse than those foredoomed plays.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Goose - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 01:37 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:I'm a bit skeptical Chryst gets the team into the right plays anyway. Like I distinctly remember Wedington getting two of those quick bubble-screen type plays against Oregon State in which the numbers and formation didn't favor him at all. I'm not sure what the alternative was there, but I'm skeptical it was worse than those foredoomed plays.

Those bubble screens when you have two receivers and two defenders rely on making the inside defender miss. This play is predicated on the idea the defender has to run around the other defender and wide receiver who is blocking him. The defender can either go behind them or in front of them. If he goes behind, we probably get at least three yards, as he has given ground. If he goes in front, he may not get there in time and ends up chasing. In both cases, if he misses, we get a lot. On both of those Wedington plays, the defender went in front. There was no way Wedington could get away from him, because the ball just took way to long to get there. He needs to be running to the outside of the blocker right away. He couldn't because Chryst was way too slow getting the ball out. That play (at least may) works if you execute it right. Chryst didn't. Both times.
Oregon used to run this play a lot with a balanced 4 wide set. I often swore the receiver was moving forward before the snap, but it was just that the ball came out so fast. It is also helpful if the slot guy has run a few inside patterns and/or is being given a cushion, because then the defender may not/can't react up immediately. We didn't have those two advantages, but it is still a viable play.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Stymie - 10-28-2017

We are all wasting our breath and our time trying to get Coach Shaw to "'splain" his decisions, as he isÂ not a person who takes criticism constructively.Â My 40+ years of working life was dealing with people with much more responsibility than the coach of a successful second level football team.Â Shaw works for us as spectators, but that is because our expectaations are so low.Â If he were in charge of the Computer Science or Economics or Phiysics department at Stanford, expectations of "We're number 20!" would be failure.Â Think about it.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - lex24 - 10-28-2017

First, this has not been a second level football team under Shaw. Its been top 5 in wins, with three league championships in 6 years. Second, if he was in charge of a Computer ScienceÂ Department that historically was mediocre at best, then it would not be anything close to failure.

(10-28-2017, 06:05 PM)Stymie link Wrote:We are all wasting our breath and our time trying to get Coach Shaw to "'splain" his decisions, as he isÂ not a person who takes criticism constructively.Â My 40+ years of working life was dealing with people with much more responsibility than the coach of a successful second level football team.Â Shaw works for us as spectators, but that is because our expectaations are so low.Â If he were in charge of the Computer Science or Economics or Phiysics department at Stanford, expectations of "We're number 20!" would be failure.Â Think about it.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Goose - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 06:18 PM)lex24 link Wrote:Second, if he was in charge of a Computer ScienceÂ Department that historically was mediocre at best

No so sure you want to go there. Anyway, departments aren't scored like football games. Too subjective to compare in any case. Also, different constraints. The NCAA doesn't limit number of faculty or compensation thereof.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - stupac2 - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 06:18 PM)lex24 link Wrote:First, this has not been a second level football team under Shaw. Its been top 5 in wins, with three league championships in 6 years. Second, if he was in charge of a Computer ScienceÂ Department that historically was mediocre at best, then it would not be anything close to failure.

[quote author=Stymie link=topic=17799.msg208967#msg208967 date=1509239153]
We are all wasting our breath and our time trying to get Coach Shaw to "'splain" his decisions, as he isÂ not a person who takes criticism constructively.Â My 40+ years of working life was dealing with people with much more responsibility than the coach of a successful second level football team.Â Shaw works for us as spectators, but that is because our expectaations are so low.Â If he were in charge of the Computer Science or Economics or Phiysics department at Stanford, expectations of "We're number 20!" would be failure.Â Think about it.

[/quote]

I assume he used "second-level" to mean "not NFL". But overall the point is pretty ridiculous, Stanford can just buy whatever Comp Sci professor it wants, we can't do that with football players. And the results are, overall, still top 5 under Shaw.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Stymie - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 06:18 PM)lex24 link Wrote:First, this has not been a second level football team under Shaw.

You miss my point, Lex.Â All NCAAF football is the second level, from Alabama to Vassar.Â The NFL is the first level and the difference from the NCAAF is massive.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - BostonCard - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 07:45 PM)Stymie link Wrote:[quote author=lex24 link=topic=17799.msg208968#msg208968 date=1509239931]
First, this has not been a second level football team under Shaw.

You miss my point, Lex.Â All NCAAF football is the second level, from Alabama to Vassar.Â The NFL is the first level and the difference from the NCAAF is massive.
[/quote]

Thanks for the clarification; I had read it much like lex did.

BC

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - washingtonismoney - 10-28-2017

(10-28-2017, 07:45 PM)Stymie link Wrote:You miss my point, Lex.Â All NCAAF football is the second level, from Alabama to Vassar.Â The NFL is the first level and the difference from the NCAAF is massive.

Meh. People say this all the time. But I'm not overly impressed by NFL head coaches. If people think Shaw is overly dogmatic and conservative, check out an NFL coach.

That's just bias speaking of course. Actual factual college coaches who go to the NFL do just fine. Pete Carroll went from being a dominant college football coach to leading a perennial contender in Seattle. Harbaugh is a great college coach and a great pro coach. Relatively mediocre college coaches like Doug Marrone or Dirk Koetter end up holding their own in the pros.

Of course sometimes coaches blow up. Nick Saban didn't do so hot in Miami, but it was a small sample -- and his lack of success has more to do with Dolphins' doctors not clearing Drew Brees than anything else. Bobby Petrino is a quitter. But of course any time you hire coaches in any sport, the default is failure. That some college coaches fail hardly shows anything.

Meanwhile pro coaches routinely fail in college. Jim Mora was a mediocre NFL coach and has proved to be so-so as UCLA head coach. Lovie Smith is failing at Illinois. Brian Schottenheimer is a curse word in Georgia. If there's some special genius that the pro coaches have, owing to the (allegedly) hypercompetitive environment of the NFL, it hasn't translated to college. In fact, my belief is that no institution better represents self-satisfaction and smugness than the NFL.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - lex24 - 10-28-2017

I just think they are completely different games.

(10-28-2017, 07:52 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=Stymie link=topic=17799.msg208998#msg208998 date=1509245112]

You miss my point, Lex.Â All NCAAF football is the second level, from Alabama to Vassar.Â The NFL is the first level and the difference from the NCAAF is massive.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - Mick - 10-29-2017

(10-27-2017, 09:40 AM)Goose link Wrote:I think that we didn't see Costello (assuming there is no injury/other reason) because Shaw was quite aware that if he pulled Chryst, it was going to be real hard to trot him out as the starter against WSU. In the previous games that Costello got a few series, it was clear that that was the plan. It wasn't because Chryst was playing poorly. When we didn't see Costello in the first half, that pretty much took away the "planned few series" option. At that point, if he did come in it was to replace Chryst because Chryst frankly stunk (or worse). At that point, I would argue, Chryst would become Ryan Burns II. If Costello wins the game he would have to be the new starter. No other action would be credible with the players (or the fans, if that matters). Shaw really didn't want to do that, because he apparently is convinced that Chryst is a better choice. Why, I don't know.
Last night, the offense had lots of problems. When things aren't going well, you want your starting QB to rise to the challenge. I think it is fair to say, at this point, that Chryst gets worse when challenged, not better. As I have said previously, Chryst has "ownage" on Oregon, and he knows it. He played great against them, because he really didn't need to. However, when he needs to step up, it seems he goes the opposite direction. This isn't a "one time" event any more. SDSU was similar. It seems unlikely to get better.
To be honest, I am not sure Costello would have been any better. We didn't get to find out. If everything goes according to "plan" against WSU, Chryst will be fine. If the receiver that is supposed to be open is open, Chryst can usually complete the pass, if he isn't already rattled. After the first 3rd and 8, or the first bad play, we could be in trouble.

With respect, I think it's the exact opposite.Â I think Stanford's offense was playing so poorly as a team, Shaw may have felt that Costello wouldn't have been enough to overcome the poor play of the other 10.Â The blocking was bad, the routes were poor, the slowness of our running backs was incomprehensible -- although IMHO, the RBs were trying to echo Bryce Love's style without his talent.Â This was a hot messy mess all the way around.Â If Shaw puts in Costello, and they lose to OSU when the other ten are having their worst game of the year, then it's difficult for Shaw to put him back in later.

I think the odds of seeing Costello as the starter against Washington, Washington State, C.a.l, ND are stratospherically high right now.

Re: Shaw on Chryst... - stupac2 - 10-29-2017

(10-29-2017, 08:22 AM)Mick link Wrote:I think the odds of seeing Costello as the starter against Washington, Washington State, C.a.l, ND are stratospherically high right now.

I keep going back and forth on this. You might be right about why Costello didn't enter the game, but the way it played out makes me think that either Chryst is 100% likely to start against WSU, or 0% likely. I just have no idea which...