The CardBoard
Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: The CARDboard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Thread: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 (/showthread.php?tid=17142)



Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - thunder_chik - 01-08-2019

Just out.  USA Today top 25 for next season has Stanford at #18.  UW #9, Ducks #11, UDFG #13, Toejams #15.  Well, it's nice to think we're in the top 25 even this early on.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - BostonCard - 01-09-2019

I’m surprised.

BC


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - slide - 01-09-2019

surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - JohnR34231 - 01-09-2019

(01-09-2019, 05:24 AM)slide Wrote:  surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.

Yeah, probably a little on the optimistic side.
Of course, in 2020 we will probably have to break in a new QB and that will make things a little dicey also.
Hopefully we won't be looking back wistfully on 2018.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - OutsiderFan - 01-09-2019

(01-09-2019, 05:54 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:  
(01-09-2019, 05:24 AM)slide Wrote:  surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.

Yeah, probably a little on the optimistic side.
Of course, in 2020 we will probably have to break in a new QB and that will make things a little dicey also.
Hopefully we won't be looking back wistfully on 2018.

There are legions of examples of first time starting QBs doing fantastic in college football. Breaking in a new QB should NOT be an issue in today's football.  If it is, coaches need to be flogged.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - JohnR34231 - 01-09-2019

(01-09-2019, 06:45 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  
(01-09-2019, 05:54 AM)JohnR34231 Wrote:  
(01-09-2019, 05:24 AM)slide Wrote:  surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.

Yeah, probably a little on the optimistic side.
Of course, in 2020 we will probably have to break in a new QB and that will make things a little dicey also.
Hopefully we won't be looking back wistfully on 2018.

There are legions of examples of first time starting QBs doing fantastic in college football. Breaking in a new QB should NOT be an issue in today's football.  If it is, coaches need to be flogged.

Given what you see on the Stanford roster (now and in the future) do you think QB in 2020 won't be any sort of a problem?
If you do, I sure hope you are right.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - BostonCard - 01-09-2019

(01-09-2019, 06:45 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  There are legions of examples of first time starting QBs doing fantastic in college football. Breaking in a new QB should NOT be an issue in today's football.  If it is, coaches need to be flogged.

Yes, there are plenty of examples of new QB's doing well, most notably Clemson's Trevor Lawrence this year.  But for every Trevor Lawrence out there, there are legions of QB's who struggled their first year at QB.

Look at the difference between any of our recent QB's redshirt freshman season (Luck, Hogan, and Costello) and their subsequent seasons and you can see they improve dramatically over time.

And lots of first time QBs struggle, no matter the team.  JT Daniels, Chase Garbers, and Dorian Thompson-Robinson were all first year QB's, and all struggled mightily this year (they had the three lowest PERs in the Pac-12); I don't think Wilcox, Kelley, and Helton should be flogged for it, though.  Costello, Tate, Herbert, Browning, and Wilkins were all returning starters, and while Minshew was not a returning starter, he was a fifth year senior.  Those were your top QB's in the conference. Experience helps at the QB position.

Just because you can succeed as an inexperienced QB doesn't mean that mean that the lack of success of an inexperienced QB is indicative of a poor coach.

BC


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - Treebound - 01-09-2019

Mark me as being in favor of a new QB coach/Offensive Coordinator.  It's time for Tavita to get some experience at another program (I do like him and think this would be highly beneficial for his career path) and it's time for us to take our QB coaching and play calling a level or two up with some fresh perspective.  

My hope is that Mills is working hard to be in the best shape possible and ready to step in next year for some snaps.    Yes, TC, you can say he's fragile, but I think he has high upside if we can protect him and keep the injury bug in check.  

As for our schedule, yes it's tough, but it's our odd year home schedule so color me optimistic that things bounce our way more in 2019 vs 2018.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - OutsiderFan - 01-09-2019

(01-09-2019, 10:19 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  
(01-09-2019, 06:45 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote:  There are legions of examples of first time starting QBs doing fantastic in college football. Breaking in a new QB should NOT be an issue in today's football.  If it is, coaches need to be flogged.

Yes, there are plenty of examples of new QB's doing well, most notably Clemson's Trevor Lawrence this year.  But for every Trevor Lawrence out there, there are legions of QB's who struggled their first year at QB.

Look at the difference between any of our recent QB's redshirt freshman season (Luck, Hogan, and Costello) and their subsequent seasons and you can see they improve dramatically over time.

And lots of first time QBs struggle, no matter the team.  JT Daniels, Chase Garbers, and Dorian Thompson-Robinson were all first year QB's, and all struggled mightily this year (they had the three lowest PERs in the Pac-12); I don't think Wilcox, Kelley, and Helton should be flogged for it, though.  Costello, Tate, Herbert, Browning, and Wilkins were all returning starters, and while Minshew was not a returning starter, he was a fifth year senior.  Those were your top QB's in the conference. Experience helps at the QB position.

Just because you can succeed as an inexperienced QB doesn't mean that mean that the lack of success of an inexperienced QB is indicative of a poor coach.

BC

Big difference - usually - between True Frosh and others.  RS Frosh have routinely played well in their first year as a starter.  KJ Costello, Andrew Luck, and Kevin Hogan are just such Stanford examples.  And many programs get fine performance out of Sophs, Juniors, and Seniors as first time starters. If Mills or West can't step in and perform well in 2020, there is a problem with some combination of development, talent evaluation, or scheme being too complicated. QBs in their 3rd and 4th years in the program should not struggle to be competent college players.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - BostonCard - 01-09-2019

I looked at all the QB's who were in the Pac-12 for more than one season since 2009, where the data at cfbstats starts.  On average a QB in his last season had a pass efficiency rating 9 points higher than in his first year 146 versus 137.  Here are some of the biggest improvements:

   Name                Team       first_yr first_PER last_yr last_PER improvement
   <chr>               <chr>         <dbl>     <dbl>   <dbl>    <dbl>       <dbl>
 1 Marshall Lobbestael Wash St        2009      80.5    2011     138.        57.9
 2 Jared Goff          California     2013     123.     2015     161.        38.4
 3 Connor Halliday     Wash St        2012     115.     2014     145.        30.5
 4 Matt Barkley        USC            2009     131.     2012     158.        26.2
 5 Andrew Luck         Stanford       2009     143.     2011     170.        26.2
 6 Kevin Prince        UCLA           2009     115.     2011     135.        19.9
 7 Kevin Hogan         Stanford       2013     152.     2015     171.        19.4
 8 Marcus Mariota      Oregon         2012     163.     2014     182.        18.5
 9 Nick Foles          Arizona        2009     127.     2011     146.        18.3
10 Anu Solomon         Arizona        2014     131.     2015     147.        16.2

BC


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - CardinalSagehen - 01-10-2019

(01-09-2019, 12:57 AM)BostonCard Wrote:  I’m surprised.

BC

Perhaps less surprisingly, Stanford does not figure at all in ESPN’s version of the “way too early” 2019 rankings. 

http://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/25695788/espn-college-football-way-too-early-top-25-2019


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - Mick - 01-10-2019

(01-09-2019, 05:24 AM)slide Wrote:  surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.

Agreed, even with KJ Costello.  Terry used to do an interesting analysis of the correlation between returning starters and season's success.  I don't think it bodes particularly well for us.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - bbm233 - 01-10-2019

(01-10-2019, 07:38 AM)Mick Wrote:  
(01-09-2019, 05:24 AM)slide Wrote:  surprised as well.  '19 is going to be a tough year for Stanford based on schedule and losses of offensive talent.

Agreed, even with KJ Costello.  Terry used to do an interesting analysis of the correlation between returning starters and season's success.  I don't think it bodes particularly well for us.

these lists are all about reputation, since for instance, UW is losing 10 of 11 starters on defense, along with Browning and Gaskin, yet appears to be the top Pac 12 team heading into next year. Eason (Georgia transfer) is probably an upgrade at QB, but BBK, Gaines, Bryant, Rapp et al is a lot to replace. Unfortunately, I can't envision any Pac 12 team that will make waves nationally in 2019.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - SamuelMcF - 01-10-2019

(01-10-2019, 10:53 AM)bbm233 Wrote:  Unfortunately, I can't envision any Pac 12 team that will make waves nationally in 2019.

If Oregon actually plays well, given all their returning talent I can see it. 10 starters (most importantly, Herbert and the entire OL) return on offense and 8 on defense. Utah also has nearly everyone returning, but they always find a way to screw it up late in the season. It's become a meme among their fans on reddit.


RE: Way too early football top 25 for 2019 - BostonCard - 01-10-2019

(01-10-2019, 11:17 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote:  
(01-10-2019, 10:53 AM)bbm233 Wrote:  Unfortunately, I can't envision any Pac 12 team that will make waves nationally in 2019.

If Oregon actually plays well, given all their returning talent I can see it. 10 starters (most importantly, Herbert and the entire OL) return on offense and 8 on defense. Utah also has nearly everyone returning, but they always find a way to screw it up late in the season. It's become a meme among their fans on reddit.

That is what I was most surprised about.  I thought Oregon should be higher, UW, Stanford and SC lower (the latter two unranked).

BC