The CardBoard
Shaw’s dilemma - 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’s dilemma (/thread-18133.html)

Pages: 1 2

Shaw’s dilemma - lex24 - 09-14-2019

The success that Harbaugh started and Shaw expanded was predicated on a Big Ten philosophy. Defense first. A ball control offense, behind a strong offensive line. Physical power football. Stop the run on defense. Win with the run on offense.

It wasn’t exciting. But it was efficient. Think of the ‘13 game vs Oregon. A game plan executed to perfection. Total dominance at the LOS. Oregon’s offense hardly saw the field.

Stanford cannot do that anymore. And they haven’t seemed to recruit to that philosophy the last few years.

Now they have to figure out a way to win playing a more wide open style that they are not equipped to do.

Going forward Shaw has to figure out if he wants to change- and join the spread revolution. Or go back to trying to build physically dominant teams and play a style that is different from the rest.

What they can’t do is “half and half”. That is a recipe for 3-9.

BTW- the Bay Area team that is employing Stanford’s former model is UCB. Wilcox has taken a soft team that tried to win 51-48 and turned them into a physical group that relies on power running and a terrific defense. If they get any QB play, they will be very good.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - yvonne - 09-14-2019

Stanford could have continued that style if it had recruited for it. The past few years, the offensive recruiting emphasis has been on receivers, not on OL and big running backs.

As for the switch between Stanford and Cal, Dave Lombardi wrote about that in the Athletic. You can see the discussion on this thread: https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=18119

The Athletic presents old-fashioned sportswriting like Sports Illustrated did. It's well worth a subscription.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - d4cohn - 09-14-2019

Can we see the Bears match Shaw's worst season in 9 years as HC (8-5) before
we praise Cal and Wilcox too much? Yes, the win against UW in Seattle was nice, but they
clearly benefited from playing in an empty stadium after a multi-hour rain delay.
Last time I watched Cal play, they were finishing up the Cheez-it Bowl embarrassment
and playing totally unwatchable offensive football.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - lex24 - 09-14-2019

Fine. My point, however, was the change in philosophy. UCB has improved dramatically under Wilcox. They were a joke under Dykes.

Now I’m not sure that translates to 9-4. Because they don’t have a viable QB. But the arrow is up. And the style is what propelled Stanford.


(09-14-2019, 11:22 AM)d4cohn Wrote:  Can we see the Bears match Shaw's worst season in 9 years as HC (8-5) before
we praise Cal and Wilcox too much? Yes, the win against UW in Seattle was nice, but they
clearly benefited from playing in an empty stadium after a multi-hour rain delay.
Last time I watched Cal play, they were finishing up the Cheez-it Bowl embarrassment
and playing totally unwatchable offensive football.
Read that article. I had reached Lombardi ‘s conclusion beforehand. And you are right on the Athletic. Well worth it.

(09-14-2019, 11:08 AM)yvonne Wrote:  Stanford could have continued that style if it had recruited for it. The past few years, the offensive recruiting emphasis has been on receivers, not on OL and big running backs.

As for the switch between Stanford and Cal, Dave Lombardi wrote about that in the Athletic. You can see the discussion on this thread: https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=18119

The Athletic presents old-fashioned sportswriting like Sports Illustrated did. It's well worth a subscription.


RE: Shaw’s dilemma - slide - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 10:48 AM)lex24 Wrote:  The success that Harbaugh started and Shaw expanded was predicated on a Big Ten philosophy. Defense first. A ball control offense, behind a strong offensive line. Physical power football. Stop the run on defense. Win with the run on offense.

It wasn’t exciting. But it was efficient. Think of the ‘13 game vs Oregon. A game plan executed to perfection. Total dominance at the LOS. Oregon’s offense hardly saw the field.

Stanford cannot do that anymore. And they haven’t seemed to recruit to that philosophy the last few years.

Now they have to figure out a way to win playing a more wide open style that they are not equipped to do.

Going forward Shaw has to figure out if he wants to change- and join the spread revolution. Or go back to trying to build physically dominant teams and play a style that is different from the rest.

What they can’t do is “half and half”. That is a recipe for 3-9.

BTW- the Bay Area team that is employing Stanford’s former model is UCB. Wilcox has taken a soft team that tried to win 51-48 and turned them into a physical group that relies on power running and a terrific defense. If they get any QB play, they will be very good.

nice post. not much to disagree with. big question is does Shaw want to work hard enough to reverese the program's long-term trendline. I'm not seeing it -- at least in terms of numbers of offers, timing of offers, use of in-home visits, use of official-visits, investments in the back end of the program. on those metrics, we lag D-1.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - qwerty49 - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 05:01 PM)slide Wrote:  
(09-14-2019, 10:48 AM)lex24 Wrote:  The success that Harbaugh started and Shaw expanded was predicated on a Big Ten philosophy. Defense first. A ball control offense, behind a strong offensive line. Physical power football. Stop the run on defense. Win with the run on offense.

It wasn’t exciting. But it was efficient. Think of the ‘13 game vs Oregon. A game plan executed to perfection. Total dominance at the LOS. Oregon’s offense hardly saw the field.

Stanford cannot do that anymore. And they haven’t seemed to recruit to that philosophy the last few years.

Now they have to figure out a way to win playing a more wide open style that they are not equipped to do.

Going forward Shaw has to figure out if he wants to change- and join the spread revolution. Or go back to trying to build physically dominant teams and play a style that is different from the rest.

What they can’t do is “half and half”. That is a recipe for 3-9.

BTW- the Bay Area team that is employing Stanford’s former model is UCB. Wilcox has taken a soft team that tried to win 51-48 and turned them into a physical group that relies on power running and a terrific defense. If they get any QB play, they will be very good.

nice post. not much to disagree with. big question is does Shaw want to work hard enough to reverese the program's long-term trendline. I'm not seeing it -- at least in terms of numbers of offers, timing of offers, use of in-home visits, use of official-visits, investments in the back end of the program. on those metrics, we lag D-1.

It's like the 12 steps. The first is recognition of the problem.

The concern I have is that while "we didn't execute" is meant mainly to motivate the players and keep their faith in the system, and that "we didn't prepare the team properly" is meant to deflect attention from our athletic shortcomings, that Shaw actually believes them to be the root cause.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - pcgoode - 09-14-2019

I have lost so much faith in Shaw and the rest of the coaching staff in the last two games. It seems like it has all come to a head this season - recruiting issues, injuries, style of offense, tackling, execution - it just seems like what used to be an excellent program has become a team with some very good pieces but one that just doesn’t deliver anymore.

I used to be a brobdingnagian fan of Shaw and it pains to say what I am about to say. I wonder how much Shaw is really motivated or equipped to lead a power five team at this stage of his career. He is a great spokesperson for the program, but it seems like he won’t make the wholesale changes that I think were needed a few years ago. I am not convinced at this stage that he sees that the game has changed fundamentally, and that what worked five years ago isn’t going to deliver PAC 12 Championships anymore.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - d4cohn - 09-14-2019

Someone posted on this board a bit back that HS football participation in California has declined,
and that the regional strengths in the Southeast and Midwest have become accentuated.

Yes, we are a national program recruiting nationally, but the guys in your backyard (California),
for a sport where you have to field 85 scholarship players alone, are most critical and the easiest
to get. Yes, we have had success getting prospects from the Southeast, but unless the student-athlete
has a real passion to play for Stanford, or with certain exceptions (Mills, Ryan Johnson etc.),
the best players in the Southeast are going to stay home and play for Clemson, Alabama, Georgia, LSU etc.

I don't think it is a coincidence that UCLA, with even more highly touted prospects than us,
is on its way quickly to an 0-3 start and getting embarrassed by Oklahoma on the field and
with fan attendance at the Rose Bowl.

Maybe the top California HS football prospects just do not stack up to their counterparts elsewhere anymore.
Also, I think Shaw recognizes that we need/have needed to change our offensive philosophy
(see how much we have thrown the ball and the way we have played offensively really since the Alamo
Bowl against TCU; the change is already/has happened).

The question is do we have the players to play Big 12 football, and can we get the players to play this style of ball
(more so on defense in the secondary than anything; see previous post regarding recruiting bases), because whether we like it or not,
Washington State, SC, UCLA, UA, UCF, TCU etc. are all playing this style of football.

Also, yes, I know, Coach Shaw and his staff are paid a lot of money to learn new "skills" in their coaching and adapt,
but look how tough it is for a person in a "regular" job (without the spotlight associated with CFB) to learn
new skills mid-career.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - cardcrimson - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 05:48 PM)d4cohn Wrote:  Someone posted on this board a bit back that HS football participation in California has declined,
and that the regional strengths in the Southeast and Midwest have become accentuated.

Yes, we are a national program recruiting nationally, but the guys in your backyard (California),
for a sport where you have to field 85 scholarship players alone, are most critical and the easiest
to get. Yes, we have had success getting prospects from the Southeast, but unless the student-athlete
has a real passion to play for Stanford, or with certain exceptions (Mills, Ryan Johnson etc.),
the best players in the Southeast are going to stay home and play for Clemson, Alabama, Georgia, LSU etc.

I don't think it is a coincidence that UCLA, with even more highly touted prospects than us,
is on its way quickly to an 0-3 start and getting embarrassed by Oklahoma on the field and
with fan attendance at the Rose Bowl.

Maybe the top California HS football prospects just do not stack up to their counterparts elsewhere anymore.
Also, I think Shaw recognizes that we need/have needed to change our offensive philosophy
(see how much we have thrown the ball and the way we have played offensively really since the Alamo
Bowl against TCU; the change is already/has happened).

The question is do we have the players to play Big 12 football, and can we get the players to play this style of ball
(more so on defense in the secondary than anything; see previous post regarding recruiting bases), because whether we like it or not,
Washington State, SC, UCLA, UA, UCF, TCU etc. are all playing this style of football.

Also, yes, I know, Coach Shaw and his staff are paid a lot of money to learn new "skills" in their coaching and adapt,
but look how tough it is for a person in a "regular" job (without the spotlight associated with CFB) to learn
new skills mid-career.

Learn new skills mid career? Are you kidding me? Good lord, look at what anybody has had to learn over the last 30 or 40 years. When I graduated from business school, the most important tool was an HP 12c calculator.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - BostonCard - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 05:29 PM)pcgoode Wrote:  I am not convinced at this stage that he sees that the game has changed fundamentally, and that what worked five years ago isn’t going to deliver PAC 12 Championships anymore.

That's an odd quote, because we are not doing what worked 5 years ago. I posted earlier that we never run power. Today we had 23 rushes and 49 passing attempts. Now you might say that we were down early. But our first drive was two passes and one rush. Our second drive was three passes. Our third drive was 1 rush and two passes. Our touchdown drive was three passes and three rushes. In 2014 we had 381 pass attempts and 477 rushes.

And maybe, as Lex points out, that's the problem. We had a formula that worked for us. It gave us an identity. It allowed us to recruit players who might not be valued by schools focused on tempo or air raids who might be a good fit for our system. It allowed us to chew up clock and keep our defense rested. Maybe it wasn't fun, but it seemed to work for many years.

What I'm not sure of is whether our move away from that is a cause or effect of our declining offense. Last year, it seemed like Shaw still wanted to run the ball, until it became clear that not only were we not good at it, but we were actually terrible at running the football, and decent at throwing the ball. So I think Shaw was adapting to the circumstances and changing our character out of necessity. The problem is that we aren't a great passing team either. So we seem to be throwing a bunch of crap up to see if anything sticks.

I really wish I had an answer here. Unlike the Teevens/Harris days, when the talent was so bad that it didn't matter what the hell we did, we would suck at it (for all the complaints of "shotgun draw", I don't think much else would have worked any better), I do think we have the talent on offense to be better. Costello has been talked about as an NFL quality player (even if he didn't show it today). Parkinson is an NFL quality player. We have receivers who I think could be good; they show flashes. The offensive line is a mess physically, but as others point out, it was serviceable today, considering. So, I think the pieces are there for success on offense, but I think we are going to need to find our way. The efficiency just isn't there, and I don't know if it is scheme (but if not this, what?) or coaching the players to play as a unit (the old whole < sum of its parts) or player development or what.

But I think it is facile to say Shaw hasn't changed his approach from 5 years ago, because what we actually see on the field is like night and day from 5 years ago. I just don't know if that is part of the problem, or a futile attempt at a solution.

BC

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - 81alum - 09-14-2019

Some of the doom and gloom is premature. Shaw deserves a chance to work us into a better place this season. He has shown the ability to change--just last year, once the O-line and Love's injuries ruined the running game and cost us several games, he shifted to the air and we got back on track. I fully expect he will shift strategies as required to maximize success with whatever handful of healthy bodies he has left.

All the criticism about whether he should shift to a spread offense or not is just silly. There is not that much wrong with his offensive philosophy--27 points should be more than enough to win a game. We have had excellent seasons when we averaged in the low 20s. For that matter, we have scored more points every week than the week before. So despite the ridiculously thin offensive line and spate of injuries we would be fine if the defense had been up to expectations.

But the defense has not been up to expectations, as the first half today and the second half against USC demonstrated.

Our run defense did not seem terrible until every warm blooded linebacker was injured.

But the consistent big problem is that our corners, who were expected to be a strength of the team, have turned into glaring weaknesses. We gave up 11.6 ypa today, we gave up 11.4 ypa last week. Yes, that is per ATTEMPT. Opposing coaches have spotted something terribly wrong in our secondary and are beating on it.

Now, if you were able to have any coach in the world on your team to help straighten out an underachieving secondary, who would you pick? Duane Akina. It may take time and therefore more losses, but they will get better. Hopefully it happens sooner rather than later.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - cardcrimson - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 06:51 PM)81alum Wrote:  Some of the doom and gloom is premature. Shaw deserves a chance to work us into a better place this season. He has shown the ability to change--just last year, once the O-line and Love's injuries ruined the running game and cost us several games, he shifted to the air and we got back on track. I fully expect he will shift strategies as required to maximize success with whatever handful of healthy bodies he has left.

All the criticism about whether he should shift to a spread offense or not is just silly. There is not that much wrong with his offensive philosophy--27 points should be more than enough to win a game. We have had excellent seasons when we averaged in the low 20s. For that matter, we have scored more points every week than the week before. So despite the ridiculously thin offensive line and spate of injuries we would be fine if the defense had been up to expectations.

But the defense has not been up to expectations, as the first half today and the second half against USC demonstrated.

Our run defense did not seem terrible until every warm blooded linebacker was injured.

But the consistent big problem is that our corners, who were expected to be a strength of the team, have turned into glaring weaknesses. We gave up 11.6 ypa today, we gave up 11.4 ypa last week. Yes, that is per ATTEMPT. Opposing coaches have spotted something terribly wrong in our secondary and are beating on it.

Now, if you were able to have any coach in the world on your team to help straighten out an underachieving secondary, who would you pick? Duane Akina. It may take time and therefore more losses, but they will get better. Hopefully it happens sooner rather than later.

Don't recall seeing any safety help over the top today. At all.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - SamuelMcF - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 06:51 PM)81alum Wrote:  Now, if you were able to have any coach in the world on your team to help straighten out an underachieving secondary, who would you pick? Duane Akina. It may take time and therefore more losses, but they will get better. Hopefully it happens sooner rather than later.

Akina has had exactly 1 NFL player drafted from his position group in the last 4 years. Our "safety" development (recruiting corners and switching them) has been...uh...not good.

I'd pick Jimmy Lake from UW every time. Or whoever is coaching the secondary at Cal.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - qwerty49 - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 07:01 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:  Don't recall seeing any safety help over the top today. At all.

This. Just as there are wrong angles in run support, there are wrong angles in pass coverage.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - Phogge - 09-14-2019

One safety is totally mismatched. Seems that after five years in the program he still is unsure of his assignments. One corner had an especially embarrassing day. We’ll have to see if that is an aberration. The other corner is inadequate and his replacement is a true freshman. None of the linebackers is an all star but Toohill plays hard. Reid and Fox are not showing the pressure that existed last year and Fox has disappeared.

Tackling remains an issue. This is puzzling in a D1 program. Coaching? Effort?

Projecting wins/losses at this point is pointless. Just have got to hit harder, lift more, recruit your ass off and keep your frickin chin up. Just improve week to week.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - chrisk - 09-14-2019

Last year, Stanford connected on big pass plays. This year the QBs haven’t hit on many. A lot can be attributed to the loss of JJ and other top receivers, but the QBs have not been sharp. Shaw has been harping on missing big plays in his post-game press conferences

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - cardcrimson - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 07:38 PM)chrisk Wrote:  Last year, Stanford connected on big pass plays. This year the QBs haven’t hit on many. A lot can be attributed to the loss of JJ and other top receivers, but the QBs have not been sharp. Shaw has been harping on missing big plays in his post-game press conferences

Of course. The game plan is perfect. The play calling fantastic. The recruiting exquisite. The players just aren't executing.

Wonder how long until the locker room is lost with comments like that.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - winflop - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 07:34 PM)qwerty49 Wrote:  
(09-14-2019, 07:01 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:  Don't recall seeing any safety help over the top today. At all.

This.  Just as there are wrong angles in run support, there are wrong angles in pass coverage.

And both of our safeties know the wrong angles well, compounded by being undersized.

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - yvonne - 09-14-2019

(09-14-2019, 07:49 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:  
(09-14-2019, 07:38 PM)chrisk Wrote:  Last year, Stanford connected on big pass plays.  This year the QBs haven’t hit on many.  A lot can be attributed to the loss of JJ and other top receivers, but the QBs have not been sharp.  Shaw has been harping on missing big plays in his post-game press conferences

Of course. The game plan is perfect. The play calling fantastic. The recruiting exquisite. The players just aren't executing.

Wonder how long until the locker room is lost with comments like that.

I think there's a big gap between "Stanford hasn't connect on big pass plays" and "The game plan is perfect, etc."

RE: Shaw’s dilemma - BostonCard - 09-15-2019

(09-14-2019, 07:49 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:  
(09-14-2019, 07:38 PM)chrisk Wrote:  Last year, Stanford connected on big pass plays.  This year the QBs haven’t hit on many.  A lot can be attributed to the loss of JJ and other top receivers, but the QBs have not been sharp.  Shaw has been harping on missing big plays in his post-game press conferences

Of course. The game plan is perfect. The play calling fantastic. The recruiting exquisite. The players just aren't executing.

Wonder how long until the locker room is lost with comments like that.

[Image: giphy.gif]

I mean, usually when a team gets beaten that profoundly, no single thing went wrong.  How about "The play calling sucked, and we couldn't execute it"