The CardBoard
Stolen identity - 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: Stolen identity (/thread-18177.html)


Stolen identity - lex24 - 09-21-2019

“I had been thinking about where we were as a program, and we weren’t going to beat Washington, Oregon, or USC for the elite athletes. Instead of playing 49-46 games, we needed to shorten the game.  We had to play small ball, like Stanford and Utah.  You can’t have your defense on the field for 40 minutes. It can’t sustain that.  There’s no reason (we) shouldn’t get those 6’4 ...Volleyball types, who can grow into their bodies and be offensive linemen, defensive ends, linebackers, tight-ends or even H-backs.  That’s[our] recruiting sweet spot.” (Source- East Bay Times. Jon Wiilner article 9/21/19))

That’s a comment from the guy that led the coaching search after Dykes was dumped, landing Wilcox.  Stanford went on its run with the “small ball” mentality. Physical grinding offense. Strong defense. Control the clock. Keep the uptempo high speed offenses off the field and “iced”. They lose rhythm.  Wilcox is trying to do that now. 

Stanford lost that identity. About 2 years ago. You saw it last year, with an unbalanced offense that had to rely on the pass to win. They have lost the ability, I think, to “shorten the game”. They now have to try to beat teams 49-46. And the teams they face are much better built to play that kind of game. Stanford will never be equipped to do that.

I watched a good part of SC-Utah. I read some comments on the brilliance of Harrell etc. Third string QB stepping in. And it was impressive as to how seamless the transition was. The QB was highly rated. In fact more so than the Frosh that carved up Stanford. But what stood out to me is the brilliance of the wideouts. Just athletically superior.  Stanford gets solid skill level guys. But not SC level.  (SCs defense also made big plays when it had to. And in the last 4 minutes, up a TD, SC was able to run out the clock- despite the fact that at one point late in the third they had minus 17 yards rushing. That was impressive). 

Recruiting is a big issue right now.  The numbers are down. The physical drop off, on both sides of the ball, is enormous. Stanford had been the bully on the beach. Kicking sand in the face of the pretty boys with their glamorous high speed offenses.  

They have lost that identity. And with it they have lost what gave them their edge during this run. 
I don’t know if they can get it back down the road. This year, it ain’t happening. So hopefully they can figure out how to win a few 49-46 games.

RE: Stolen identity - Phogge - 09-21-2019

The question right now is whether the new normal will be 6-6 or 8-4 or will the retreat be total.

RE: Stolen identity - Mick - 09-22-2019

(09-21-2019, 08:58 AM)lex24 Wrote:  “I had been thinking about where we were as a program, and we weren’t going to beat Washington, Oregon, or USC for the elite athletes. Instead of playing 49-46 games, we needed to shorten the game.  We had to play small ball, like Stanford and Utah.  You can’t have your defense on the field for 40 minutes. It can’t sustain that.  There’s no reason (we) shouldn’t get those 6’4 ...Volleyball types, who can grow into their bodies and be offensive linemen, defensive ends, linebackers, tight-ends or even H-backs.  That’s[our] recruiting sweet spot.” (Source- East Bay Times. Jon Wiilner article 9/21/19))

That’s a comment from the guy that led the coaching search after Dykes was dumped, landing Wilcox.  Stanford went on its run with the “small ball” mentality. Physical grinding offense. Strong defense. Control the clock. Keep the uptempo high speed offenses off the field and “iced”. They lose rhythm.  Wilcox is trying to do that now. 

Stanford lost that identity. About 2 years ago. You saw it last year, with an unbalanced offense that had to rely on the pass to win. They have lost the ability, I think, to “shorten the game”. They now have to try to beat teams 49-46. And the teams they face are much better built to play that kind of game. Stanford will never be equipped to do that.

I watched a good part of SC-Utah. I read some comments on the brilliance of Harrell etc. Third string QB stepping in. And it was impressive as to how seamless the transition was. The QB was highly rated. In fact more so than the Frosh that carved up Stanford. But what stood out to me is the brilliance of the wideouts. Just athletically superior.  Stanford gets solid skill level guys. But not SC level.  (SCs defense also made big plays when it had to. And in the last 4 minutes, up a TD, SC was able to run out the clock- despite the fact that at one point late in the third they had minus 17 yards rushing. That was impressive). 

Recruiting is a big issue right now.  The numbers are down. The physical drop off, on both sides of the ball, is enormous. Stanford had been the bully on the beach. Kicking sand in the face of the pretty boys with their glamorous high speed offenses.  

They have lost that identity. And with it they have lost what gave them their edge during this run. 
I don’t know if they can get it back down the road. This year, it ain’t happening. So hopefully they can figure out how to win a few 49-46 games.

Agree completely.  We need the TWU, the road graders, the northwest road warriors.  We need big, strong, fast linemen, we need a lot of them, and we need them now, and if we have a few 240 pound RBs and some 270 pound TEs, with maybe a 265 pound FB, that wouldn't suck either.  Georgia's line averages 330 pounds per player.
https://athlonsports.com/college-football/college-footballs-top-30-offensive-lines-2019

I would be very happy to win games 14-10.

And I want an OOC schedule that includes three patsies.  Not San Jose State, they have proven they can beat an SEC team.  Sheesh.  Arkansas paid them $1.5 million to get beat like a drum.  I'll take any three of Rice, Akron, Vandy, UMass or New Mexico State.

RE: Stolen identity - martyup - 09-23-2019

(09-22-2019, 11:12 AM)Mick Wrote:  And I want an OOC schedule that includes three patsies.  Not San Jose State, they have proven they can beat an SEC team.  Sheesh.  Arkansas paid them $1.5 million to get beat like a drum.  I'll take any three of Rice, Akron, Vandy, UMass or New Mexico State.

Well, I seem to recall that we have William and Mary on a future schedule.  William is tough, but Mary . . .

RE: Stolen identity - qwerty49 - 09-23-2019

The
(09-23-2019, 04:06 PM)martyup Wrote:  
(09-22-2019, 11:12 AM)Mick Wrote:  And I want an OOC schedule that includes three patsies.  Not San Jose State, they have proven they can beat an SEC team.  Sheesh.  Arkansas paid them $1.5 million to get beat like a drum.  I'll take any three of Rice, Akron, Vandy, UMass or New Mexico State.

Well, I seem to recall that we have William and Mary on a future schedule.  William is tough, but Mary . . .

If Mary plays on defense she’ll have 10 tackles, 3 sacks, a fumble recovery and a pick six against us.

RE: Stolen identity - Phogge - 09-23-2019

lined up so far.... BYU, K State, W&M, Vandy, TCU and BC. Plus the Domers.

RE: Stolen identity - SamuelMcF - 09-23-2019

For the record, Arkansas is a flaming pile of garbage.

lex24 - lex24 - 09-23-2019

Yeah, but the football team isn’t bad.

(09-23-2019, 05:08 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:  For the record, Arkansas is a flaming pile of garbage.


RE: lex24 - SamuelMcF - 09-23-2019

(09-23-2019, 10:21 PM)lex24 Wrote:  Yeah, but the football team isn’t bad.

(09-23-2019, 05:08 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:  For the record, Arkansas is a flaming pile of garbage.

Lol, love this response.

But yes, the football team is really bad.