The CardBoard
Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - 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: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? (/thread-4032.html)


Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - Redrum - 10-13-2012

As the new coach of the 49ers Bill Walsh semi-famously said of (then) starting QB Steve DeBerg,

"He plays just good enough to get you beat."

That is exactly what we are looking at with Josh Nunes.  A QB who is just good enough to get us beat.

And no coach clear-eyed enough to see it, recognize it, and act.

 


Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - JohnR34231 - 10-13-2012

No offensive touchdowns in two road games should send a message that something needs to be done.

But I'm not sure it will.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - stan01 - 10-13-2012

(10-13-2012, 07:47 PM)Redrum link Wrote:As the new coach of the 49ers Bill Walsh semi-famously said of (then) starting QB Steve DeBerg,

"He plays just good enough to get you beat."

That is exactly what we are looking at with Josh Nunes.  A QB who is just good enough to get us beat.

And no coach clear-eyed enough to see it, recognize it, and act.

Perhaps that's what the journalists who cover Stanford should use to approach the subject of QB change with Shaw: "What would Bill Walsh do?"

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - scorecard - 10-13-2012

(10-13-2012, 08:04 PM)JPRI link Wrote:No offensive touchdowns in two road games should send a message that something needs to be done.

But I'm not sure it will.

We should just play Nottingham on all road games.  The ultimate 2 quarterback system.  It couldn't be any worse.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - 81alum - 10-13-2012

Who knows who Walsh would play at quarterback?  He would choose someone he had worked with and brought along.  He was a master teacher--I've always thought that Montana could have turned out to be a mediocre quarterback had it not been for his tutelage under Walsh.

Our current quarterbacks must have raw talent.  Walsh would have picked whichever one was going to be the greatest success and would have extracted the absolute best from him.  I don't know if Nunes is our best talent or not--but Walsh would have known.  But if Nunes was our guy, he would have been performing much better with a Walsh to guide him.  The contribution of having a great teacher and a playcaller who knew how to call plays to build his quarterbacks's confidence really added to whatever natural talent a qb might possess.

Walsh also would have been much more imaginative with the play calling.  He liked to run the ball, but almost never when it was expected.  Passing on running downs and running on passing downs--especially in 77-78 when he started at Stanford.  Running power up the middle when everyone knows it is coming--nope. 


Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - fullmetal - 10-14-2012

(10-13-2012, 09:13 PM)scorecard link Wrote:[quote author=JPRI link=topic=6665.msg49628#msg49628 date=1350183860]
No offensive touchdowns in two road games should send a message that something needs to be done.

But I'm not sure it will.

We should just play Nottingham on all road games.  The ultimate 2 quarterback system.  It couldn't be any worse.
[/quote]

Yep.  Nunes in practice since he's such a good practice QB.  And someone else in real games, because you know, Nunes ain't so good in real games.

And, the necessary foot note - Redrum - 10-14-2012

The QB who eventually replaced DeBerg:  Joe Montana. 

Wonder if there is a another Joe Montana on our roster.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - george - 10-14-2012

I wonder if Shaw will go with the "everyone wanted to bronze his arm after the Arizona game, so keep calm and carry on" argument...



Re: And, the necessary foot note - yvonne - 10-14-2012

(10-14-2012, 06:21 AM)Redrum link Wrote:The QB who eventually replaced DeBerg:  Joe Montana. 

Wonder if there is a another Joe Montana on our roster.

We might have to get rid of Frank O'Connor first.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - Griffins78 - 10-14-2012

This doesn't "feel" like a West Coast Bill Walsh offense anymore.

The West Coast offense used a high percentage short passing game which was like a run game. It stretched the defense across the field which opened up the run and vertical passing game. It used timing in the passing game with the QB going through a sequence of receiver options as they ran very precise routes to precise timing. It was very effective in making even average QBs generate unheard of QB ratings and completion percentages, e.g., when the starting QB was injured and a 2nd or 3rd string QB came in. It gave the offense a rhythm and confidence and sustained long drives.

The pass set up the run - and with an almost unstoppable short-passing game - it made the offense unpredictable. With 3rd and 5 it could run or pass.

We seem to be old school football. Run and impose our will first and then pass.

More importantly, it seems like Nunes is always trying to make tough throws. Even when we're 3rd and 4 or 5 he seems to be passing for 20 or 30 yards to a tightly covered receiver and the OL has to maintain the pocket for a longer time. Our completion percentage is low and some of it is Nunes poor passing, some of it is receiver drops, and some of it is either play calling, checks at the LOS, decision making by Nunes of which receiver to pass to, or offense philosophy. I cannot tell.

I would like to see a passing game that relies on shorter, timing passes, ala West Coast and Bill Walsh.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - fullmetal - 10-14-2012

I haven't seen Nunes complete many slants (requires precision)--he throws behind his receiver too often.  We don't throw screens because apparently our receivers aren't athletic enough to make a bunch of people miss.  Crossing routes seem to be a 75/25 split of culpability between QB and receiver when it comes down to why they fail, and they fail more often than not.  We get seam routes, go routes, and post routes.

I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about what defenses are doing to us, but I wonder if they're all doing the same thing because they all see common weaknesses in Nunes's game.  I wonder how many DCs are silently thanking the powers that be that Shaw does not have a legitimately skilled D1 QB at the helm.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - 81alum - 10-14-2012

(10-14-2012, 08:03 AM)Griffin78 link Wrote:This doesn't "feel" like a West Coast Bill Walsh offense anymore.

The West Coast offense used a high percentage short passing game which was like a run game. It stretched the defense across the field which opened up the run and vertical passing game. It used timing in the passing game with the QB going through a sequence of receiver options as they ran very precise routes to precise timing. It was very effective in making even average QBs generate unheard of QB ratings and completion percentages, e.g., when the starting QB was injured and a 2nd or 3rd string QB came in. It gave the offense a rhythm and confidence and sustained long drives.

The pass set up the run - and with an almost unstoppable short-passing game - it made the offense unpredictable. With 3rd and 5 it could run or pass.

We seem to be old school football. Run and impose our will first and then pass.

More importantly, it seems like Nunes is always trying to make tough throws. Even when we're 3rd and 4 or 5 he seems to be passing for 20 or 30 yards to a tightly covered receiver and the OL has to maintain the pocket for a longer time. Our completion percentage is low and some of it is Nunes poor passing, some of it is receiver drops, and some of it is either play calling, checks at the LOS, decision making by Nunes of which receiver to pass to, or offense philosophy. I cannot tell.

I would like to see a passing game that relies on shorter, timing passes, ala West Coast and Bill Walsh.
Very well said, Griffin.

The current Stanford power running model is what was common everywhere when Walsh became a head coach.  His offense was so entirely different and unpredictable from that model that it created major problems for other defenses.  Over the years his offense became almost standard for most teams and it lost its novelty.

The new novel offense became the spread offense--and it still has not run its course entirely, but more and more teams are recruiting and building defenses to stop it--but those kinds of defenses are not necessarily well suited to stopping power running.  Hence we have had a pretty good run.

I think Walsh was a pragmatist, an innovator, and he was very demanding on technical execution.  Shaw as his student knew Walsh during his second coming, when I think Walsh was not quite as energetic or hands-on.  Walsh would have recognized Harbaugh's success in bringing back power running when other teams were not well suited to stop it.  And I sense Walsh's influence on the unbalanced lines, multiple tight ends, etc.  Walsh did his master's thesis on the evolution of flank formation football and often talked about the transformation from imbalanced to balanced lines.  Playing around with that just seems like the kind of thing Walsh would do--I wonder if he and Harbaugh and Shaw just "shot the breeze" one day early in Harbaugh's tenure here, in Spring 2007 while Bill was still alive, talking about ways of digging way back into football history so as to make some old ideas into new ideas.  I think I recall Harbaugh talking about such a conversation.

Walsh served as a game commentator for stretches late in his career, and he usually saved his most critical remarks for play calling that was predictable, particularly at the college level.  He did not like to criticize college players much, but he made it clear that he thought that their coaches sometimes let them down when they allowed their own lack of imagination or stubborness to hurt the player's chances to perform.  I specifically remember him complaining about a sequence in which the ball was run up the middle several times in a row without success.  He said something to the effect that this kind of  Woody Hayes "macho" play calling might be popular with old-guard coaches who would almost rather lose a game than embrace misdirection plays that might earn them the dreaded "finesse" label. 

And that is just it.  Even yesterday I heard commentators saying "Stanford reversed its fortunes when it stopped being a finesse team" and went to "power football."  Where is it graven in stone that you can't be both?  Walsh always resented the "finesse" label, but sometimes finesse works, and sometimes power works, and why in heaven's name would you want to leave one tool out of your bag? 

Walsh would be scheming new ways to take advantage of the limited practice time of college teams.  Doing a Woody Hayes immitation for a couple of years worked wonderfully, but you can't expect it to last forever.  Maybe this just means innovation within the running game--not abandoning the running game--but Walsh would not be sitting pat on an old formula.

Re: Where is Bill Walsh when you need him? - Griffins78 - 10-14-2012

(10-14-2012, 10:25 AM)81alum link Wrote:The current Stanford power running model is what was common everywhere when Walsh became a head coach.  His offense was so entirely different and unpredictable from that model that it created major problems for other defenses.  Over the years his offense became almost standard for most teams and it lost its novelty.

The new novel offense became the spread offense--and it still has not run its course entirely, but more and more teams are recruiting and building defenses to stop it--but those kinds of defenses are not necessarily well suited to stopping power running.  Hence we have had a pretty good run.

I think Walsh was a pragmatist, an innovator, and he was very demanding on technical execution.  Shaw as his student knew Walsh during his second coming, when I think Walsh was not quite as energetic or hands-on.  Walsh would have recognized Harbaugh's success in bringing back power running when other teams were not well suited to stop it.  And I sense Walsh's influence on the unbalanced lines, multiple tight ends, etc.  Walsh did his master's thesis on the evolution of flank formation football and often talked about the transformation from imbalanced to balanced lines.  Playing around with that just seems like the kind of thing Walsh would do--I wonder if he and Harbaugh and Shaw just "shot the breeze" one day early in Harbaugh's tenure here, in Spring 2007 while Bill was still alive, talking about ways of digging way back into football history so as to make some old ideas into new ideas.  I think I recall Harbaugh talking about such a conversation.

Walsh served as a game commentator for stretches late in his career, and he usually saved his most critical remarks for play calling that was predictable, particularly at the college level.  He did not like to criticize college players much, but he made it clear that he thought that their coaches sometimes let them down when they allowed their own lack of imagination or stubborness to hurt the player's chances to perform.  I specifically remember him complaining about a sequence in which the ball was run up the middle several times in a row without success.  He said something to the effect that this kind of  Woody Hayes "macho" play calling might be popular with old-guard coaches who would almost rather lose a game than embrace misdirection plays that might earn them the dreaded "finesse" label. 

And that is just it.  Even yesterday I heard commentators saying "Stanford reversed its fortunes when it stopped being a finesse team" and went to "power football."  Where is it graven in stone that you can't be both?  Walsh always resented the "finesse" label, but sometimes finesse works, and sometimes power works, and why in heaven's name would you want to leave one tool out of your bag? 

Walsh would be scheming new ways to take advantage of the limited practice time of college teams.  Doing a Woody Hayes immitation for a couple of years worked wonderfully, but you can't expect it to last forever.  Maybe this just means innovation within the running game--not abandoning the running game--but Walsh would not be sitting pat on an old formula.
Even better! Well thought and described 81alum.

I agree that Walsh was an innovator that would have adapted and changed to stay a step ahead. The spread seems like an evolution of the West Coast maintaining the short-passing ball control approach that spreads the defense across the field and opens up the run and isolates the defense in one on one situations which can be exploited.

I love having strength, toughness, skill, and power. But deception (if you want to call it finesse) or unpredictability, even in the run game, is a key concept that we seem to have less of.