The CardBoard
Offensive strengths - 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: Offensive strengths (/thread-7950.html)

Pages: 1 2

Offensive strengths - stanfan95118 - 10-05-2014

I'm curious-- are there some general strengths that we may say the offense possesses? What exactly does the offense do well? I myself am struggling to identify anything specifically...

Re: Offensive strengths - stupac2 - 10-05-2014

We've been able to move the ball pretty well once we get desperate and have to throw. So there's that.

Re: Offensive strengths - fullmetal - 10-05-2014

We can throw the ball deepish when the weather is good and the OL is protecting well and the receivers know that the ball might be behind them.

We can run the ball if the blocking scheme exploits a mismatch in either talent or scheme.

Re: Offensive strengths - doubledub - 10-05-2014

Our wide receivers, of course.  Notwithstanding the uncharacteristic dropped balls yesterday, these guys get open and have good hands.  They have made several non-routine catches and bailed Hogan out this season.  I think they are very, very good.

I also think we could have a very good running game too if we stuck with one back. I recall Shaw saying that we have certain backs for certain plays that were designed to suit their strengths.  It would seem to me that other coaches have figured that out and know exactly the kind of plays we will run, depending on which running back is in the game.  We aren't good enough to make plays work even when the defense knows what is coming...

Re: Offensive strengths - OutsiderFan - 10-05-2014

There have been numerous examples of players who did nothing in poorly run or otherwise bad fit for them systems, who then flourished under new systems and coordinators.  This in mind, I'm a firm believer Stanford's offensive strengths are:

1. Pass blocking OL
2. Big, fast WRs
3. Good TEs
4. RBs with pass catching ability who are good in open field
5. A mobile, sturdy QB

Some pretty nice building blocks if put in positions to succeed.

Re: Offensive strengths - 81alum - 10-05-2014

I think our personnel on offense are excellent.  I would say we have the absolute luxury of having a weak offense with great offensive players.  The problem is practice, scheme and coaching.

To build on the strengths of the offense, keep all the players, replace or supplement the Offensive Coordinator, replace the QB coach, simplify the offense until the OLine has completely mastered the basics.

Other ideas that I am not so sure of but I will throw out there: more long distance passes to our WRs on 1st down, more short possession passes to our TEs on 3rd down.


Re: Offensive strengths - Simas - 10-05-2014

Over the past few years the anchor of our offense has been the OL and a stud RB.  Those two ingredients are missing this year.  On paper the OL should not be a problem, so I keep hoping they finally get it together.  I think the bold move would be to make Montgomery the "every down" RB.  Can he take the beating and still be our primary KR?  From my spot on the couch he is not a great route runner and over the years drops too many passes (like he did yesterday).  We have other options at WR.  Occasionally lining him up as RB just shines a light on him for the defense.  Why not move him? 

Re: Offensive strengths - yvonne - 10-05-2014

He actually did say in a Council meeting that his favorite position is running back.

Re: Offensive strengths - stupac2 - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 05:12 PM)Simas link Wrote:Over the past few years the anchor of our offense has been the OL and a stud RB.  Those two ingredients are missing this year.  On paper the OL should not be a problem, so I keep hoping they finally get it together.  I think the bold move would be to make Montgomery the "every down" RB.  Can he take the beating and still be our primary KR?  From my spot on the couch he is not a great route runner and over the years drops too many passes (like he did yesterday).  We have other options at WR.  Occasionally lining him up as RB just shines a light on him for the defense.  Why not move him?

That would be interesting. Make our default set something like Cajuste and Rector wide, Hooper in-line or in the slot, and Ty and McCaffrey in the backfield. Such big possibilities...

Re: Offensive strengths - Rally - 10-05-2014

I think one of the biggest problems is arrogance.  We telegraph our offense and dare the defense to stop it.  All teams study film.  Ty in the wildcat . . . .gee, wonder what's coming?  Jumbo set, gee, I wonder.  Sanders in?  Hmmm.  Ty returning?  Wonder what to do.    Empty backfield and guards pulling right?  Gee, let me think.  That pass to Skov yesterday worked.  Why?  Not on film.  I am not an expert like so many here, but even I am becoming pretty good at calling our plays before the snap.  Over and over again I heard, this year and the last two, "Stanford likes to line up and dare you to stop them."  Not working with this inexperienced OL.  Just saying.

Re: Offensive strengths - CowboyIndian - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 03:00 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:I'm a firm believer Stanford's offensive strengths are:
1. Pass blocking OL

Did you watch the game yesterday? How many sacks on Hogan? how many hurries? That is the worst OL play I've seen on a Stanford team since Trent Edwards was in the hospital.

Re: Offensive strengths - Extra Point - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 05:20 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:That would be interesting. Make our default set something like Cajuste and Rector wide, Hooper in-line or in the slot, and Ty and McCaffrey in the backfield. Such big possibilities...

Who is going to be the blocking back?

Re: Offensive strengths - StanFan88 - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 03:00 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:There have been numerous examples of players who did nothing in poorly run or otherwise bad fit for them systems, who then flourished under new systems and coordinators.  This in mind, I'm a firm believer Stanford's offensive strengths are:

1. Pass blocking OL
2. Big, fast WRs
3. Good TEs
4. RBs with pass catching ability who are good in open field
5. A mobile, sturdy QB

Some pretty nice building blocks if put in positions to succeed.

Last line is the key.  The gameplan remains largely based on last year's team.  Problem is, Hogan is not the guy he was last year, the OL doesn't have 4 NFL draft picks on it, and there is no 220+ bell-cow to run up the middle.

Re: Offensive strengths - stupac2 - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 06:46 PM)Extra Point link Wrote:Who is going to be the blocking back?

Well, first, I think that's a ridiculously overrated concern with a QB as mobile as Hogan. You can defeat it by running bootlegs or otherwise moving the pocket, or just getting the ball out fast at first to neutralize pass rush. On obvious passing downs, sure, bring in a fullback or something. But on first and 10, second and 4? You don't need it.

Re: Offensive strengths - washingtonismoney - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 07:23 PM)StanFan88 link Wrote:Last line is the key.  The gameplan remains largely based on last year's team.  Problem is, Hogan is not the guy he was last year, the OL doesn't have 4 NFL draft picks on it, and there is no 220+ bell-cow to run up the middle.

I don't think this is the case. So far this year it's 174 running plays to 150 passing plays -- so running about 53.7% of the time, and that despite large parts of two games being blowouts. Last year we ran 65.2% of the time. In 2012 it was 57.9% of the time.

And, qualitatively the plays called seem quite different. We're reliant on runs out of shotgun to a greater degree than I can ever recall (though, frustratingly, never with a QB option built in.)

So the approach is really quite different, and I think it's odd to claim otherwise. Unsuccessful, to be sure. But quite different.

Re: Offensive strengths - StanFan88 - 10-05-2014

WIM

Where are the bootlegs & rollouts?  Where is the read option?  Where are the bubble screens?  Where are the jet sweeps?  Where is the wildcat with motion?  Where are the checkdowns/screens/flare passes to our smaller, faster RBs?

This team's strengths are:
- speed to the edges at skill positions
- WR blocking
- a QB who can throw on the move, but who can also run and take a hit

Can you seriously say that the gameplans for UW, USC, and ND have taken advantage of these strengths?

Re: Offensive strengths - washingtonismoney - 10-05-2014

(10-05-2014, 07:49 PM)StanFan88 link Wrote:WIM

Where are the bootlegs & rollouts?  Where is the read option?  Where are the bubble screens?  Where are the jet sweeps?  Where is the wildcat with motion?  Where are the checkdowns/screens/flare passes to our smaller, faster RBs?

This team's strengths are:
- speed to the edges at skill positions
- WR blocking
- a QB who can throw on the move, but who can also run and take a hit

Can you seriously say that the gameplans for UW, U$€, and ND have taken advantage of these strengths?

Look, you said the game plan was based on last year's team. It, demonstrably, is not. Simply because it's not the plan you like doesn't mean it's not a different plan than the 2013 team.

Re: Offensive strengths - StanFan88 - 10-06-2014

I don't see a sufficiently material difference, sorry.  Still trying to play football in a phonebooth for the most part without either the OL or RBs to do it.  And it's not working

Re: Offensive strengths - Hulk01 - 10-06-2014

1.  The lack of an intermediate wide receiver who can break off a route and consistently catch the ball.  (Ty is not a great route runner and still has hands issues.)

2.  The lack of running back who is either a true power back a la Gerhart or Gaffney or a true to-the-house threat a la Sankey, Franklin, James (plus James also ran damn well between the tackles.  When he left, Barner gave them only one dimension, and that figured in our ability to turn those former losses into wins.  And DAT, of course, could not run between the tackles at all, unless someone cleared a big hole for him.)

3.  Hogan's weaknesses: a short quick release needed to exploit number one above; inability to work to his second and third options; and inability to look off defensive backs, which regularly results in a double-covered primary receiver.

4.  An OL that is committing too many penalties.  Hooper already has tied Danser's single-season false start record, and Peat, Caspers, and Garnett have suffered too many penalties, too.  The combination of OL penalties plus sacks and hurries allowed far exceeds the "bad play" OL numbers of any of the four BCS bowl teams.  This offense always has lived off of second and sixes and now is seeing far too many first and 15s.

5.  Too few plays that counter our most obvious threat to a particular defense--e.g., defenses that are overplaying the threat of Montgomery at tailback.

Our WR's hands didn't appear to be an issue until the Saturday game, and don't seem like an overall issue although Montgomery's draft stock likely dropped at least a round by half time.   

Re: Offensive strengths - OutsiderFan - 10-06-2014

(10-06-2014, 10:44 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:1.  The lack of an intermediate wide receiver who can break off a route and consistently catch the ball.  (Ty is not a great route runner and still has hands issues.)

2.  The lack of running back who is either a true power back a la Gerhart or Gaffney or a true to-the-house threat a la Sankey, Franklin, James (plus James also ran damn well between the tackles.  When he left, Barner gave them only one dimension, and that figured in our ability to turn those former losses into wins.  And DAT, of course, could not run between the tackles at all, unless someone cleared a big hole for him.)

3.  Hogan's weaknesses: a short quick release needed to exploit number one above; inability to work to his second and third options; and inability to look off defensive backs, which regularly results in a double-covered primary receiver.

4.  An OL that is committing too many penalties.  Hooper already has tied Danser's single-season false start record, and Peat, Caspers, and Garnett have suffered too many penalties, too.  The combination of OL penalties plus sacks and hurries allowed far exceeds the "bad play" OL numbers of any of the four BCS bowl teams.  This offense always has lived off of second and sixes and now is seeing far too many first and 15s.

5.  Too few plays that counter our most obvious threat to a particular defense--e.g., defenses that are overplaying the threat of Montgomery at tailback.

Our WR's hands didn't appear to be an issue until the Saturday game, and don't seem like an overall issue although Montgomery's draft stock likely dropped at least a round by half time. 

The operative question was what are the strengths, not weaknesses everyone can see.

But I take exception with no WR able to run a crossing route.  To me, Rector is the guy who needs more reps because he has proven to have very good hands and get open everywhere on the field.