08-26-2014, 08:00 PM
Thought this was an interesting Shaw presser
08-26-2014, 08:44 PM
(08-26-2014, 08:32 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Anything particularly interesting for those not able to listen?
I'm toooooo lazzzyyyyyy.
Anyway, Shaw also did a Fox Sports interview that's playing right now. He's had a couple interesting answers. In response to the unionization question, Shaw responded with his typical case against it... and then said, "but if they do it, we'll adjust to it." I don't think Shaw's said that before. And I know Muir has suggested in the related-but-not-identical pay-the-athletes debate that the school would drop football in that scenario. (Though I believe both support cost-of-attendance.)
Shaw also hedged a bit with the inevitable going-to-the-NFL query, saying "you never know what's going to happen" before reiterating all those familiar reasons why he'd stay.
(08-26-2014, 08:32 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:Anything particularly interesting for those not able to listen?
I'm toooooo lazzzyyyyyy.
Anyway, Shaw also did a Fox Sports interview that's playing right now. He's had a couple interesting answers. In response to the unionization question, Shaw responded with his typical case against it... and then said, "but if they do it, we'll adjust to it." I don't think Shaw's said that before. And I know Muir has suggested in the related-but-not-identical pay-the-athletes debate that the school would drop football in that scenario. (Though I believe both support cost-of-attendance.)
Shaw also hedged a bit with the inevitable going-to-the-NFL query, saying "you never know what's going to happen" before reiterating all those familiar reasons why he'd stay.
08-26-2014, 09:23 PM
What struck me about the interview is that Shaw stressed that he was a "West Coast purist" and a disciple of Bill Walsh, John Gruden, etc. He emphasized that the west coast offense allowed you to do "a little bit of everything" including 5 wideouts which look like the spread. He seemed to be emphasizing the versatility of his training and coaching philosophy.
This is not the philosophy of Woody Hayes and the unimaginative ground pounding that he is sometimes accused of.Â
I'm beginning to think that with the changes in personnel we have this year, and with Shaw having had the off-season to reflect on last year's playcalling, that he may intend to drift to a more balanced and less predictable attack this year. In other words, coaches learn too, and Shaw sounded like he has.Â
What he said about the history of Roger Craig being more a pass catcher one year and more a pounder the next was meant to suggest that the offense should change according to the personnel and the gameplan. That is the Walsh philosophy. But notice that he did not come out and say "our philosophy is always to establish the run first."
Now, this is just a single radio interview, but I definitely think there were some hints in there.
This is not the philosophy of Woody Hayes and the unimaginative ground pounding that he is sometimes accused of.Â
I'm beginning to think that with the changes in personnel we have this year, and with Shaw having had the off-season to reflect on last year's playcalling, that he may intend to drift to a more balanced and less predictable attack this year. In other words, coaches learn too, and Shaw sounded like he has.Â
What he said about the history of Roger Craig being more a pass catcher one year and more a pounder the next was meant to suggest that the offense should change according to the personnel and the gameplan. That is the Walsh philosophy. But notice that he did not come out and say "our philosophy is always to establish the run first."
Now, this is just a single radio interview, but I definitely think there were some hints in there.
What struck me about the interview is that Shaw stressed that he was a "West Coast purist" and a disciple of Bill Walsh, John Gruden, etc. He emphasized that the west coast offense allowed you to do "a little bit of everything" including 5 wideouts which look like the spread. He seemed to be emphasizing the versatility of his training and coaching philosophy.
This is not the philosophy of Woody Hayes and the unimaginative ground pounding that he is sometimes accused of.Â
I'm beginning to think that with the changes in personnel we have this year, and with Shaw having had the off-season to reflect on last year's playcalling, that he may intend to drift to a more balanced and less predictable attack this year. In other words, coaches learn too, and Shaw sounded like he has.Â
What he said about the history of Roger Craig being more a pass catcher one year and more a pounder the next was meant to suggest that the offense should change according to the personnel and the gameplan. That is the Walsh philosophy. But notice that he did not come out and say "our philosophy is always to establish the run first."
Now, this is just a single radio interview, but I definitely think there were some hints in there.
This is not the philosophy of Woody Hayes and the unimaginative ground pounding that he is sometimes accused of.Â
I'm beginning to think that with the changes in personnel we have this year, and with Shaw having had the off-season to reflect on last year's playcalling, that he may intend to drift to a more balanced and less predictable attack this year. In other words, coaches learn too, and Shaw sounded like he has.Â
What he said about the history of Roger Craig being more a pass catcher one year and more a pounder the next was meant to suggest that the offense should change according to the personnel and the gameplan. That is the Walsh philosophy. But notice that he did not come out and say "our philosophy is always to establish the run first."
Now, this is just a single radio interview, but I definitely think there were some hints in there.
08-27-2014, 03:20 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2014, 03:32 AM by OutsiderFan.)
All signs point to a different offense, at least scheme-wise in 2014:
1. Best WR depth in Shaw's Stanford coaching tenure
2. No big bruiser RB
3. Athletic OTs who offer great pass protection potential
4. Re-emergence of capable pass catching TEs
5. Kevin Hogan's concerted effort to improve mechanics for more short to medium range accuracy
It doesn't take a critical analysis of "conservative play calling" or even being the head coach to see what is going on. Stanford's personnel lends itself to spreading the field more in 2014 than plaing in a phone booth.
This doesn't mean Stanford won't run. What it means is Stanford will use fewer jumbo sets. The two starting WRs are 220+ and are great blockers. Owusu and Pratt are also big bodies who can block. Plus, the TEs are dual threats, as in-line blockers and split out wide. Defenses won't be able to anticipate run or pass by formation and personnel as much. They will only be able to do it by tendency per down and distance, play calling history, and if someone on the offense does something to tip off run or pass, like an OL doing something different in his stance for a run vs. pass.
It will be interesting to see what the plan is on 3rd and 4th and one or less. Will we see a bit wider line splits to create more space for smaller RB's? Who is going to carry the ball in such situations? This is the biggest question I have about the offense going into 2014.
The west coast offense is fine. The only problem I have with it is it's complexity. It takes a long time to get players ready to play, both in terms of learning the plays, and the length of play calls that can result in delay of game penalties and wasted timeouts. It's clear that the huddle is becoming a dinosaur in modern football because it is an impediment to expeditious play, and the premium is on limiting defensive substitutions, and tiring defenses mentally and physically. Stanford seems to have limited the play calling length challenge a bit with the plays on wristbands, but it still takes a long time for players to learn the offense and get on the field.
All that said, it's more of an NFL offense, and from a recruiting standpoint, the opportunity to learn an NFL offense can pay dividends, particularly at the QB position.
1. Best WR depth in Shaw's Stanford coaching tenure
2. No big bruiser RB
3. Athletic OTs who offer great pass protection potential
4. Re-emergence of capable pass catching TEs
5. Kevin Hogan's concerted effort to improve mechanics for more short to medium range accuracy
It doesn't take a critical analysis of "conservative play calling" or even being the head coach to see what is going on. Stanford's personnel lends itself to spreading the field more in 2014 than plaing in a phone booth.
This doesn't mean Stanford won't run. What it means is Stanford will use fewer jumbo sets. The two starting WRs are 220+ and are great blockers. Owusu and Pratt are also big bodies who can block. Plus, the TEs are dual threats, as in-line blockers and split out wide. Defenses won't be able to anticipate run or pass by formation and personnel as much. They will only be able to do it by tendency per down and distance, play calling history, and if someone on the offense does something to tip off run or pass, like an OL doing something different in his stance for a run vs. pass.
It will be interesting to see what the plan is on 3rd and 4th and one or less. Will we see a bit wider line splits to create more space for smaller RB's? Who is going to carry the ball in such situations? This is the biggest question I have about the offense going into 2014.
The west coast offense is fine. The only problem I have with it is it's complexity. It takes a long time to get players ready to play, both in terms of learning the plays, and the length of play calls that can result in delay of game penalties and wasted timeouts. It's clear that the huddle is becoming a dinosaur in modern football because it is an impediment to expeditious play, and the premium is on limiting defensive substitutions, and tiring defenses mentally and physically. Stanford seems to have limited the play calling length challenge a bit with the plays on wristbands, but it still takes a long time for players to learn the offense and get on the field.
All that said, it's more of an NFL offense, and from a recruiting standpoint, the opportunity to learn an NFL offense can pay dividends, particularly at the QB position.
(This post was last modified: 08-27-2014, 03:32 AM by OutsiderFan.)
All signs point to a different offense, at least scheme-wise in 2014:
1. Best WR depth in Shaw's Stanford coaching tenure
2. No big bruiser RB
3. Athletic OTs who offer great pass protection potential
4. Re-emergence of capable pass catching TEs
5. Kevin Hogan's concerted effort to improve mechanics for more short to medium range accuracy
It doesn't take a critical analysis of "conservative play calling" or even being the head coach to see what is going on. Stanford's personnel lends itself to spreading the field more in 2014 than plaing in a phone booth.
This doesn't mean Stanford won't run. What it means is Stanford will use fewer jumbo sets. The two starting WRs are 220+ and are great blockers. Owusu and Pratt are also big bodies who can block. Plus, the TEs are dual threats, as in-line blockers and split out wide. Defenses won't be able to anticipate run or pass by formation and personnel as much. They will only be able to do it by tendency per down and distance, play calling history, and if someone on the offense does something to tip off run or pass, like an OL doing something different in his stance for a run vs. pass.
It will be interesting to see what the plan is on 3rd and 4th and one or less. Will we see a bit wider line splits to create more space for smaller RB's? Who is going to carry the ball in such situations? This is the biggest question I have about the offense going into 2014.
The west coast offense is fine. The only problem I have with it is it's complexity. It takes a long time to get players ready to play, both in terms of learning the plays, and the length of play calls that can result in delay of game penalties and wasted timeouts. It's clear that the huddle is becoming a dinosaur in modern football because it is an impediment to expeditious play, and the premium is on limiting defensive substitutions, and tiring defenses mentally and physically. Stanford seems to have limited the play calling length challenge a bit with the plays on wristbands, but it still takes a long time for players to learn the offense and get on the field.
All that said, it's more of an NFL offense, and from a recruiting standpoint, the opportunity to learn an NFL offense can pay dividends, particularly at the QB position.
1. Best WR depth in Shaw's Stanford coaching tenure
2. No big bruiser RB
3. Athletic OTs who offer great pass protection potential
4. Re-emergence of capable pass catching TEs
5. Kevin Hogan's concerted effort to improve mechanics for more short to medium range accuracy
It doesn't take a critical analysis of "conservative play calling" or even being the head coach to see what is going on. Stanford's personnel lends itself to spreading the field more in 2014 than plaing in a phone booth.
This doesn't mean Stanford won't run. What it means is Stanford will use fewer jumbo sets. The two starting WRs are 220+ and are great blockers. Owusu and Pratt are also big bodies who can block. Plus, the TEs are dual threats, as in-line blockers and split out wide. Defenses won't be able to anticipate run or pass by formation and personnel as much. They will only be able to do it by tendency per down and distance, play calling history, and if someone on the offense does something to tip off run or pass, like an OL doing something different in his stance for a run vs. pass.
It will be interesting to see what the plan is on 3rd and 4th and one or less. Will we see a bit wider line splits to create more space for smaller RB's? Who is going to carry the ball in such situations? This is the biggest question I have about the offense going into 2014.
The west coast offense is fine. The only problem I have with it is it's complexity. It takes a long time to get players ready to play, both in terms of learning the plays, and the length of play calls that can result in delay of game penalties and wasted timeouts. It's clear that the huddle is becoming a dinosaur in modern football because it is an impediment to expeditious play, and the premium is on limiting defensive substitutions, and tiring defenses mentally and physically. Stanford seems to have limited the play calling length challenge a bit with the plays on wristbands, but it still takes a long time for players to learn the offense and get on the field.
All that said, it's more of an NFL offense, and from a recruiting standpoint, the opportunity to learn an NFL offense can pay dividends, particularly at the QB position.
08-27-2014, 05:20 AM
Short yardage may mean QB sneaks, RB over the top, or short passes to TE . . . versus power running with pads low from TB.Â
DIE LUFT DER FREIHEIT WEHT
Short yardage may mean QB sneaks, RB over the top, or short passes to TE . . . versus power running with pads low from TB.Â
DIE LUFT DER FREIHEIT WEHT
08-27-2014, 06:14 AM
(08-26-2014, 08:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=10441.msg95354#msg95354 date=1409110340]
Anything particularly interesting for those not able to listen?
I'm toooooo lazzzyyyyyy.
Anyway, Shaw also did a Fox Sports interview that's playing right now. He's had a couple interesting answers. In response to the unionization question, Shaw responded with his typical case against it... and then said, "but if they do it, we'll adjust to it." I don't think Shaw's said that before. And I know Muir has suggested in the related-but-not-identical pay-the-athletes debate that the school would drop football in that scenario. (Though I believe both support cost-of-attendance.)
Shaw also hedged a bit with the inevitable going-to-the-NFL query, saying "you never know what's going to happen" before reiterating all those familiar reasons why he'd stay.
[/quote]
Here is the Fox Sports interview you referenced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb-0qBOzQjY
If I had a dollar every time I was distracted, I wish I had some ice cream.
(08-26-2014, 08:44 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=10441.msg95354#msg95354 date=1409110340]
Anything particularly interesting for those not able to listen?
I'm toooooo lazzzyyyyyy.
Anyway, Shaw also did a Fox Sports interview that's playing right now. He's had a couple interesting answers. In response to the unionization question, Shaw responded with his typical case against it... and then said, "but if they do it, we'll adjust to it." I don't think Shaw's said that before. And I know Muir has suggested in the related-but-not-identical pay-the-athletes debate that the school would drop football in that scenario. (Though I believe both support cost-of-attendance.)
Shaw also hedged a bit with the inevitable going-to-the-NFL query, saying "you never know what's going to happen" before reiterating all those familiar reasons why he'd stay.
[/quote]
Here is the Fox Sports interview you referenced:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb-0qBOzQjY
If I had a dollar every time I was distracted, I wish I had some ice cream.
08-27-2014, 12:57 PM
I don't know if it was the same presser, but, according to the report by Drukarev, Shaw also said that the most likely true freshmen to start are Tucker and McCaffrey, with Alexander and Marx right behind. He said Thomas and Phillips are likely to redshirt because he's happy with the depth at DL. It was a surprise to me to see that he's happy with the DL depth because he previously was quoted as saying that there isn't a 6th DL who he feels comfortable putting into the rotation. In this presser, Shaw was quoted as saying that Lohn has stepped up and that Watkins is back healthy. If there are, in fact, seven serviceable players on the DL, that would be a nice development, though the omission of Hayes and Callahan is unfortunate since Parry remains the only true NT in the mix.
When I registered here in 2014, TrumpCard seemed like an apolitical user ID...
I don't know if it was the same presser, but, according to the report by Drukarev, Shaw also said that the most likely true freshmen to start are Tucker and McCaffrey, with Alexander and Marx right behind. He said Thomas and Phillips are likely to redshirt because he's happy with the depth at DL. It was a surprise to me to see that he's happy with the DL depth because he previously was quoted as saying that there isn't a 6th DL who he feels comfortable putting into the rotation. In this presser, Shaw was quoted as saying that Lohn has stepped up and that Watkins is back healthy. If there are, in fact, seven serviceable players on the DL, that would be a nice development, though the omission of Hayes and Callahan is unfortunate since Parry remains the only true NT in the mix.
When I registered here in 2014, TrumpCard seemed like an apolitical user ID...
08-27-2014, 01:20 PM
Quote: most likely true freshmen to start are Tucker and McCaffrey
I assume you meant "play". Starting would be truly unprecedented, though I guess being the most likely to get on the field means you're also the most likely to start...
08-27-2014, 01:35 PM
On the DL, I think Jordan Watkins is ready to go and he's the "6th," after Anderson, Parry, Lueders, Shittu, and Kaumatule. And then Nate Lohn seems like a guy who might be ready to take on a bigger role. It sure stinks not ever getting anything from Callahan, Hayes, and Nwafor.Â
The 2015 DL recruiting class is critical for Stanford to nail.
The 2015 DL recruiting class is critical for Stanford to nail.
On the DL, I think Jordan Watkins is ready to go and he's the "6th," after Anderson, Parry, Lueders, Shittu, and Kaumatule. And then Nate Lohn seems like a guy who might be ready to take on a bigger role. It sure stinks not ever getting anything from Callahan, Hayes, and Nwafor.Â
The 2015 DL recruiting class is critical for Stanford to nail.
The 2015 DL recruiting class is critical for Stanford to nail.
08-27-2014, 04:19 PM
I think we are in big big trouble next year with regard to NT. As things currently stand, it will be an undersized Shittu, and what.... the meatball (not saying he isn't talented, but he hasn't really played and is also undersized)? Or perhaps a true freshman? Callihan and Hayes continue to be no shows (not to mention Salem at DE). Our lack of a single true NT next year is going to be a big problem....
I think we are in big big trouble next year with regard to NT. As things currently stand, it will be an undersized Shittu, and what.... the meatball (not saying he isn't talented, but he hasn't really played and is also undersized)? Or perhaps a true freshman? Callihan and Hayes continue to be no shows (not to mention Salem at DE). Our lack of a single true NT next year is going to be a big problem....
08-27-2014, 04:28 PM
Quote: Our lack of a single true NT next year is going to be a big problem....Â
Pun intended?
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »