On the scale of things I have seen at that site, this is not bad … though the need for an editor is clear.
As always, a couple of things.
Many of the observations about the offense under Costello seem roughly correct, except these are really aspects of Stanford's offense lately not so much a Costello thing. We have relied upon, and recruited, big receivers for some time now. One aspect of the pass game Shaw clearly likes is drawing/forcing the safeties up and then going for the big strike against single coverage. And, if I understand what he is referring to, Stanford has run that pseudo-draw to the back for some time now.
The last four games (of the regular season) on a roll thing doesn't really describe Costello's season. He was only named starter for the last five, the first of which was tough going against a very good WSU defense; so yes the next four games were better. However, they weren't really notably different than his first two games as an injury replacement or even the bowl game (where he was apparently significantly dinged) - though they were against generally better defenses than those first two. Overall, it looks more like a dip versus WSU than a ramp up at the end.
The really odd thing about the article is the discussion of the pistol formation. I am not sure what the author thinks that formation is, but it clearly is not what I think it is.
The play in his gif was run out of a simple I - on first down where it is easy to convince the defense we might be running with Love. That is easier to see on a full video of the play in question.
First TD vs und
In addition, the play action on the play is a simple sweep to Love on the opposite side of the field as the pass - it isn't any kind of draw.
Stanford does run out of lots of formations. Those include a bunch of variations of the shotgun, but off the top of my head I cannot think of many that used variants of the pistol. But I am going to look for this in going over some of the latter games.
[Key pistol elements: the QB in a short short-gun snap position, the RB with a deep drop directly behind the QB, usually a one-back formation but I have often sets with a FB or HB either beside or to the side and in front of the QB also referred to as pistol.]
I think you are aiming far too low. [Yeah, I know you put "at least" in there.]
Last year, Stanford's offense had the following rankings (all rate stats, as necessary to compare Stanford's down-tempo offense to most team's up-tempo offenses):
FEI = #14
S&P+ = #29
Pts/Drive = #18 (2.78)
Yds/Play = #17 (6.45)
ESPN Off Eff* = #11
With somewhere between 9 and 10 starters returning, lots of young talent coming along, the offense had BETTER be a lot better than last year; which ought to make it top 10 on most of the relevant stats.
* I hesitate to include the ESPN number because I don't know much about what it is or how it is calculated. But lots of people look at ESPN so it is relatively well known and by notoriety alone seems it should be included.
As always, a couple of things.
Many of the observations about the offense under Costello seem roughly correct, except these are really aspects of Stanford's offense lately not so much a Costello thing. We have relied upon, and recruited, big receivers for some time now. One aspect of the pass game Shaw clearly likes is drawing/forcing the safeties up and then going for the big strike against single coverage. And, if I understand what he is referring to, Stanford has run that pseudo-draw to the back for some time now.
The last four games (of the regular season) on a roll thing doesn't really describe Costello's season. He was only named starter for the last five, the first of which was tough going against a very good WSU defense; so yes the next four games were better. However, they weren't really notably different than his first two games as an injury replacement or even the bowl game (where he was apparently significantly dinged) - though they were against generally better defenses than those first two. Overall, it looks more like a dip versus WSU than a ramp up at the end.
The really odd thing about the article is the discussion of the pistol formation. I am not sure what the author thinks that formation is, but it clearly is not what I think it is.
The play in his gif was run out of a simple I - on first down where it is easy to convince the defense we might be running with Love. That is easier to see on a full video of the play in question.
First TD vs und
In addition, the play action on the play is a simple sweep to Love on the opposite side of the field as the pass - it isn't any kind of draw.
Stanford does run out of lots of formations. Those include a bunch of variations of the shotgun, but off the top of my head I cannot think of many that used variants of the pistol. But I am going to look for this in going over some of the latter games.
[Key pistol elements: the QB in a short short-gun snap position, the RB with a deep drop directly behind the QB, usually a one-back formation but I have often sets with a FB or HB either beside or to the side and in front of the QB also referred to as pistol.]
(08-01-2018, 05:05 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Glad to see I'm not the only one who believes Stanford is positioned to have one of the best offenses not just in the Pac-12, but entire country. Really should be in the Top 25 at least.
I think you are aiming far too low. [Yeah, I know you put "at least" in there.]
Last year, Stanford's offense had the following rankings (all rate stats, as necessary to compare Stanford's down-tempo offense to most team's up-tempo offenses):
FEI = #14
S&P+ = #29
Pts/Drive = #18 (2.78)
Yds/Play = #17 (6.45)
ESPN Off Eff* = #11
With somewhere between 9 and 10 starters returning, lots of young talent coming along, the offense had BETTER be a lot better than last year; which ought to make it top 10 on most of the relevant stats.
* I hesitate to include the ESPN number because I don't know much about what it is or how it is calculated. But lots of people look at ESPN so it is relatively well known and by notoriety alone seems it should be included.