09-23-2018, 08:28 AM
To his credit, Shaw did not blame injuries, even though the patchwork OL in the first half with Herbig at RT and Dalman at RG was totally ineffective.
I’ve thought about this a lot over the couple of years and I think the element of stubbornness is more an element of blindness in that he thinks the scheme is fundamentally sound and only needs perfect execution. His standard retort to failed plays is “we didn’t execute.”
But even the casual observer can see the difference between Nate Herbig and David DeCastro, or Regan Williams and Owen Marecic, or Kyle Murphy and AT Hall. Not meaning to slam our current guys, but some guys execute better because they just are better. I think Shaw’s expectations on offense are blind to the limitations of his personnel.
OTOH Shaw pretty much lets Anderson run the D and this year it looks like we are running a “swarming” approach to D which did not seem to be present when we had individual stars like Solly and Philips around. I think Lance has adjusted but Shaw has not, at least when it comes to the running game.
To his credit, we’ve refined the old end-zone fade to a box out for JJAW and a jump ball for Parkinson. And it’s good to see the TE over the middle on medium deep routes.
I just wish Shaw would dictate a few changes to the running game that don’t ask the current OL to do more than they can. This is more bridge than poker, ie get the most out of the cards you hold, rather than go all-in on cards that may not be the best on the table.
And hey, a pun.
I’ve thought about this a lot over the couple of years and I think the element of stubbornness is more an element of blindness in that he thinks the scheme is fundamentally sound and only needs perfect execution. His standard retort to failed plays is “we didn’t execute.”
But even the casual observer can see the difference between Nate Herbig and David DeCastro, or Regan Williams and Owen Marecic, or Kyle Murphy and AT Hall. Not meaning to slam our current guys, but some guys execute better because they just are better. I think Shaw’s expectations on offense are blind to the limitations of his personnel.
OTOH Shaw pretty much lets Anderson run the D and this year it looks like we are running a “swarming” approach to D which did not seem to be present when we had individual stars like Solly and Philips around. I think Lance has adjusted but Shaw has not, at least when it comes to the running game.
To his credit, we’ve refined the old end-zone fade to a box out for JJAW and a jump ball for Parkinson. And it’s good to see the TE over the middle on medium deep routes.
I just wish Shaw would dictate a few changes to the running game that don’t ask the current OL to do more than they can. This is more bridge than poker, ie get the most out of the cards you hold, rather than go all-in on cards that may not be the best on the table.
And hey, a pun.
(09-23-2018, 07:45 AM)Velodoc Wrote: Same old, same old.
Last year, it was obvious that a young QB named Costello had of immense proportions upside and we all wondered why Shaw continued to play Chryst, respectfully assuming there was something we didn't know tipping his hand. Even a casual football fan could clearly see the difference in energy, body language, athleticism, much less more subtle things like picking up secondary receivers and throwing accuracy. Shaw's stubbornness, at the very least, slowed KJ's maturity and almost derailed our season (wins were unnecessarily close--ie Utah).
This year, even a casual fan can see that running on first and second downs EVERY series early in a game just doesn't work--for whatever reason (the reason doesn't matter, and there are many). And coming in with a jumbo package on 4th and short and running up the gut EVERY time may not work with this particular offensive line. Again, Shaw's stubbornness almost derailed our season last night.
We cannot run down the throats of teams this year (even UCD proved this). At least not early in games. We have a future Sunday QB, at least four, possibly five, Sunday receivers. Why not use there talents EARLY, make the D adjust and then allow our running game (featuring a very capable guy named Love) to thrive.
I just don't get it. And I don't see any possible subtle, nuanced explanation for our predictable, repeatedly failing approach to offense. This is a good, talented, mature team that can go far...but Shaw's play-calling, strategy and game-day adjustments make no sense. I'd like to see what happens (wouldn't we all) if we open up our passing game early and then, and only then, start running down their throats.
We should have won by 2 to 3 TD's. It shouldn't have been a heroic, OT win dependent on Oregon's miscues and great individual D plays. Hopefully, Shaw will wake up entlightened (rather than interpret last night's victory as a validation of his tired approach).
I'm heading to Indiana next w/e and hope we can ride this victory to a truly dominant game performance. I bleed Stanford football and have deep personal ties--but I am quite frustrated.
Last night was a great victory. Legendary really. But it should have been routine.