09-23-2019, 07:29 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-23-2019, 07:38 AM by SF_Cardinal_Fan.)
(09-22-2019, 06:57 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(09-22-2019, 06:39 PM)SF_Cardinal_Fan Wrote:(09-22-2019, 06:13 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Five turnovers today. FIVE! Two deep in their own territory that gave up six early points; three in goal to go situations (I think). Horrible execution.
In their first two games, they had FIVE TDs called back on penalties. FIVE!!! Horrible execution.
Oh by the way, they're 3 and 0. Good, well-coached teams find a way to win.
I don't equate "good execution" to mean no turnovers. I think good execution is about a team having consistently effective blocking and tackling.
No. Of course you wouldn't. . . .
By the way, what would you call snapping the ball into the facemask of a wide receiver in motion? How about missing the QBs hands on a snap under center? A series of unfortunate events?
No need to get personal.
Every team has player (s) who will make mistakes such as a bad center snap, fumbled ball, dropped pass , off sides etc... But in general I think "lack of execution" refers to the team not executing plays as they were designed, and this usually comes from lack of blocking. For example, Stanford's receivers are not getting open because they don't have time to run their routes, and that is due to lack of line of scrimmage blocking. Christian McCaffery and Bryce Love were able to rack up yards because they received line of scrimmage as well as downfield blocking, which is good execution of plays.
Against Oregon Stanford's defense executed fairly well, including getting to the ball carrier, fundamentally sound tackling, preventing long yardage plays.
