[teejers1]

Something that struck me odd in Shaw's post game presser was his comment that liked the match up of the best TE in the country against the best LB in the country (Parkinson vs whomever from Cal). As noted in another thread, I mentioned that it seems to me you would try to have a play that gets the TE isolated against anyone besides the best LB in the country.

Weaver. Weaver is more known as a good tackler and run stopper. He is not overwhelming in pass coverage. Yes, you scheme to get a player wide open. It happened with Fehoko when the cover man blitzed and the safety was late getting there. You have to remember the defense plays too. You may have a plan to get somebody wide open. Then, the question is "What if the defense is competent and actually responds as best they can?" Shaw's play was designed to get the Tight End wide open (if Weaver decides to play run) or covered by an Inside Linebacker, Weaver. That is a win for the offense. The TE should be able to beat Weaver 9 out of 10 times. What you don't want is covered by a Safety, or even worse over and under by an ILB and S (which we have seen a lot of this year). The call was effective. So yes, coverage by Weaver is much preferred to coverage by a Safety. We got exactly what we wanted and planned for. Parkinson should easily beat Weaver, and if he can't outrun him, he should be able to out jump him. Weaver is 6'3". Parkinson is 6'7" and knows what the play is. Weaver has a grand total of 2 interceptions in his career at Cal. Weaver is a very good ILB, but pass defense isn't his main job. Should be a win for the offense. The pass just wasn't where Parkinson could catch it. Great call. Not great execution.

I sometimes wonder if Goose is related to Shaw . . .
Great call?  Really?


And I loved CC's response, which of course is what Shaw says about all his plays in the post game presser - i.e., the call was good/great, it was the players' fault for not executing.  Please.

(And I suspect CC knows that and was being a bit sarcastic).

[teejers1]

Something that struck me odd in Shaw's post game presser was his comment that liked the match up of the best TE in the country against the best LB in the country (Parkinson vs whomever from Cal). As noted in another thread, I mentioned that it seems to me you would try to have a play that gets the TE isolated against anyone besides the best LB in the country.

Weaver. Weaver is more known as a good tackler and run stopper. He is not overwhelming in pass coverage. Yes, you scheme to get a player wide open. It happened with Fehoko when the cover man blitzed and the safety was late getting there. You have to remember the defense plays too. You may have a plan to get somebody wide open. Then, the question is "What if the defense is competent and actually responds as best they can?" Shaw's play was designed to get the Tight End wide open (if Weaver decides to play run) or covered by an Inside Linebacker, Weaver. That is a win for the offense. The TE should be able to beat Weaver 9 out of 10 times. What you don't want is covered by a Safety, or even worse over and under by an ILB and S (which we have seen a lot of this year). The call was effective. So yes, coverage by Weaver is much preferred to coverage by a Safety. We got exactly what we wanted and planned for. Parkinson should easily beat Weaver, and if he can't outrun him, he should be able to out jump him. Weaver is 6'3". Parkinson is 6'7" and knows what the play is. Weaver has a grand total of 2 interceptions in his career at Cal. Weaver is a very good ILB, but pass defense isn't his main job. Should be a win for the offense. The pass just wasn't where Parkinson could catch it. Great call. Not great execution.

I sometimes wonder if Goose is related to Shaw . . .
Great call?  Really?


And I loved CC's response, which of course is what Shaw says about all his plays in the post game presser - i.e., the call was good/great, it was the players' fault for not executing.  Please.

(And I suspect CC knows that and was being a bit sarcastic).