05-17-2020, 12:31 PM
OK, I listened...
When I read "intellectual brutality" it conjures someone destroying something with their mind. It doesn't mean being physically dominated. Don't get me wrong, I really do love the slogan, but for me it means outsmarting people, always being 1-2 steps ahead. It's thinking someone is going to zig, but instead zag. Stanford football does not tend to do things I would call innovative or that cause the opponent fits because they aren't expected or otherwise catch people off guard.
Here's an example of intellectual brutality on offense:
Starting a game with the OL coming to the LOS in traditional formation, and then switching to unbalanced line, with the QB in a trips right formation. Having the RB take a snap our of shotgun (wildcat) and an eligible TE in the LT position, with the LT lined up next to the RT. Then run a reverse action to the QB, with two of the WRs running streaks and the TE running a corner route, and have the RB keep the ball after faking handoff to the QB. That to me is intellectual brutality. Give the defense one thing to think about as the OL shift into an unbalanced set. Then having the QB flanked wide makes the defense think about something else. Then run the QB like he's gonna get the ball to throw, and fool it again with an off Tackle run with 4 OL leading the way.
I'm not saying this is conventional football, but I don't want to see intellectual brutality be conventional football.
Here's an example of intellectual brutality on defense.
Show a single high Safety and a double A gap blitz pre-snap. Send one ILB at the snap and drop one out while bringing a Safety blitz into the gap vacated by the dropping ILB. This confuses OL and gives the QB something to react to that he wasn't expecting.
If you can run the ball when the other team knows you are going to do it, there is no better offense in football. That said, there is a lot to gain by keeping opponents off balance and guessing. You can make up for lack of speed and quickness by making your opponent have to think more. On offense you can slow defenses by making them think before they act. And on defense you can make offenses hesitant and screw up their timing by confusing blocking schemes.
I just don't see enough from Stanford these days that makes me think they are the smarter team. I'd really like to see Stanford outsmart its opponents a lot more frequently than it appears to me they do. That would be intellectual brutality for me.
When I read "intellectual brutality" it conjures someone destroying something with their mind. It doesn't mean being physically dominated. Don't get me wrong, I really do love the slogan, but for me it means outsmarting people, always being 1-2 steps ahead. It's thinking someone is going to zig, but instead zag. Stanford football does not tend to do things I would call innovative or that cause the opponent fits because they aren't expected or otherwise catch people off guard.
Here's an example of intellectual brutality on offense:
Starting a game with the OL coming to the LOS in traditional formation, and then switching to unbalanced line, with the QB in a trips right formation. Having the RB take a snap our of shotgun (wildcat) and an eligible TE in the LT position, with the LT lined up next to the RT. Then run a reverse action to the QB, with two of the WRs running streaks and the TE running a corner route, and have the RB keep the ball after faking handoff to the QB. That to me is intellectual brutality. Give the defense one thing to think about as the OL shift into an unbalanced set. Then having the QB flanked wide makes the defense think about something else. Then run the QB like he's gonna get the ball to throw, and fool it again with an off Tackle run with 4 OL leading the way.
I'm not saying this is conventional football, but I don't want to see intellectual brutality be conventional football.
Here's an example of intellectual brutality on defense.
Show a single high Safety and a double A gap blitz pre-snap. Send one ILB at the snap and drop one out while bringing a Safety blitz into the gap vacated by the dropping ILB. This confuses OL and gives the QB something to react to that he wasn't expecting.
If you can run the ball when the other team knows you are going to do it, there is no better offense in football. That said, there is a lot to gain by keeping opponents off balance and guessing. You can make up for lack of speed and quickness by making your opponent have to think more. On offense you can slow defenses by making them think before they act. And on defense you can make offenses hesitant and screw up their timing by confusing blocking schemes.
I just don't see enough from Stanford these days that makes me think they are the smarter team. I'd really like to see Stanford outsmart its opponents a lot more frequently than it appears to me they do. That would be intellectual brutality for me.