[lex24]

It’s wonderful to outsmart teams. You’ll win a few games that way. But it’s actually better to out physical team. Always. Bill Walsh was the smartest offensive football mind of his generation. In two years during his stint at Stanford against USC, Walsh managed seven points. Why? Did he get stupid all of a sudden?  Was John Robinson smarter than Walsh? Did he have Stanford’s offense down cold? No. USC was able to physically dominate Stanford and they could do very little offensively. So you can outsmart all you want. I’ll take  physical. That is what put Stanford on the map. If they can’t get  back to it they’re not gonna win. Simple as that

I totally agree. You need to have at least equal athletes on the field or it will be a long day. However, being more physical that the other team doesn't mean just brute strength. It also means team speed and overall execution. Precisely run patterns can help compensate for not being quite as fast as the coverage man, but only if the QB can hit the receiver right on the break. Two different physical skills can cancel out a third physical advantage. However, what is certainly true is that if one team has a prohibitive "physical" advantage in one area, they will utilize it until it gets defeated. If your team has to be 100% perfect on every possession because Stanford is keeping the ball away, that is a big advantage to Stanford. However, if you are physically dominating the LOS on both sides of the ball, it isn't going to matter much how good the opposing QB may be.

Scheme can be a factor only when the teams are well enough matched that neither one can just repeatedly run the same plays and succeed. In the past, lots of teams could dominate Stanford physically. JH recruited guys that could match or exceed the other team's strengths, but it wasn't just in one area. It was across the board. Right now, as others have pointed out, our main problem is on defense. That is where we need to get more "physical".

Agree!

---

If it is third and 1, who would you rather have carry the ball, BL or Toby?

Remound Wright

On third down and 1 - 3 yards to go:
Wright had 28 touches, 19 first downs, and 5 touchdowns (in 2015); his success rate was 68%, his touchdown rate was 18%
Bryce Love had 14 touches, 2 first downs, and 1 touchdown (in 2017) (he had 4 first downs in 7 attempts in 2018); his success rate was 14%, his touchdown rate was 7%
Toby had 31 touches, 21 first downs, and 2 touchdowns (in 2009); his success rate was 68%, his touchdown rate was 6%

However, on third down and 1-3 yards to go:
In 2015 CMac had 16 touches, and got a first down 12 times (no touchdowns); his success rate was better than anyone at 75%
In 2016 (without WRight) CMac had 23 touches, got a first down 19 times, and had 1 TD.  His success rate was 83%!

So to answer the OP's question.  On third and short, I want Christian McCaffrey in the backfield.

BC

I like it that this post is data driven. Just to clarify, were his touches all runs inside the tackles? It may be that that isn't easily documented, but if it is, it would be interesting to know.

I suspect  most were.  Stanford doesn’t run their backs outside the tackles all that much.   I think defenses these days are so predicated on speed that it’s very hard to run outside. I mean how often do you see a good old fashioned power sweep? From anybody.

[lex24]

It’s wonderful to outsmart teams. You’ll win a few games that way. But it’s actually better to out physical team. Always. Bill Walsh was the smartest offensive football mind of his generation. In two years during his stint at Stanford against USC, Walsh managed seven points. Why? Did he get stupid all of a sudden?  Was John Robinson smarter than Walsh? Did he have Stanford’s offense down cold? No. USC was able to physically dominate Stanford and they could do very little offensively. So you can outsmart all you want. I’ll take  physical. That is what put Stanford on the map. If they can’t get  back to it they’re not gonna win. Simple as that

I totally agree. You need to have at least equal athletes on the field or it will be a long day. However, being more physical that the other team doesn't mean just brute strength. It also means team speed and overall execution. Precisely run patterns can help compensate for not being quite as fast as the coverage man, but only if the QB can hit the receiver right on the break. Two different physical skills can cancel out a third physical advantage. However, what is certainly true is that if one team has a prohibitive "physical" advantage in one area, they will utilize it until it gets defeated. If your team has to be 100% perfect on every possession because Stanford is keeping the ball away, that is a big advantage to Stanford. However, if you are physically dominating the LOS on both sides of the ball, it isn't going to matter much how good the opposing QB may be.

Scheme can be a factor only when the teams are well enough matched that neither one can just repeatedly run the same plays and succeed. In the past, lots of teams could dominate Stanford physically. JH recruited guys that could match or exceed the other team's strengths, but it wasn't just in one area. It was across the board. Right now, as others have pointed out, our main problem is on defense. That is where we need to get more "physical".

Agree!

---

If it is third and 1, who would you rather have carry the ball, BL or Toby?

Remound Wright

On third down and 1 - 3 yards to go:
Wright had 28 touches, 19 first downs, and 5 touchdowns (in 2015); his success rate was 68%, his touchdown rate was 18%
Bryce Love had 14 touches, 2 first downs, and 1 touchdown (in 2017) (he had 4 first downs in 7 attempts in 2018); his success rate was 14%, his touchdown rate was 7%
Toby had 31 touches, 21 first downs, and 2 touchdowns (in 2009); his success rate was 68%, his touchdown rate was 6%

However, on third down and 1-3 yards to go:
In 2015 CMac had 16 touches, and got a first down 12 times (no touchdowns); his success rate was better than anyone at 75%
In 2016 (without WRight) CMac had 23 touches, got a first down 19 times, and had 1 TD.  His success rate was 83%!

So to answer the OP's question.  On third and short, I want Christian McCaffrey in the backfield.

BC

I like it that this post is data driven. Just to clarify, were his touches all runs inside the tackles? It may be that that isn't easily documented, but if it is, it would be interesting to know.

I suspect  most were.  Stanford doesn’t run their backs outside the tackles all that much.   I think defenses these days are so predicated on speed that it’s very hard to run outside. I mean how often do you see a good old fashioned power sweep? From anybody.