[troyc]

- Is tackling primarily a player (talent) issue or a coaching issue? Can bad tacklers be taught to be good tacklers? If not, why are we recruiting bad tacklers to begin with? If so, why aren't we doing a better job of teaching our players to tackle?

My suspicion is that it's a practice issue. And a health issue. With both dovetailing together.

Stanford's banged up (and the more banged up the team has been, the worse the tackling has gotten), so that affects how physical practices can be for the players who can participate. Doesn't help that Stanford has stayed banged up during spring sessions and the preseason camp, so that affects how physical those practices can be, too. (which can be problematic because the offseason is probably the best time to work on those things) On top of that, the NCAA also limits how many full-contact periods teams can have during practice, and how long those periods can be.

Hard to practice tackling when you don't have enough players to do it. Even harder when the rules limit how often you can go live. And in-season, when you're just trying to keep enough guys healthy to be able to field a team on gameday, it's nearly impossible. All part of the by-product of players getting bigger, faster, and stronger and colliding at higher speeds and with more force? Yeah, probably.

Along those lines, it's also probably harder to tackle when your four ILBs have six healthy hands between them...

Back to the Treecast: The sense I got from Troy's analysis was that the two failed red zone opportunities versus Cal pretty much sealed Stanford's fate, especially after Cal's quick strike to take the lead. But if Stanford had gone up 14-0, Stanford still might have lost, but it wouldn't have been the complete annihilation that we witnessed. Seems reasonable to me.


But I'll leave it to Troy to correct the record if I misunderstood him.

No, you pretty much got that right!

If apathy is reigning everywhere, why are there so many encyclopedia-length posts?

Oh, you noticed that too?

As painful as it was to hear you retell the horror story of Big Game, I appreciate your takes and straightforward approach, Troy.

Thank you! Appreciate you -- and everyone else on this thread! -- for checking out the show. Even when we're not talking about great stuff.

Troy C

[troyc]

- Is tackling primarily a player (talent) issue or a coaching issue? Can bad tacklers be taught to be good tacklers? If not, why are we recruiting bad tacklers to begin with? If so, why aren't we doing a better job of teaching our players to tackle?

My suspicion is that it's a practice issue. And a health issue. With both dovetailing together.

Stanford's banged up (and the more banged up the team has been, the worse the tackling has gotten), so that affects how physical practices can be for the players who can participate. Doesn't help that Stanford has stayed banged up during spring sessions and the preseason camp, so that affects how physical those practices can be, too. (which can be problematic because the offseason is probably the best time to work on those things) On top of that, the NCAA also limits how many full-contact periods teams can have during practice, and how long those periods can be.

Hard to practice tackling when you don't have enough players to do it. Even harder when the rules limit how often you can go live. And in-season, when you're just trying to keep enough guys healthy to be able to field a team on gameday, it's nearly impossible. All part of the by-product of players getting bigger, faster, and stronger and colliding at higher speeds and with more force? Yeah, probably.

Along those lines, it's also probably harder to tackle when your four ILBs have six healthy hands between them...

Back to the Treecast: The sense I got from Troy's analysis was that the two failed red zone opportunities versus Cal pretty much sealed Stanford's fate, especially after Cal's quick strike to take the lead. But if Stanford had gone up 14-0, Stanford still might have lost, but it wouldn't have been the complete annihilation that we witnessed. Seems reasonable to me.


But I'll leave it to Troy to correct the record if I misunderstood him.

No, you pretty much got that right!

If apathy is reigning everywhere, why are there so many encyclopedia-length posts?

Oh, you noticed that too?

As painful as it was to hear you retell the horror story of Big Game, I appreciate your takes and straightforward approach, Troy.

Thank you! Appreciate you -- and everyone else on this thread! -- for checking out the show. Even when we're not talking about great stuff.

Troy C