08-23-2023, 07:07 PM
Manley:
* Taylor didn't catch many breaks when it came to roster retention and attrition but the big one he did catch was Manley coming back. Manley is one of the ten most experienced players on the entire roster and, unlike 3-4 of the other experienced players, played at a competitive level in the experience he had previously. In 2020 and 2021, Manley was right on the cusp of what one would call significant snaps relative to his peers (16th most snaps on the defense in 2020, 19th in 2021 but starter snaps all four games he played). Among players with his level of snaps, he was our third highest graded defender in 2020 and our fourth highest graded defender in 2021. To be gifted arguably your most proven defensive player is a nice boost, as much as Taylor couldn't catch a break otherwise.
* The talk of an acclimation and adjustment period was moderately surprising to me considering that we've already had spring and summer but on balance he comes across as a cerebral, reflective guy and I think he's just saying it's been a different kind of few months than he's had in a while, not necessarily saying it's been a difficult or problematic acclimation. One does have to wonder if taking a year off may have thrown him off his game or rhythms but I don't think that's necessarily (and hope it isn't) the case.
* He says he knew during fall quarter that he knew he wanted to come back and dedicated a lot of time to training by himself to stay in shape. This timeline may be a data point that his departure wasn't related to incompatibility with Akina, or at least that playing for Akina wasn't a deal breaker as there would have been no way to know in the fall that Akina would be departing. However, the "may" in that sentence is crucial as Manley easily could have grad transferred elsewhere if he didn't want to play for Stanford, so it's possible that the coaching change smoothed his way back to Stanford football. I have no idea how much of his sabbatical was physical or mental fatigue, exploring other passions before realizing football is still the main one, interpersonal issues with coaches, academic (certainly a possibility as we know he's a below average student since he's never made an academic honor roll), or something else. In his words it was a break to find himself off the field and explore other paths.
* Manley had an interesting point that last fall he had to put the work in to stay in shape but in the winter and spring the new staff did a good job making conditioning "competitive." The clear implication was that once he was back in the fold and working with the regimen of the new staff the getting back in shape took care of itself. This sounds to me like another modest data point on the new strength and conditioning approach striking players as a step up.
* If one is looking for an indication there may have been friction with Akina, you don't have to look far. First words out of Manley's mouth when asked about Paul Williams: "It's great, he's a very knowledgeable coach, very personable guy as well, which is a really refreshing experience for me." If I'm not mistaken the last part of that sentence had a bit of emphasis/lilt in his voice. As I've said, I tend to think it's easy to overestimate the amount the players' comments on their new coaches are meant comparatively with the old ones so I don't want to make too big of a deal out of this, but it's a possible hint. For what it's worth, the rest of the answer was a detailed endorsement of Williams' coaching, citing the way he coaches technique, whether press, playing off, or Cover 3 and oddly specifically mentioning the exact number of years Williams has experience coaching (27, obviously not a dig on Akina given his even vaster experience).
* From a DB perspective, Manley says the new defense "is kind of the same in terms of Cover 3/man but it's a lot more aggressive, a lot more stimulated pressures and just blitz packages." He also said there's a lot of press man coverage. I don't know enough scheme or have a specific enough memory to recall what our coverage schemes looked like under Akina but for what it's worth it's always interesting to hear these kind of observations from players. In terms of the aggressiveness, it's unclear how much Manley is talking about stimulated pressures and blitz packages generally or specifically with regard to corners but the implication seems to be that he specifically is involved in more of that than before. In any case, I don't view this as very significant because I did some digging into Stanford DB sack and tackle for loss numbers over the last decade and compared to both Wisconsin DBs and Wake Forest DBs (in the Williams years there) and don't think there's any significant disparity. Notably, this is despite there being a very significant disparity between Stanford and Wisconsin sack and tackle for loss numbers overall. The difference in sack and tackle for loss playmaking is exactly where you'd expect it to be, in the front seven. As we think about defensive playmakers, keep in mind that in the last five years Stanford had one guy rank in the top 100 in tackles for loss (Casey Toohill for those wondering) while Wisconsin had six. Of particular note, April has had two OLBs (Nick Herbig in 2022 and Zach Baun in 2019) finish in the top 14 of all players nationally in tackles for loss. For whoever emerges among Keneley, Bailey, Tafiti, Cooper, and Aybar, there will be opportunity to hunt. The same is true for ILBs as Wisconsin has had two top 30 and three top 100 tackle for loss master ILBs in this span (not coached by D'Onofrio, though his star pupil last year was just outside the top 100), though we have far less talent at ILB to exploit this than we do at OLB. Anyway, Manley may like the pressure he gets to be involved in but I view it as minimally relevant for the defense. The real story to watch is how the various looks we give unlock our OLBs.
* Big-ish caveat to what I just wrote that is just now occurring to me. For nine months I've been analyzing the "Wisconsin defense" somewhat as if Dave Aranda, Justin Wilcox, Jim Leonhard, and Bobby April are the same person. Obviously they aren't. It is possible that April is bringing tweaks, maybe even significant ones, compared to how Leonhard operated. For all I know corner blitzes, for example, are going to be a much bigger deal than they were at Wisconsin. Once we start seeing this in action it will be fun to start talking about the April defense and, hopefully eventually, the "Stanford defense."
* It's just words but the way he talks about competition and pushing himself to reach the goals he has for himself is what I like to hear. He seems locked in for his fifth year in an unfinished personal business kind of way, somewhat reminiscent of Ethan Bonner last year.
* Humphreys, Ayomanor, and Reuben were the three WRs he highlighted. It's just one data point but it supports a picture that those are three receivers in line for the bulk of opportunities at WR (assuming health, a historic question mark with Ayomanor).
* Taylor didn't catch many breaks when it came to roster retention and attrition but the big one he did catch was Manley coming back. Manley is one of the ten most experienced players on the entire roster and, unlike 3-4 of the other experienced players, played at a competitive level in the experience he had previously. In 2020 and 2021, Manley was right on the cusp of what one would call significant snaps relative to his peers (16th most snaps on the defense in 2020, 19th in 2021 but starter snaps all four games he played). Among players with his level of snaps, he was our third highest graded defender in 2020 and our fourth highest graded defender in 2021. To be gifted arguably your most proven defensive player is a nice boost, as much as Taylor couldn't catch a break otherwise.
* The talk of an acclimation and adjustment period was moderately surprising to me considering that we've already had spring and summer but on balance he comes across as a cerebral, reflective guy and I think he's just saying it's been a different kind of few months than he's had in a while, not necessarily saying it's been a difficult or problematic acclimation. One does have to wonder if taking a year off may have thrown him off his game or rhythms but I don't think that's necessarily (and hope it isn't) the case.
* He says he knew during fall quarter that he knew he wanted to come back and dedicated a lot of time to training by himself to stay in shape. This timeline may be a data point that his departure wasn't related to incompatibility with Akina, or at least that playing for Akina wasn't a deal breaker as there would have been no way to know in the fall that Akina would be departing. However, the "may" in that sentence is crucial as Manley easily could have grad transferred elsewhere if he didn't want to play for Stanford, so it's possible that the coaching change smoothed his way back to Stanford football. I have no idea how much of his sabbatical was physical or mental fatigue, exploring other passions before realizing football is still the main one, interpersonal issues with coaches, academic (certainly a possibility as we know he's a below average student since he's never made an academic honor roll), or something else. In his words it was a break to find himself off the field and explore other paths.
* Manley had an interesting point that last fall he had to put the work in to stay in shape but in the winter and spring the new staff did a good job making conditioning "competitive." The clear implication was that once he was back in the fold and working with the regimen of the new staff the getting back in shape took care of itself. This sounds to me like another modest data point on the new strength and conditioning approach striking players as a step up.
* If one is looking for an indication there may have been friction with Akina, you don't have to look far. First words out of Manley's mouth when asked about Paul Williams: "It's great, he's a very knowledgeable coach, very personable guy as well, which is a really refreshing experience for me." If I'm not mistaken the last part of that sentence had a bit of emphasis/lilt in his voice. As I've said, I tend to think it's easy to overestimate the amount the players' comments on their new coaches are meant comparatively with the old ones so I don't want to make too big of a deal out of this, but it's a possible hint. For what it's worth, the rest of the answer was a detailed endorsement of Williams' coaching, citing the way he coaches technique, whether press, playing off, or Cover 3 and oddly specifically mentioning the exact number of years Williams has experience coaching (27, obviously not a dig on Akina given his even vaster experience).
* From a DB perspective, Manley says the new defense "is kind of the same in terms of Cover 3/man but it's a lot more aggressive, a lot more stimulated pressures and just blitz packages." He also said there's a lot of press man coverage. I don't know enough scheme or have a specific enough memory to recall what our coverage schemes looked like under Akina but for what it's worth it's always interesting to hear these kind of observations from players. In terms of the aggressiveness, it's unclear how much Manley is talking about stimulated pressures and blitz packages generally or specifically with regard to corners but the implication seems to be that he specifically is involved in more of that than before. In any case, I don't view this as very significant because I did some digging into Stanford DB sack and tackle for loss numbers over the last decade and compared to both Wisconsin DBs and Wake Forest DBs (in the Williams years there) and don't think there's any significant disparity. Notably, this is despite there being a very significant disparity between Stanford and Wisconsin sack and tackle for loss numbers overall. The difference in sack and tackle for loss playmaking is exactly where you'd expect it to be, in the front seven. As we think about defensive playmakers, keep in mind that in the last five years Stanford had one guy rank in the top 100 in tackles for loss (Casey Toohill for those wondering) while Wisconsin had six. Of particular note, April has had two OLBs (Nick Herbig in 2022 and Zach Baun in 2019) finish in the top 14 of all players nationally in tackles for loss. For whoever emerges among Keneley, Bailey, Tafiti, Cooper, and Aybar, there will be opportunity to hunt. The same is true for ILBs as Wisconsin has had two top 30 and three top 100 tackle for loss master ILBs in this span (not coached by D'Onofrio, though his star pupil last year was just outside the top 100), though we have far less talent at ILB to exploit this than we do at OLB. Anyway, Manley may like the pressure he gets to be involved in but I view it as minimally relevant for the defense. The real story to watch is how the various looks we give unlock our OLBs.
* Big-ish caveat to what I just wrote that is just now occurring to me. For nine months I've been analyzing the "Wisconsin defense" somewhat as if Dave Aranda, Justin Wilcox, Jim Leonhard, and Bobby April are the same person. Obviously they aren't. It is possible that April is bringing tweaks, maybe even significant ones, compared to how Leonhard operated. For all I know corner blitzes, for example, are going to be a much bigger deal than they were at Wisconsin. Once we start seeing this in action it will be fun to start talking about the April defense and, hopefully eventually, the "Stanford defense."
* It's just words but the way he talks about competition and pushing himself to reach the goals he has for himself is what I like to hear. He seems locked in for his fifth year in an unfinished personal business kind of way, somewhat reminiscent of Ethan Bonner last year.
* Humphreys, Ayomanor, and Reuben were the three WRs he highlighted. It's just one data point but it supports a picture that those are three receivers in line for the bulk of opportunities at WR (assuming health, a historic question mark with Ayomanor).