[Goose]

I really like the posts by KartyFan and Msqueri. Amazingly, I find little to criticize in either of them. Both noted that this years team projected an image of competence that even last year's 4 win team did not. Even the rough spot where they got a DOG after a time-out seemed to be a minor blip.

I especially liked Msqueri's resetting expectations regarding the Stanford running game. The stats made it look much better than it actually was. Ford has an amazing ability to run behind an OL that achieves at best an initial stalemate at the LOS. The line then helps by pushing the pile. The times that Ford got through the line without significant contact were all scheme plays where some of the Hawaii defenders were "influence blocked" and actually either chipped or untouched. In the second half these plays stopped working as Hawaii adjusted. Looking at a replay of Ford's last TD you will see he had a bit of a hole but still had to run through two tackles. He did so with ease, but it was in no way "clean". Better tackling and he is stopped.

 

Speaking of tackling it was noted that Stanford executed lots of one-on-one tackles effectively, particularly in the first half. This was IMO much better than recent defenses that would react properly but then very often miss the tackle. In the second half there were at least two cases where the Stanford player got there but missed the tackle. There were other cases in the second half where the defense was not close to getting there and had to pursue. The pursuit angles were not great. Hawaii definitely started executing better in the second half, both offensively and defensively. IMO Stanford didn't deteriorate a lot as the game went on. Hawaii just improved. Fortunately they simply didn't have enough and Stanford made some plays.

 

I agree Warren played a good but not great game. I think that is probably what we can hope for (and hopefully expect) going forward. Definitely agree some of his passes were not perfect, but even more agree that his receivers didn't help him out much in the first half. They didn't catch some catchable balls. I feel it necessary to point out the swing pass that Ford dropped due to trying to run before he had the ball. He has been around long enough to not do that. Since he is such a great part of the offense being able to use him in the passing game would be a major plus. So far in his career that hasn't happened. I agree that Warren exhibited great pocket presence and made very good decisions. Some of his best plays were IMO things he did NOT do. He did play conservatively. He didn't throw any 50-50 balls.

 

IMO Warren is a very good passer when he has time to set his feet. He also is somewhat good in moving around in the pocket and creating a space where he can set up and throw the ball. He has trouble (as do many QBs) when he has to throw a dart while backing up. Lots of his low throws happened in this situation. Warren can throw the ball adequately well when he is running north-south. When he is running east-west he has trouble turning quickly and throwing the ball. He also can't throw the ball 20 yards across his body while rotating that 90 degrees :-). Alejado can and did at least twice. To his credit Warren knows he can't do that and didn't court disaster by trying. IMO some of the times he didn't throw to a receiver that was open were not because he didn't see them but rather because he wasn't comfortable making that throw (for whatever reason). In this, he played like the anti-K.J. Costello.

 

I also think the play where Warren was called for intentional grounding was just fine. There was a Stanford receiver on that side of the field that was not closely covered. There were no Hawaii defenders in the area. Warren was trying to get the ball down the field far enough it could be considered "in the area" of the receiver. He just couldn't get quite enough on the throw. He was going to get sacked anyway so the spot of the foul would be the same point. It was pretty safe, and almost worked. The refs had to talk about it in the event. I also believe Warren did the right thing when he didn't dive for the extra 2 yards and went out of bounds instead. Given his injury history, I think he is quite aware that he has to pick his spots. I also believe the coaches have reinforced that idea. They have told him we need you upright and whole because there isn't much behind you at this point. This is game 1. Don't get hurt giving up your body, period. The Warren from two years ago at Michigan would have gone for it. The older, smarter Warren of this year did not.

 

Lastly, the kicking game. The FG attempt was shanked. The whole play just felt funny. The timing wasn't "off", the snap was good. The players just didn't seem "ready". Not sure why, but it didn't inspire confidence. It hasn't been mentioned, but there was a fairly stiff wind right down the major axis of the stadium from the east. The two flags in the end zone were fully horizontally extended all afternoon. It cooled the stadium off quite nicely in the 4-5:30 sun period :-). It wasn't a gale and a 45-50 yard FG into the wind would have clearly been possible. However, the wind was a factor. It was also a great wind for a long hang time punt that would provide great field position. Perhaps that affected the decision to punt.

 

All in all, I think it was a better performance by Stanford than I feared. Clearly, as Msqueri pointed out, we are not ready to be a run-heavy offense with occasional "shot" plays.

If Ford running well behind his pads on 25 carries against a Group of Six defense to rack up not quite a hundred yards is good play up front, there is not much hope for us against power fronts. 

Agree, and I doubt the return of injured linemen is going to materially change that. We will need to take what we can get on the ground, play good defense, protect the passer, and avoid big mistakes. The good news is that it appears all involved are at least competent and while we will have to play real good football to win even 4 games, we currently give the impression we may be able to do that.

[Goose]

I really like the posts by KartyFan and Msqueri. Amazingly, I find little to criticize in either of them. Both noted that this years team projected an image of competence that even last year's 4 win team did not. Even the rough spot where they got a DOG after a time-out seemed to be a minor blip.

I especially liked Msqueri's resetting expectations regarding the Stanford running game. The stats made it look much better than it actually was. Ford has an amazing ability to run behind an OL that achieves at best an initial stalemate at the LOS. The line then helps by pushing the pile. The times that Ford got through the line without significant contact were all scheme plays where some of the Hawaii defenders were "influence blocked" and actually either chipped or untouched. In the second half these plays stopped working as Hawaii adjusted. Looking at a replay of Ford's last TD you will see he had a bit of a hole but still had to run through two tackles. He did so with ease, but it was in no way "clean". Better tackling and he is stopped.

 

Speaking of tackling it was noted that Stanford executed lots of one-on-one tackles effectively, particularly in the first half. This was IMO much better than recent defenses that would react properly but then very often miss the tackle. In the second half there were at least two cases where the Stanford player got there but missed the tackle. There were other cases in the second half where the defense was not close to getting there and had to pursue. The pursuit angles were not great. Hawaii definitely started executing better in the second half, both offensively and defensively. IMO Stanford didn't deteriorate a lot as the game went on. Hawaii just improved. Fortunately they simply didn't have enough and Stanford made some plays.

 

I agree Warren played a good but not great game. I think that is probably what we can hope for (and hopefully expect) going forward. Definitely agree some of his passes were not perfect, but even more agree that his receivers didn't help him out much in the first half. They didn't catch some catchable balls. I feel it necessary to point out the swing pass that Ford dropped due to trying to run before he had the ball. He has been around long enough to not do that. Since he is such a great part of the offense being able to use him in the passing game would be a major plus. So far in his career that hasn't happened. I agree that Warren exhibited great pocket presence and made very good decisions. Some of his best plays were IMO things he did NOT do. He did play conservatively. He didn't throw any 50-50 balls.

 

IMO Warren is a very good passer when he has time to set his feet. He also is somewhat good in moving around in the pocket and creating a space where he can set up and throw the ball. He has trouble (as do many QBs) when he has to throw a dart while backing up. Lots of his low throws happened in this situation. Warren can throw the ball adequately well when he is running north-south. When he is running east-west he has trouble turning quickly and throwing the ball. He also can't throw the ball 20 yards across his body while rotating that 90 degrees :-). Alejado can and did at least twice. To his credit Warren knows he can't do that and didn't court disaster by trying. IMO some of the times he didn't throw to a receiver that was open were not because he didn't see them but rather because he wasn't comfortable making that throw (for whatever reason). In this, he played like the anti-K.J. Costello.

 

I also think the play where Warren was called for intentional grounding was just fine. There was a Stanford receiver on that side of the field that was not closely covered. There were no Hawaii defenders in the area. Warren was trying to get the ball down the field far enough it could be considered "in the area" of the receiver. He just couldn't get quite enough on the throw. He was going to get sacked anyway so the spot of the foul would be the same point. It was pretty safe, and almost worked. The refs had to talk about it in the event. I also believe Warren did the right thing when he didn't dive for the extra 2 yards and went out of bounds instead. Given his injury history, I think he is quite aware that he has to pick his spots. I also believe the coaches have reinforced that idea. They have told him we need you upright and whole because there isn't much behind you at this point. This is game 1. Don't get hurt giving up your body, period. The Warren from two years ago at Michigan would have gone for it. The older, smarter Warren of this year did not.

 

Lastly, the kicking game. The FG attempt was shanked. The whole play just felt funny. The timing wasn't "off", the snap was good. The players just didn't seem "ready". Not sure why, but it didn't inspire confidence. It hasn't been mentioned, but there was a fairly stiff wind right down the major axis of the stadium from the east. The two flags in the end zone were fully horizontally extended all afternoon. It cooled the stadium off quite nicely in the 4-5:30 sun period :-). It wasn't a gale and a 45-50 yard FG into the wind would have clearly been possible. However, the wind was a factor. It was also a great wind for a long hang time punt that would provide great field position. Perhaps that affected the decision to punt.

 

All in all, I think it was a better performance by Stanford than I feared. Clearly, as Msqueri pointed out, we are not ready to be a run-heavy offense with occasional "shot" plays.

If Ford running well behind his pads on 25 carries against a Group of Six defense to rack up not quite a hundred yards is good play up front, there is not much hope for us against power fronts. 

Agree, and I doubt the return of injured linemen is going to materially change that. We will need to take what we can get on the ground, play good defense, protect the passer, and avoid big mistakes. The good news is that it appears all involved are at least competent and while we will have to play real good football to win even 4 games, we currently give the impression we may be able to do that.