[DC 86]

Not sure whether this has been said elsewhere, but there is an opportunity to restructure the coaching assignments, not just replace existing coaches with new coaches handling the same assignments. In a 4-3 defense, ILB coach is a pointless position. And given the team’s decreased usage of TEs, that position doesn’t need its own coach. I wonder whether, on offense, it might make sense to have an OC who isn’t at all burdened by position coach responsibilities.

Why is ILB a pointless position in a 4-3? I'm not sure Dick Butkus or Ray Nitschke would agree.

He didn't say ILB (meaning MLB) is a pointless position in a 4-3, he said that having a dedicated coach for that position is pointless, given that it's one coach for a single person on the field.

[DC 86]

Not sure whether this has been said elsewhere, but there is an opportunity to restructure the coaching assignments, not just replace existing coaches with new coaches handling the same assignments. In a 4-3 defense, ILB coach is a pointless position. And given the team’s decreased usage of TEs, that position doesn’t need its own coach. I wonder whether, on offense, it might make sense to have an OC who isn’t at all burdened by position coach responsibilities.

Why is ILB a pointless position in a 4-3? I'm not sure Dick Butkus or Ray Nitschke would agree.

He didn't say ILB (meaning MLB) is a pointless position in a 4-3, he said that having a dedicated coach for that position is pointless, given that it's one coach for a single person on the field.

[TrumpCard]

Assuming Stanford does move to a 4-3 and it's not merely a new name for the same defense, then who will play DT, DE, OLB, and MLB?  There would have to be some shuffling.  

The ILBs with eligibility remaining include Miezan, Damuni, Sinclair, JMF, Dubre, and Jorgensen.  All 6 can't be MLBs next year.  Maybe JMF or Damuni will move on?  Even then, I think someone would move to OLB.  Sinclair doesn't have the size you'd want for MLB, and seems like a potential candidate to move to OLB or maybe safety with his speed.

If we assume RJ, DWP and Booker all are gone, then the DT position will take some moving pieces around as well.  Phillips would play there as would Pakola if he returns.  After that, the team would be converting DEs or playing true freshmen.  I guess Franklin and Buckey would be the most likely to contribute, with Moi and Rowell figuring to contribute more down the road.

The rest will play OLB or DE, and there does not seem to be a lot of size disparity among the group.  Armitage would stay at DE where he already plays.  Aybar, Herron, Keneley, and DiCosmo are the remaining guys on the roster now, with Bailey and Cooper likely to provide immediate reinforcements in the Summer/Fall.  I'm not sure whether Tafiti will fit at MLB or edge.  A lot of potential here based on recruiting profiles and SPARQ scores, but not a ton of proof on the field so far.  I'd be interested to know how you all think this battle will play out and whether you all think this group of edge players will be able to generate more pass rush than Stanford did in 2021.

[TrumpCard]

Assuming Stanford does move to a 4-3 and it's not merely a new name for the same defense, then who will play DT, DE, OLB, and MLB?  There would have to be some shuffling.  

The ILBs with eligibility remaining include Miezan, Damuni, Sinclair, JMF, Dubre, and Jorgensen.  All 6 can't be MLBs next year.  Maybe JMF or Damuni will move on?  Even then, I think someone would move to OLB.  Sinclair doesn't have the size you'd want for MLB, and seems like a potential candidate to move to OLB or maybe safety with his speed.

If we assume RJ, DWP and Booker all are gone, then the DT position will take some moving pieces around as well.  Phillips would play there as would Pakola if he returns.  After that, the team would be converting DEs or playing true freshmen.  I guess Franklin and Buckey would be the most likely to contribute, with Moi and Rowell figuring to contribute more down the road.

The rest will play OLB or DE, and there does not seem to be a lot of size disparity among the group.  Armitage would stay at DE where he already plays.  Aybar, Herron, Keneley, and DiCosmo are the remaining guys on the roster now, with Bailey and Cooper likely to provide immediate reinforcements in the Summer/Fall.  I'm not sure whether Tafiti will fit at MLB or edge.  A lot of potential here based on recruiting profiles and SPARQ scores, but not a ton of proof on the field so far.  I'd be interested to know how you all think this battle will play out and whether you all think this group of edge players will be able to generate more pass rush than Stanford did in 2021.

[BostonCard]

The coaching limit is 1 HC and 10 assistants.  Figure you divide the 10 assistants into 5 assistants on offense and 4 on defense, plus one special teams coordinator.  Currently, we have position coaches for DL, ILB, and DBs (plus the DC does double duty as OLB coach). On offense, we have position coaches for the OL, RB, WR, TE, and the OC is also the QB coach.

You could provide a single linebacker coach, and then split the defensive line into interior line and ends, but given how often we run a nickel, it probably makes more sense to have two defensive backs coaches to coach, in essence five positions.  Then again, you might want to have an extra coach for the front seven, but instead of dividing by position, divide by function: run stuffing, pass rushing, and (for the linebackers), pass coverage.  Hey, if we are reimagining Stanford football, why not a director of run-stuffing and a pass rush coordinator?

In the past, we have had two OL coaches, with one coaching the interior OL and one coaching the tackles and tight ends.  Again, having three coaches each focusing on a function: run blocking (OL, TE, FB, WR), pass blocking (OL and RB), and pass catching (TE, WR, and sometimes RB) might be one way of reimagining coaching.

BC

[BostonCard]

The coaching limit is 1 HC and 10 assistants.  Figure you divide the 10 assistants into 5 assistants on offense and 4 on defense, plus one special teams coordinator.  Currently, we have position coaches for DL, ILB, and DBs (plus the DC does double duty as OLB coach). On offense, we have position coaches for the OL, RB, WR, TE, and the OC is also the QB coach.

You could provide a single linebacker coach, and then split the defensive line into interior line and ends, but given how often we run a nickel, it probably makes more sense to have two defensive backs coaches to coach, in essence five positions.  Then again, you might want to have an extra coach for the front seven, but instead of dividing by position, divide by function: run stuffing, pass rushing, and (for the linebackers), pass coverage.  Hey, if we are reimagining Stanford football, why not a director of run-stuffing and a pass rush coordinator?

In the past, we have had two OL coaches, with one coaching the interior OL and one coaching the tackles and tight ends.  Again, having three coaches each focusing on a function: run blocking (OL, TE, FB, WR), pass blocking (OL and RB), and pass catching (TE, WR, and sometimes RB) might be one way of reimagining coaching.

BC