[msqueri]

Bobby April III coming on board as the defensive coordinator comes with promise that he'll bring Wisconsin Badger flavor the defense badly needs as well as anxiety Stanford is handing the keys of the defense to a coach who's never coordinated/called a defense. I thought it might be interesting to look at Wisconsin's defense over the years to try to get a sense of the defense we're hoping to emulate and what role April played in it. 

April joined Wisconsin's staff in 2018 (one year into Jim Leonhard's tenure as defensive coordinator) as the outside linebackers coach and from 2020-2022 also had a defensive run game coordinator. While the defensive performance during that time has been elite, Badger defensive greatness preceded them. Here's the Defensive FEI rankings by year (DCs listed parenthetically): 

2007: #53 (Hankwitz)
2008: #43 (Doeren)
2009: #30 (Doeren)
2010: #40 (Doeren)
2011: #41 (Ash/Partridge)
2012: #20 (Ash/Partridge)
2013: #8 (Aranda)
2014: #21 (Aranda)
2015: #12 (Aranda)
2016: #6 (Wilcox)
2017: #6 (Leonhard)
2018: #32 (Leonhard)
2019: #12 (Leonhard)
2020: #4 (Leonhard)
2021: #3 (Leonhard)
2022: #18 (Leonhard)

Leonhard/April had a very tough act to follow after Aranda and Wilcox and managed to live up to that standard. In the five years April coached at Wisconsin, the median defense was #12 in the nation. To put that into perspective for Stanford fans, the Harbaugh/Shaw glory years median for Stanford was #8 or #9, depending on where you cut off the years. As we all know, even a tick behind that as Wisconsin has been the last decade (with two of the last three seasons being even more elite than prime Stanford mustered) is dominant. That's an exciting defense to try to draw lessons from.

The questions for us become how much of the credit a mid-level assistant like April deserves as opposed to Leonhard, how much of the Wisconsin magic baked in to the program's DNA (by Aranda, Wilcox, Leonhard, and others) rubbed off on April, and how much of the Wisconsin staff responsible for this magic April will be able to bring with him to Stanford. For each of these I think there are reasons for optimism regarding what April can mean for Stanford, as well as reasons to be concerned we're getting the understudy rather than the maestro. Stanford's own experience is a bit of a cautionary tale - based on program trajectory/departing DCs moving on for other opportunities/etc., there are obvious parallels between April and Lance Anderson. Stanford calculated that Anderson's apprenticeships under Mason and Fangio rubbed off, but it became clear that the magic didn't translate. For Wisconsin, Leonhard himself was an assistant for a year under Wilcox who moved up to the big job in the way Stanford tried with Anderson, but Wilcox and Aranda were both proven DC hired guns/rising supernovas. The Wilcox/Aranda model is the more reliable one and the one I wish Stanford would use for the critical DC position, just as I wish we would belly up to the big kids table and hire a proven Power Five head coach, but we are where we are: trying to identify good candidates among guys looking to make a professional leap. 

How have Wisconsin defensive assistants done trying to make professional leaps? Daronte Jones coached only one year under Aranda and then got half a decade of NFL experience, so his experience is inverted compared to April (and much less time marinating in the Badger defensive stew), but for what it's worth he got a year as LSU's DC and had a mediocre year by LSU standards (#44 in Defensive FEI); he went back to the NFL when LSU's coaching staff turned over. Tim Tibesar (the coach April replaced at Wisconsin) parlayed his Wisconsin job into a Pac-12 defensive coordinator gig as well, at Oregon State, though Tibesar had years of major college football experience previously so is not a good analogue to April; for what it's worth, Tibesar's track record at Oregon State was not successful and he's now DC at Akron and in his first year squeezed out modest improvement in what had been the worst defense in America before he got there. In general, there isn't much track record of Aranda/Wilcox/Leonhard Wisconsin assistants making a jump to DC. Jones is really the only guy to make the leap without DC experience and he only did it for a year. This is a small sample and if April is going to be a good hire he'd naturally be an outlier. We have to hope he's got a good mix of talents and experience to be a good DC. He's got a relatively clean upward trajectory and lengthy apprenticeships under Rex Ryan in the NFL (four years) and Leonhard in college (five years), which means a lot more to me than a coach getting one year under Aranda for instance. 

To the extent April has been a defensive scheme guy and empowered in the Wisconsin defense, it's been as the run game coordinator. It's nigh impossible for outsiders to discern how much credit to assess for titular roles like this, how integral April was to Leonhard's scheme and calls, how much more empowered April was in the defensive run game compared to the defensive pass game, etc. But for the sake of trying to understand what April brings to the table let's take a look at Wisconsin's yards per carry allowed ranks in the defense's salad (Aranda-Wilcox-Leonhard) days:

2013: #9
2014: #28
2015: #4
2016: #9
2017: #9
2018: #75 (April joined staff)
2019: #15
2020: #14 (April became defensive run game coordinator)
2021: #1
2022: #6

Well, gotta love that! If Stanford can come even close to replicating that run defense it would be a godsend. In the five years April has been part of a defensive staff that had a median year of being #14 in the nation in run defense, Stanford's median run defense has been #115. What a difference.

[msqueri]

Bobby April III coming on board as the defensive coordinator comes with promise that he'll bring Wisconsin Badger flavor the defense badly needs as well as anxiety Stanford is handing the keys of the defense to a coach who's never coordinated/called a defense. I thought it might be interesting to look at Wisconsin's defense over the years to try to get a sense of the defense we're hoping to emulate and what role April played in it. 

April joined Wisconsin's staff in 2018 (one year into Jim Leonhard's tenure as defensive coordinator) as the outside linebackers coach and from 2020-2022 also had a defensive run game coordinator. While the defensive performance during that time has been elite, Badger defensive greatness preceded them. Here's the Defensive FEI rankings by year (DCs listed parenthetically): 

2007: #53 (Hankwitz)
2008: #43 (Doeren)
2009: #30 (Doeren)
2010: #40 (Doeren)
2011: #41 (Ash/Partridge)
2012: #20 (Ash/Partridge)
2013: #8 (Aranda)
2014: #21 (Aranda)
2015: #12 (Aranda)
2016: #6 (Wilcox)
2017: #6 (Leonhard)
2018: #32 (Leonhard)
2019: #12 (Leonhard)
2020: #4 (Leonhard)
2021: #3 (Leonhard)
2022: #18 (Leonhard)

Leonhard/April had a very tough act to follow after Aranda and Wilcox and managed to live up to that standard. In the five years April coached at Wisconsin, the median defense was #12 in the nation. To put that into perspective for Stanford fans, the Harbaugh/Shaw glory years median for Stanford was #8 or #9, depending on where you cut off the years. As we all know, even a tick behind that as Wisconsin has been the last decade (with two of the last three seasons being even more elite than prime Stanford mustered) is dominant. That's an exciting defense to try to draw lessons from.

The questions for us become how much of the credit a mid-level assistant like April deserves as opposed to Leonhard, how much of the Wisconsin magic baked in to the program's DNA (by Aranda, Wilcox, Leonhard, and others) rubbed off on April, and how much of the Wisconsin staff responsible for this magic April will be able to bring with him to Stanford. For each of these I think there are reasons for optimism regarding what April can mean for Stanford, as well as reasons to be concerned we're getting the understudy rather than the maestro. Stanford's own experience is a bit of a cautionary tale - based on program trajectory/departing DCs moving on for other opportunities/etc., there are obvious parallels between April and Lance Anderson. Stanford calculated that Anderson's apprenticeships under Mason and Fangio rubbed off, but it became clear that the magic didn't translate. For Wisconsin, Leonhard himself was an assistant for a year under Wilcox who moved up to the big job in the way Stanford tried with Anderson, but Wilcox and Aranda were both proven DC hired guns/rising supernovas. The Wilcox/Aranda model is the more reliable one and the one I wish Stanford would use for the critical DC position, just as I wish we would belly up to the big kids table and hire a proven Power Five head coach, but we are where we are: trying to identify good candidates among guys looking to make a professional leap. 

How have Wisconsin defensive assistants done trying to make professional leaps? Daronte Jones coached only one year under Aranda and then got half a decade of NFL experience, so his experience is inverted compared to April (and much less time marinating in the Badger defensive stew), but for what it's worth he got a year as LSU's DC and had a mediocre year by LSU standards (#44 in Defensive FEI); he went back to the NFL when LSU's coaching staff turned over. Tim Tibesar (the coach April replaced at Wisconsin) parlayed his Wisconsin job into a Pac-12 defensive coordinator gig as well, at Oregon State, though Tibesar had years of major college football experience previously so is not a good analogue to April; for what it's worth, Tibesar's track record at Oregon State was not successful and he's now DC at Akron and in his first year squeezed out modest improvement in what had been the worst defense in America before he got there. In general, there isn't much track record of Aranda/Wilcox/Leonhard Wisconsin assistants making a jump to DC. Jones is really the only guy to make the leap without DC experience and he only did it for a year. This is a small sample and if April is going to be a good hire he'd naturally be an outlier. We have to hope he's got a good mix of talents and experience to be a good DC. He's got a relatively clean upward trajectory and lengthy apprenticeships under Rex Ryan in the NFL (four years) and Leonhard in college (five years), which means a lot more to me than a coach getting one year under Aranda for instance. 

To the extent April has been a defensive scheme guy and empowered in the Wisconsin defense, it's been as the run game coordinator. It's nigh impossible for outsiders to discern how much credit to assess for titular roles like this, how integral April was to Leonhard's scheme and calls, how much more empowered April was in the defensive run game compared to the defensive pass game, etc. But for the sake of trying to understand what April brings to the table let's take a look at Wisconsin's yards per carry allowed ranks in the defense's salad (Aranda-Wilcox-Leonhard) days:

2013: #9
2014: #28
2015: #4
2016: #9
2017: #9
2018: #75 (April joined staff)
2019: #15
2020: #14 (April became defensive run game coordinator)
2021: #1
2022: #6

Well, gotta love that! If Stanford can come even close to replicating that run defense it would be a godsend. In the five years April has been part of a defensive staff that had a median year of being #14 in the nation in run defense, Stanford's median run defense has been #115. What a difference.

[msqueri]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

[msqueri]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

[BostonCard]

Thanks, Matt; another tour de force, as we have come to expect.  I think April has a lot of room to improve the defensive side of the ball, if only by improving defensive fundamentals: positioning, tackling, not blowing coverage.  Even if the defensive play calling isn’t brilliant, I think we can improve dramatically just by playing fundamentally sound defense, and improving defensive S&C.

Given how bad it has been the last four years, I think even a merely competent defensive coordinator ought to improve defensive efficiency dramatically.

BC

[BostonCard]

Thanks, Matt; another tour de force, as we have come to expect.  I think April has a lot of room to improve the defensive side of the ball, if only by improving defensive fundamentals: positioning, tackling, not blowing coverage.  Even if the defensive play calling isn’t brilliant, I think we can improve dramatically just by playing fundamentally sound defense, and improving defensive S&C.

Given how bad it has been the last four years, I think even a merely competent defensive coordinator ought to improve defensive efficiency dramatically.

BC

[lex24]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ). Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run. And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

[lex24]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ). Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run. And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

[Mick]

I like most of Coach Taylor's new hires. We'll see how Sac State success translates.

I'm particularly interested in Coach Deatrick's outcomes.  We suffered in strength & conditioning, I'm very hopeful that he can turn it around, improving strength, endurance and flexibility and reducing injuries.

[Mick]

I like most of Coach Taylor's new hires. We'll see how Sac State success translates.

I'm particularly interested in Coach Deatrick's outcomes.  We suffered in strength & conditioning, I'm very hopeful that he can turn it around, improving strength, endurance and flexibility and reducing injuries.

[msqueri]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

The offensive tempo is not going to be slow under Taylor. The slowest tempo offense Taylor has coached would be the fastest Shaw ever coached. Just based on past practice we should expect about ten more plays of offense per game (15+ percent more plays....a ton). Theoretically one could posit that Taylor played fast tempo at Sacramento State because personnel/opponents/situation called for it and at Stanford he may opt for a different strategy. I know you and some others would like that. But based on his public comments over the last two weeks you should not expect that. He routinely uses "tempo" (along with fun, attack, and balance) as one of the main words to describe his offense. When he mentions slowing tempo it is explicitly in the context of mixing tempos to keep defenses off balance; that is, very much not the deliberative, clock squeezing lethargy of Shawfense. And he has even said in recent interviews that we will sometimes huddle. Expect tempo. This is going to be much faster than Shaw.

It's a fair question to wonder what that means for the defense. For what it's worth, here are Wisconsin offense plays per game:

2013: 70.2
2014: 69.3
2015: 71.6
2016: 70.1
2017: 68.1
2018: 67.3
2019: 68.8
2020: 70.7
2021: 66.7
2022: 62.8

So the median plays per game for Wisconsin in its defensively dominant years is about 69. That's about three plays more per game than Shaw's median and almost exactly (a tad higher) than Stanford's 2022 offense. It's fair to wonder how Taylor tempo will mesh with a defense that's relied on slower tempo, which is a description of both Stanford and to a lesser extent Wisconsin in recent years.

I also like your point about defenses playing better against the run if they practice against a good run offense. In my simplistic view I consider the improvements in offensive efficiency we should anticipate with Taylor as a reason for optimism regarding the defense too.

The connection between defensive depth and tempo is one where I understand your logic but would want to empirically test it. I don't get the impression good defenses, regardless of tempo, rotate out personnel as much as many fans assume. It's not that taxing for a good major college football linebacker to play 60+ plays. But this is something I'd want to test with data.

[msqueri]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

The offensive tempo is not going to be slow under Taylor. The slowest tempo offense Taylor has coached would be the fastest Shaw ever coached. Just based on past practice we should expect about ten more plays of offense per game (15+ percent more plays....a ton). Theoretically one could posit that Taylor played fast tempo at Sacramento State because personnel/opponents/situation called for it and at Stanford he may opt for a different strategy. I know you and some others would like that. But based on his public comments over the last two weeks you should not expect that. He routinely uses "tempo" (along with fun, attack, and balance) as one of the main words to describe his offense. When he mentions slowing tempo it is explicitly in the context of mixing tempos to keep defenses off balance; that is, very much not the deliberative, clock squeezing lethargy of Shawfense. And he has even said in recent interviews that we will sometimes huddle. Expect tempo. This is going to be much faster than Shaw.

It's a fair question to wonder what that means for the defense. For what it's worth, here are Wisconsin offense plays per game:

2013: 70.2
2014: 69.3
2015: 71.6
2016: 70.1
2017: 68.1
2018: 67.3
2019: 68.8
2020: 70.7
2021: 66.7
2022: 62.8

So the median plays per game for Wisconsin in its defensively dominant years is about 69. That's about three plays more per game than Shaw's median and almost exactly (a tad higher) than Stanford's 2022 offense. It's fair to wonder how Taylor tempo will mesh with a defense that's relied on slower tempo, which is a description of both Stanford and to a lesser extent Wisconsin in recent years.

I also like your point about defenses playing better against the run if they practice against a good run offense. In my simplistic view I consider the improvements in offensive efficiency we should anticipate with Taylor as a reason for optimism regarding the defense too.

The connection between defensive depth and tempo is one where I understand your logic but would want to empirically test it. I don't get the impression good defenses, regardless of tempo, rotate out personnel as much as many fans assume. It's not that taxing for a good major college football linebacker to play 60+ plays. But this is something I'd want to test with data.

[Red80]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

It's the main reason that I don't like the hire of Taylor. I would have been quite pleased if Stanford had hired Chryst as HC and April as DC. 

Stanford is going to continue to trend offensively to look like most of the other teams in the conference, as they have since 2019. When Stanford was winning P12 Titles they did not look like anyone else. That was one of the main reasons they were so successful. 

Simply put, this program does not get the talent to play uptempo football, offensively or defensively.

Couldn't agree more that practicing against a power run game scheme makes the defense better at stopping the run. The combination of the two also makes a football team tougher and tougher, which Stanford used to be known for during their great run.

[Red80]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

It's the main reason that I don't like the hire of Taylor. I would have been quite pleased if Stanford had hired Chryst as HC and April as DC. 

Stanford is going to continue to trend offensively to look like most of the other teams in the conference, as they have since 2019. When Stanford was winning P12 Titles they did not look like anyone else. That was one of the main reasons they were so successful. 

Simply put, this program does not get the talent to play uptempo football, offensively or defensively.

Couldn't agree more that practicing against a power run game scheme makes the defense better at stopping the run. The combination of the two also makes a football team tougher and tougher, which Stanford used to be known for during their great run.

[lex24]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

The offensive tempo is not going to be slow under Taylor. The slowest tempo offense Taylor has coached would be the fastest Shaw ever coached. Just based on past practice we should expect about ten more plays of offense per game (15+ percent more plays....a ton). Theoretically one could posit that Taylor played fast tempo at Sacramento State because personnel/opponents/situation called for it and at Stanford he may opt for a different strategy. I know you and some others would like that. But based on his public comments over the last two weeks you should not expect that. He routinely uses "tempo" (along with fun, attack, and balance) as one of the main words to describe his offense. When he mentions slowing tempo it is explicitly in the context of mixing tempos to keep defenses off balance; that is, very much not the deliberative, clock squeezing lethargy of Shawfense. And he has even said in recent interviews that we will sometimes huddle. Expect tempo. This is going to be much faster than Shaw.

It's a fair question to wonder what that means for the defense. For what it's worth, here are Wisconsin offense plays per game:

2013: 70.2
2014: 69.3
2015: 71.6
2016: 70.1
2017: 68.1
2018: 67.3
2019: 68.8
2020: 70.7
2021: 66.7
2022: 62.8

So the median plays per game for Wisconsin in its defensively dominant years is about 69. That's about three plays more per game than Shaw's median and almost exactly (a tad higher) than Stanford's 2022 offense. It's fair to wonder how Taylor tempo will mesh with a defense that's relied on slower tempo, which is a description of both Stanford and to a lesser extent Wisconsin in recent years.

I also like your point about defenses playing better against the run if they practice against a good run offense. In my simplistic view I consider the improvements in offensive efficiency we should anticipate with Taylor as a reason for optimism regarding the defense too.

The connection between defensive depth and tempo is one where I understand your logic but would want to empirically test it. I don't get the impression good defenses, regardless of tempo, rotate out personnel as much as many fans assume. It's not that taxing for a good major college football linebacker to play 60+ plays. But this is something I'd want to test with data.

I know it’s going to be significantly more up tempo. Makes no sense to play that style offense and NOT go uptempo.  

 My point  about needing more depth come from comments  Nick Alioti made about the need for defensive depth when your offense plays fast. That was back in Chip Kelly days. Doubt Taylor will go THAT up tempo.  But it’s logical to assume your defense  will be on the field longer  when your offense goes up tempo.  Thus the need for more depth.

And while I would’ve preferred a more power oriented  style “complimentary “ football, they went a different direction. Great. Just hope it works. And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

[lex24]

Notably, it appears the plan might be for April to bring his fellow defensive front seven assistants, inside linebackers coach Mark D'Onofrio and defensive line coach Ross Kolodziej, with him to Stanford. D'Onofrio has only coached with Leonhard and April for one year after a three year absence from coaching and many years as a defensive coordinator at Temple, Miami, and Houston. Looking at the arcs of D'Onofrio's defenses at each of those three schools, he was very modestly successful at Temple, unsuccessful at Miami, and unsuccessful at Houston. The way I'd think about D'Onofrio is a failed coordinator who can nonetheless provide April with some perspective from years of major college football play calling, and the two have a year of successful experience navigating the seams and gaps between outside and inside linebackers. Kolodziej led Badger strength and conditioning for six years between 2015-2020 before serving as the DL coach the last two years. The performance of the defense, especially in run defense, the last two years suggests that Chryst and Leonhard didn't err in making Kolodziej DL coach. Certainly he's been integral to the program spanning Aranda, Wilcox, and Leonhard successes. In my view, the theory of the case for the Stanford defense under April would be much stronger with Kolodziej and D'Onofrio than it would be if he is forced to retain Stanford assistants or search elsewhere for new partners. Big arrow up for me if these three come together. They have proven synergy as defensive coaches and, as a bonus, synergy with one another in integrating strength and conditioning with defensive coaching: in addition to Kolodziej's obvious strength and conditioning expertise, D'Onofrio's time at Houston overlapped with new Stanford honcho Ryan Deatrick.

The biggest unknown for me with regard to April as DC is the defensive secondary coaching. I remain convinced we need two defensive secondary coaches, as Leonhard operated at Wisconsin and as Taylor operated at Sacramento State. I do not know anything about the coaching Taylor and April plan to bring on for the secondary. Big unknown for me. Hopefully we can nail down the rest of the staff soon and the synergies are as good as my optimistic read so far.

Wisconsin played a slow tempo run oriented offense. Ball control.  Which obviously helps the defense. Also, I think a defense plays the run better when it practices against a run oriented offense (and usually with a very good o-line ).  Complimentary football. Running well and stopping the run were the constants during their great run.  And the inability to run or stop the run was at the forefront of the collapse.

I don’t  know how up tempo Taylor will play.  Defensive depth will be very important.  Kind of a “duh”, I know.    But I think it’s even more imperative with an up tempo style team.

The offensive tempo is not going to be slow under Taylor. The slowest tempo offense Taylor has coached would be the fastest Shaw ever coached. Just based on past practice we should expect about ten more plays of offense per game (15+ percent more plays....a ton). Theoretically one could posit that Taylor played fast tempo at Sacramento State because personnel/opponents/situation called for it and at Stanford he may opt for a different strategy. I know you and some others would like that. But based on his public comments over the last two weeks you should not expect that. He routinely uses "tempo" (along with fun, attack, and balance) as one of the main words to describe his offense. When he mentions slowing tempo it is explicitly in the context of mixing tempos to keep defenses off balance; that is, very much not the deliberative, clock squeezing lethargy of Shawfense. And he has even said in recent interviews that we will sometimes huddle. Expect tempo. This is going to be much faster than Shaw.

It's a fair question to wonder what that means for the defense. For what it's worth, here are Wisconsin offense plays per game:

2013: 70.2
2014: 69.3
2015: 71.6
2016: 70.1
2017: 68.1
2018: 67.3
2019: 68.8
2020: 70.7
2021: 66.7
2022: 62.8

So the median plays per game for Wisconsin in its defensively dominant years is about 69. That's about three plays more per game than Shaw's median and almost exactly (a tad higher) than Stanford's 2022 offense. It's fair to wonder how Taylor tempo will mesh with a defense that's relied on slower tempo, which is a description of both Stanford and to a lesser extent Wisconsin in recent years.

I also like your point about defenses playing better against the run if they practice against a good run offense. In my simplistic view I consider the improvements in offensive efficiency we should anticipate with Taylor as a reason for optimism regarding the defense too.

The connection between defensive depth and tempo is one where I understand your logic but would want to empirically test it. I don't get the impression good defenses, regardless of tempo, rotate out personnel as much as many fans assume. It's not that taxing for a good major college football linebacker to play 60+ plays. But this is something I'd want to test with data.

I know it’s going to be significantly more up tempo. Makes no sense to play that style offense and NOT go uptempo.  

 My point  about needing more depth come from comments  Nick Alioti made about the need for defensive depth when your offense plays fast. That was back in Chip Kelly days. Doubt Taylor will go THAT up tempo.  But it’s logical to assume your defense  will be on the field longer  when your offense goes up tempo.  Thus the need for more depth.

And while I would’ve preferred a more power oriented  style “complimentary “ football, they went a different direction. Great. Just hope it works. And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

[Goose]

And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

This is absolutely the case, and to a large extent Stanford has already done the experiment, and repeated it several times. Obviously every team and every coach are a bit different, but Walsh did not run a "slow" tempo offense. Certainly Jack Elway didn't either. Stanford has historically been unable to recruit adequate depth on defense. We would have a few really outstanding defenders and a lot of quite marginal ones. We knew we had to outscore the other team by a fair amount, because at then end of the game our outstanding defenders would be gassed and couldn't cover for the marginal ones. It is probably true that a "good" linebacker can play 60 plays a game, but if he has to play 70 while covering for some guys who might be OK for 40, it doesn't work. We know this from experience.

If the new staff can do a significantly better job recruiting defensive players, obviously we are are going to have a better defense. The determining factor will be how much better. It is also a matter of "depth" in the sense a few great players can't really compensate for players who aren't so good over an entire game. The balance is also very important. It is not that it can't be done, but there isn't much precedent for it.

[Goose]

And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

This is absolutely the case, and to a large extent Stanford has already done the experiment, and repeated it several times. Obviously every team and every coach are a bit different, but Walsh did not run a "slow" tempo offense. Certainly Jack Elway didn't either. Stanford has historically been unable to recruit adequate depth on defense. We would have a few really outstanding defenders and a lot of quite marginal ones. We knew we had to outscore the other team by a fair amount, because at then end of the game our outstanding defenders would be gassed and couldn't cover for the marginal ones. It is probably true that a "good" linebacker can play 60 plays a game, but if he has to play 70 while covering for some guys who might be OK for 40, it doesn't work. We know this from experience.

If the new staff can do a significantly better job recruiting defensive players, obviously we are are going to have a better defense. The determining factor will be how much better. It is also a matter of "depth" in the sense a few great players can't really compensate for players who aren't so good over an entire game. The balance is also very important. It is not that it can't be done, but there isn't much precedent for it.

[msqueri]

The other piece I wanted to look at was Wisconsin's defensive personnel usage.

Judging by the participation report lists of starters, they run a mix of nickel (2-4-5) and 3-4, with more games starting in 3-4 and arguably trending more in that direction the last three years, though it's generally stable in terms of being in 3-4 a bit more than nickel. Over the last three years I counted 18 games starting in 3-4, 12 games starting in nickel, and one game starting in a dime (1-4-6). On paper this seems like a significant difference from Stanford's 2022 defense, though some of this is terminological and guys labeled as DEs in one system can be OLBs in another.

For what it's worth, by PFF's classification of positions the top 15 contributors in Stanford's 2022 defense included three defensive interior, three edge, four linebackers, two safeties, and three cornerbacks while Wisconsin's 2022 defense includes three defensive interior, three edge, three linebackers, two safeties, and four cornerbacks. Wisconsin's 2021 defense was four defensive interior, two edge, two linebackers, three safeties, and four cornerbacks. Wisconsin's 2020 defense was four defensive interior, three edge, two linebackers, three safeties, and three cornerbacks. I don't want to read too much into the technical classification of positions and vagaries between years but this is suggestive of the Wisconsin defense requiring more defensive interior and fewer linebackers. To test the proposition a bit I went a bit further back and see that they had four key contributor defensive interior in 2019 and 2016 and FIVE (holy crap) in 2018. In contrast, Stanford last had four key contributor defensive interior in 2019. In short, Wisconsin has had four key big uglies on defense four of the last seven years (2021, 2020, 2019, and 2016) and Stanford has only twice (2018, 2017).

This emerges for me as another big question about bringing April on board. The Wisconsin defense does use meat up front. Can Stanford replicate that? If the Stanford defense uses fundamentally different personnel than what April succeeded with at Wisconsin, that's a major variable that would significantly decrease confidence in his ability to translate. In the short term, one wonders if Keneley or Armitage can be essentially full time up at the line.

[msqueri]

The other piece I wanted to look at was Wisconsin's defensive personnel usage.

Judging by the participation report lists of starters, they run a mix of nickel (2-4-5) and 3-4, with more games starting in 3-4 and arguably trending more in that direction the last three years, though it's generally stable in terms of being in 3-4 a bit more than nickel. Over the last three years I counted 18 games starting in 3-4, 12 games starting in nickel, and one game starting in a dime (1-4-6). On paper this seems like a significant difference from Stanford's 2022 defense, though some of this is terminological and guys labeled as DEs in one system can be OLBs in another.

For what it's worth, by PFF's classification of positions the top 15 contributors in Stanford's 2022 defense included three defensive interior, three edge, four linebackers, two safeties, and three cornerbacks while Wisconsin's 2022 defense includes three defensive interior, three edge, three linebackers, two safeties, and four cornerbacks. Wisconsin's 2021 defense was four defensive interior, two edge, two linebackers, three safeties, and four cornerbacks. Wisconsin's 2020 defense was four defensive interior, three edge, two linebackers, three safeties, and three cornerbacks. I don't want to read too much into the technical classification of positions and vagaries between years but this is suggestive of the Wisconsin defense requiring more defensive interior and fewer linebackers. To test the proposition a bit I went a bit further back and see that they had four key contributor defensive interior in 2019 and 2016 and FIVE (holy crap) in 2018. In contrast, Stanford last had four key contributor defensive interior in 2019. In short, Wisconsin has had four key big uglies on defense four of the last seven years (2021, 2020, 2019, and 2016) and Stanford has only twice (2018, 2017).

This emerges for me as another big question about bringing April on board. The Wisconsin defense does use meat up front. Can Stanford replicate that? If the Stanford defense uses fundamentally different personnel than what April succeeded with at Wisconsin, that's a major variable that would significantly decrease confidence in his ability to translate. In the short term, one wonders if Keneley or Armitage can be essentially full time up at the line.

[newguy]

I know it’s going to be significantly more up tempo. Makes no sense to play that style offense and NOT go uptempo.  

 My point  about needing more depth come from comments  Nick Alioti made about the need for defensive depth when your offense plays fast. That was back in Chip Kelly days. Doubt Taylor will go THAT up tempo.  But it’s logical to assume your defense  will be on the field longer  when your offense goes up tempo.  Thus the need for more depth.

And while I would’ve preferred a more power oriented  style “complimentary “ football, they went a different direction. Great. Just hope it works. And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

according to 247, 8 of the top 9 recruits who have signed with us for 2023 are on offense, assuming that Jackson Harris is a WR.

[newguy]

I know it’s going to be significantly more up tempo. Makes no sense to play that style offense and NOT go uptempo.  

 My point  about needing more depth come from comments  Nick Alioti made about the need for defensive depth when your offense plays fast. That was back in Chip Kelly days. Doubt Taylor will go THAT up tempo.  But it’s logical to assume your defense  will be on the field longer  when your offense goes up tempo.  Thus the need for more depth.

And while I would’ve preferred a more power oriented  style “complimentary “ football, they went a different direction. Great. Just hope it works. And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

according to 247, 8 of the top 9 recruits who have signed with us for 2023 are on offense, assuming that Jackson Harris is a WR.

[Phogge]

I don’t care about the tempo. All I want is an an active team. Attack and attack again. At least play watchable football.

[Phogge]

I don’t care about the tempo. All I want is an an active team. Attack and attack again. At least play watchable football.

[Spiny_Norman]

msqueri, what kind of defensive talent was Wisconsin working with? Were they getting elite results from elite players? Were they coaching up 3 stars to play like 4 and 5 stars? Or just playing solid overall defense without standouts?

[Spiny_Norman]

msqueri, what kind of defensive talent was Wisconsin working with? Were they getting elite results from elite players? Were they coaching up 3 stars to play like 4 and 5 stars? Or just playing solid overall defense without standouts?

[81alum]

And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

This is absolutely the case, and to a large extent Stanford has already done the experiment, and repeated it several times. Obviously every team and every coach are a bit different, but Walsh did not run a "slow" tempo offense. Certainly Jack Elway didn't either. Stanford has historically been unable to recruit adequate depth on defense. We would have a few really outstanding defenders and a lot of quite marginal ones. We knew we had to outscore the other team by a fair amount, because at then end of the game our outstanding defenders would be gassed and couldn't cover for the marginal ones. It is probably true that a "good" linebacker can play 60 plays a game, but if he has to play 70 while covering for some guys who might be OK for 40, it doesn't work. We know this from experience..

I agree.  Gordy Ceresino could not make the Walsh I defense good enough to compete with the heavyweights Washington and USC.  We knew we would have to outscore such teams, since we had many more quality players on offense than defense.  We did give up 45 and 49 points, after all. At the time I heard some theories about why Stanford attracted top offensive players (Benjamin, Loften, Nelson, King) and not so many outstanding defenders (Ceresino).  I always wondered if that was really inherent in the nature of the university or just the coaching emphasis of Walsh and his predecessors.  Was it (is it?) true that the best students academically tend to opt for offensive positions, and more average students tend to opt for defensive positions?  That was the theory, but I've never known if there was evidence to support it.

The Harbaugh/Gerhardt system, I think, allowed thinner defensive rosters more of a chance to compete--by emphasizing ball control and keeping the defense off the field.  This was assisted by all the spread offenses of our opponents--all their speedy tempos might result in points, but at least they would score quickly and keep our defense from staying on the field forever.  The longer a weak defensive unit is on the field the greater the probability that the opposing Offensive Coordinator will find its weaknesses and exploit them when they are tired and vulnerable.  

I do remember very well Aliotti discussing the Oregon defenses he coached--how essential it was to have wholesale shift changes since his defenses would spend nearly twice as much time on the field as the Oregon offense. 

In short, there is plausibility to the conventional wisdom is that up-tempo offense demands a special level of defensive depth. 

Presumably our new defensive coordinator is knows all this.  He apparently has a reputation as a good recruiter.  Great!  He will need it.  Perhaps a selling point when recruiting defenders will be that many more players than usual will see the field.

[81alum]

And I think for it to do so they will need to have defensive depth.

This is absolutely the case, and to a large extent Stanford has already done the experiment, and repeated it several times. Obviously every team and every coach are a bit different, but Walsh did not run a "slow" tempo offense. Certainly Jack Elway didn't either. Stanford has historically been unable to recruit adequate depth on defense. We would have a few really outstanding defenders and a lot of quite marginal ones. We knew we had to outscore the other team by a fair amount, because at then end of the game our outstanding defenders would be gassed and couldn't cover for the marginal ones. It is probably true that a "good" linebacker can play 60 plays a game, but if he has to play 70 while covering for some guys who might be OK for 40, it doesn't work. We know this from experience..

I agree.  Gordy Ceresino could not make the Walsh I defense good enough to compete with the heavyweights Washington and USC.  We knew we would have to outscore such teams, since we had many more quality players on offense than defense.  We did give up 45 and 49 points, after all. At the time I heard some theories about why Stanford attracted top offensive players (Benjamin, Loften, Nelson, King) and not so many outstanding defenders (Ceresino).  I always wondered if that was really inherent in the nature of the university or just the coaching emphasis of Walsh and his predecessors.  Was it (is it?) true that the best students academically tend to opt for offensive positions, and more average students tend to opt for defensive positions?  That was the theory, but I've never known if there was evidence to support it.

The Harbaugh/Gerhardt system, I think, allowed thinner defensive rosters more of a chance to compete--by emphasizing ball control and keeping the defense off the field.  This was assisted by all the spread offenses of our opponents--all their speedy tempos might result in points, but at least they would score quickly and keep our defense from staying on the field forever.  The longer a weak defensive unit is on the field the greater the probability that the opposing Offensive Coordinator will find its weaknesses and exploit them when they are tired and vulnerable.  

I do remember very well Aliotti discussing the Oregon defenses he coached--how essential it was to have wholesale shift changes since his defenses would spend nearly twice as much time on the field as the Oregon offense. 

In short, there is plausibility to the conventional wisdom is that up-tempo offense demands a special level of defensive depth. 

Presumably our new defensive coordinator is knows all this.  He apparently has a reputation as a good recruiter.  Great!  He will need it.  Perhaps a selling point when recruiting defenders will be that many more players than usual will see the field.

[OutsiderFan]

On what basis is it assumed Bobby April is a great recruiter? I'm not denying he is, but I'd like to know what gives this impression.

Stanford has not been known for having "great recruiters" on the coaching staff of late, and I'm not even sure I know what this term means these days. It used to mean ability to land the top talents and beat our other top programs for coveted players. Now, it might mean more than that. Like in the age of NIL and transfer portal, perhaps it means more emphasis on finding guys who fit the school and systems and getting more of those guys than the average coach might.

Stanford has traditionally tasked coaches with areas of the country to focus on. Is Taylor going to change this approach and have the position coaches who will be coaching the recruits be the ones recruiting them, or keep it geographic-focused? Or maybe a hybrid approach?

[OutsiderFan]

On what basis is it assumed Bobby April is a great recruiter? I'm not denying he is, but I'd like to know what gives this impression.

Stanford has not been known for having "great recruiters" on the coaching staff of late, and I'm not even sure I know what this term means these days. It used to mean ability to land the top talents and beat our other top programs for coveted players. Now, it might mean more than that. Like in the age of NIL and transfer portal, perhaps it means more emphasis on finding guys who fit the school and systems and getting more of those guys than the average coach might.

Stanford has traditionally tasked coaches with areas of the country to focus on. Is Taylor going to change this approach and have the position coaches who will be coaching the recruits be the ones recruiting them, or keep it geographic-focused? Or maybe a hybrid approach?

[msqueri]

msqueri, what kind of defensive talent was Wisconsin working with? Were they getting elite results from elite players? Were they coaching up 3 stars to play like 4 and 5 stars? Or just playing solid overall defense without standouts?

On paper Wisconsin's overall talent has been lesser than Stanford's virtually every year in this stretch. 247 talent composite numbers with Wisconsin listed first and Stanford second:

2015: #37 vs. #18
2016: #37 vs. #17
2017: #37 vs. #14
2018: #36 vs. #18
2019: #33 vs. #20
2020: #27 vs. #20
2021: #21 vs. #25
2022: #28 vs. #23

The big bump up starting in 2020 was in large part due to April's recruiting, as he hauled in composite top 200 OLBs Nick Herbig and Kaden Johnson, a level of recruit Wisconsin does not typically attract. And then in 2021 April brought in another composite top 200 edge player, TJ Bollers. Those three are a big part of the story in what drove up Wisconsin's talent. In general Wisconsin's talent profile has been high-profile OL and then 3-stars to fill out the rest of the roster. April added OLB to the list of 4-star positions but generally speaking Wisconsin is not a top 25 talent program on paper while Stanford is.

On the 2022 rosters, here's how on paper 4-star defensive talent compared between Wisconsin and Stanford:

Wisconsin: 5 LBs, 1 S, 0 DL, 0 CB

Stanford: 7 LBs, 1 CB, 0 DL, 0 S

The similarity between the two is striking. Hard to find a more similar defense talent-wise. That's a big part of why Wisconsin is such an attractive defense for Stanford to emulate.

For what it's worth, Stanford's 2023 roster looks like it will lose Herron and Turner-Muhammad and add Frausto-Ramos (and hopefully Leviticus Su'a but I'm not counting on that), so a slight tick down but with the core of the defense, all the 4-star edge guys, getting a year older (i.e., I think a year more of development for Bailey, Cooper, Tafiti, Armitage, and Aybar outweighs the loss of Herron). Qualitatively this seems like a slightly more talented defense, on paper, than either Stanford or Wisconsin's 2022 roster.

On paper is an important qualification as evaluation, strength and conditioning, development, and the precise picture at the 3-star level that primarily mans both defenses are all super important parts of the puzzle. It would stand to reason it would take April and Co. a few years to get Stanford in shape. While the answer to the basic question is that Wisconsin's defense does not have better on paper talent than Stanford, Wisconsin certainly ends up with better talent.

One way to test this is NFL draft picks, which provides an after-the-fact retrospective on the talent to complement the picture provided by recruiting rankings. In the five years from 2018-2022, Stanford had seven defensive players drafted: DB Justin Reid, DT Harrison Phillips, LB Peter Kalambayi, LB Bobby Okereke, LB Casey Toohill, DB Paulson Adebo, and DT Thomas Booker. In that same span, Wisconsin had 12 defensive players drafted: DB Nick Nelson, DB Natrell Jamerson, LB Jack Cichy, LB Leon Jacobs, LB Ryan Connelly, LB Andrew Van Ginkel, LB Zack Baun, DT Isaiahh Laudermilk, DB Rachad Wildgoose, LB Leo Chenal, DT Matt Henningsen, CB Faion Hicks. Stanford has consistently better defensive recruiting rankings yet Wisconsin has consistently more defensive NFL talent.

My bottom line is Wisconsin's defensive model is maybe the single one in the entire country we'd want to emulate. While I would have rather gotten the architects themselves - Dave Aranda especially but arguably Leonhard too, and certainly Leonhard would have been thrilling as DC - if we can surround April with D'Onofrio and Kolodziej we're getting at least a plausible consolation prize.

[msqueri]

msqueri, what kind of defensive talent was Wisconsin working with? Were they getting elite results from elite players? Were they coaching up 3 stars to play like 4 and 5 stars? Or just playing solid overall defense without standouts?

On paper Wisconsin's overall talent has been lesser than Stanford's virtually every year in this stretch. 247 talent composite numbers with Wisconsin listed first and Stanford second:

2015: #37 vs. #18
2016: #37 vs. #17
2017: #37 vs. #14
2018: #36 vs. #18
2019: #33 vs. #20
2020: #27 vs. #20
2021: #21 vs. #25
2022: #28 vs. #23

The big bump up starting in 2020 was in large part due to April's recruiting, as he hauled in composite top 200 OLBs Nick Herbig and Kaden Johnson, a level of recruit Wisconsin does not typically attract. And then in 2021 April brought in another composite top 200 edge player, TJ Bollers. Those three are a big part of the story in what drove up Wisconsin's talent. In general Wisconsin's talent profile has been high-profile OL and then 3-stars to fill out the rest of the roster. April added OLB to the list of 4-star positions but generally speaking Wisconsin is not a top 25 talent program on paper while Stanford is.

On the 2022 rosters, here's how on paper 4-star defensive talent compared between Wisconsin and Stanford:

Wisconsin: 5 LBs, 1 S, 0 DL, 0 CB

Stanford: 7 LBs, 1 CB, 0 DL, 0 S

The similarity between the two is striking. Hard to find a more similar defense talent-wise. That's a big part of why Wisconsin is such an attractive defense for Stanford to emulate.

For what it's worth, Stanford's 2023 roster looks like it will lose Herron and Turner-Muhammad and add Frausto-Ramos (and hopefully Leviticus Su'a but I'm not counting on that), so a slight tick down but with the core of the defense, all the 4-star edge guys, getting a year older (i.e., I think a year more of development for Bailey, Cooper, Tafiti, Armitage, and Aybar outweighs the loss of Herron). Qualitatively this seems like a slightly more talented defense, on paper, than either Stanford or Wisconsin's 2022 roster.

On paper is an important qualification as evaluation, strength and conditioning, development, and the precise picture at the 3-star level that primarily mans both defenses are all super important parts of the puzzle. It would stand to reason it would take April and Co. a few years to get Stanford in shape. While the answer to the basic question is that Wisconsin's defense does not have better on paper talent than Stanford, Wisconsin certainly ends up with better talent.

One way to test this is NFL draft picks, which provides an after-the-fact retrospective on the talent to complement the picture provided by recruiting rankings. In the five years from 2018-2022, Stanford had seven defensive players drafted: DB Justin Reid, DT Harrison Phillips, LB Peter Kalambayi, LB Bobby Okereke, LB Casey Toohill, DB Paulson Adebo, and DT Thomas Booker. In that same span, Wisconsin had 12 defensive players drafted: DB Nick Nelson, DB Natrell Jamerson, LB Jack Cichy, LB Leon Jacobs, LB Ryan Connelly, LB Andrew Van Ginkel, LB Zack Baun, DT Isaiahh Laudermilk, DB Rachad Wildgoose, LB Leo Chenal, DT Matt Henningsen, CB Faion Hicks. Stanford has consistently better defensive recruiting rankings yet Wisconsin has consistently more defensive NFL talent.

My bottom line is Wisconsin's defensive model is maybe the single one in the entire country we'd want to emulate. While I would have rather gotten the architects themselves - Dave Aranda especially but arguably Leonhard too, and certainly Leonhard would have been thrilling as DC - if we can surround April with D'Onofrio and Kolodziej we're getting at least a plausible consolation prize.

[gailtate]

The two things about Taylor's body of work as a HC that stand out the most for me are the ones most absent in the program he took over: player development* and productive deployment of talent on hand. In other words, what Harbaugh delivered immediately. If the new regime replicates those attributes, I'm satisfied.

*Skills, strength, conditioning.

[gailtate]

The two things about Taylor's body of work as a HC that stand out the most for me are the ones most absent in the program he took over: player development* and productive deployment of talent on hand. In other words, what Harbaugh delivered immediately. If the new regime replicates those attributes, I'm satisfied.

*Skills, strength, conditioning.

[BostonCard]

Kolodziej Is confirmed.

BC

[BostonCard]

Kolodziej Is confirmed.

BC

[msqueri]

On what basis is it assumed Bobby April is a great recruiter? I'm not denying he is, but I'd like to know what gives this impression.

Stanford has not been known for having "great recruiters" on the coaching staff of late, and I'm not even sure I know what this term means these days. It used to mean ability to land the top talents and beat our other top programs for coveted players. Now, it might mean more than that. Like in the age of NIL and transfer portal, perhaps it means more emphasis on finding guys who fit the school and systems and getting more of those guys than the average coach might.

Stanford has traditionally tasked coaches with areas of the country to focus on. Is Taylor going to change this approach and have the position coaches who will be coaching the recruits be the ones recruiting them, or keep it geographic-focused? Or maybe a hybrid approach?

The reputation is built in large part on being lead recruiter for Nick Herbig, Kaden Johnson, and TJ Bollers, a trio of OLBs that were a sea change in what Wisconsin typically is able to recruit. That's on paper. In reality, Herbig is the big feather in the cap. He's one of the best players in America.

Stanford recruiters rarely get named as great recruiters for at least three reasons. First, we tend to emphasize the school's attraction rather than anything football-specific, much less individual coach-specific. A lot of other schools try to recruit based on interpersonal bonds and that's not something we've done as much. Second, Shaw never emphasized recruiting externally and based on insider accounts didn't emphasize it as the all-important function for his staff either. There are other programs that have absolute dynamo recruiters who get coaching positions primarily so they can use their energy and charms to snag recruits. It's hard to think of many of these guys for Stanford over the years. Teevens had David Kelly, but that was a long time ago. Third, lists of top recruiters would rarely include Stanford guys anyway because our program doesn't have fans/interest so we're not really top of mind for those kind of lists. As a case in point, Bloomgren had a crazy number of whale recruits for one recruiter and would sometimes get excluded from such lists and I don't recall him ever being singled out as one of the top few recruiters in the nation.

In the past I've done detailed breakdowns of all of Stanford's assistant coaches and their recruiting prowess. We've definitely had individual recruiters who were relative standouts. In the Shaw era I'd put Mike Bloomgren, Lance Anderson, Lance Taylor, and Tavita Pritchard on top.

It's hard for me to imagine a recruiting model for Stanford that isn't some sort of hybrid in which the country gets divided up regionally among the coaches but coaches also play a key role in evaluating/recruiting their own position groups. Anything else seems pretty dysfunctional in the Stanford context. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to get data points over time of what Taylor's recruiting operation looks like.

[msqueri]

On what basis is it assumed Bobby April is a great recruiter? I'm not denying he is, but I'd like to know what gives this impression.

Stanford has not been known for having "great recruiters" on the coaching staff of late, and I'm not even sure I know what this term means these days. It used to mean ability to land the top talents and beat our other top programs for coveted players. Now, it might mean more than that. Like in the age of NIL and transfer portal, perhaps it means more emphasis on finding guys who fit the school and systems and getting more of those guys than the average coach might.

Stanford has traditionally tasked coaches with areas of the country to focus on. Is Taylor going to change this approach and have the position coaches who will be coaching the recruits be the ones recruiting them, or keep it geographic-focused? Or maybe a hybrid approach?

The reputation is built in large part on being lead recruiter for Nick Herbig, Kaden Johnson, and TJ Bollers, a trio of OLBs that were a sea change in what Wisconsin typically is able to recruit. That's on paper. In reality, Herbig is the big feather in the cap. He's one of the best players in America.

Stanford recruiters rarely get named as great recruiters for at least three reasons. First, we tend to emphasize the school's attraction rather than anything football-specific, much less individual coach-specific. A lot of other schools try to recruit based on interpersonal bonds and that's not something we've done as much. Second, Shaw never emphasized recruiting externally and based on insider accounts didn't emphasize it as the all-important function for his staff either. There are other programs that have absolute dynamo recruiters who get coaching positions primarily so they can use their energy and charms to snag recruits. It's hard to think of many of these guys for Stanford over the years. Teevens had David Kelly, but that was a long time ago. Third, lists of top recruiters would rarely include Stanford guys anyway because our program doesn't have fans/interest so we're not really top of mind for those kind of lists. As a case in point, Bloomgren had a crazy number of whale recruits for one recruiter and would sometimes get excluded from such lists and I don't recall him ever being singled out as one of the top few recruiters in the nation.

In the past I've done detailed breakdowns of all of Stanford's assistant coaches and their recruiting prowess. We've definitely had individual recruiters who were relative standouts. In the Shaw era I'd put Mike Bloomgren, Lance Anderson, Lance Taylor, and Tavita Pritchard on top.

It's hard for me to imagine a recruiting model for Stanford that isn't some sort of hybrid in which the country gets divided up regionally among the coaches but coaches also play a key role in evaluating/recruiting their own position groups. Anything else seems pretty dysfunctional in the Stanford context. Nonetheless, it will be interesting to get data points over time of what Taylor's recruiting operation looks like.