Open Comments on the Army Game - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Open Comments on the Army Game (/thread-7779.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Open Comments on the Army Game (/thread-7779.html)
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - ChicagoCard - 09-13-2014
Kalambayi looked great late in the game.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - washingtonismoney - 09-13-2014
(09-13-2014, 04:54 PM)ChicagoVisitor link Wrote:Kalambayi looked great late in the game.
I'll leave it to the experts, but on those big QB runs in that final drive, did Kalambayi lose his responsibility there?
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - PrinceLightfoot - 09-13-2014
Loved the half time adjustments on offense and our defense is once again spectacular. Holding Army to under 200 rushing yards is really difficult to do.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - ChicagoCard - 09-13-2014
(09-13-2014, 04:56 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:[quote author=ChicagoVisitor link=topic=10632.msg98256#msg98256 date=1410652485]
Kalambayi looked great late in the game.
I'll leave it to the experts, but on those big QB runs in that final drive, did Kalambayi lose his responsibility there?
[/quote]
Even if that's true, he was a force on some big stops. And it's not as if he was in there on his own with the first string.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - Rally - 09-13-2014
(09-13-2014, 02:35 PM)82 Card link Wrote:TV showed army guys in full green camo with Stanford fans behind them in shorts sweating away in the heat. Weather.com says temperature is 82 F. Looked like it was a lot warmer than that in the stands.
Soon, many of those guys in green camo will be in 120 degree heat with a hell of a lot more than green camo on their backs. I don't know how they do it but they do.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - Hurlburt88 - 09-13-2014
No game comments from garvin?
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - oman - 09-13-2014
Pretty happy with that. Solid day at the office.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - fullmetal - 09-13-2014
Army could have kicked a FG to get on the board instead of going for it on 4th and 1 from inside our 10 yd line...such are the whims of college football.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - StanFan88 - 09-13-2014
(09-13-2014, 04:26 PM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:I am still not sold on the wildcat but TyM ran that one perfectly
I'm OK with a couple wildkittens per game, but they have to be run with motion or it's a blatant telegraph.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - StanFan88 - 09-13-2014
(09-13-2014, 04:31 PM)Publius link Wrote:I know it's Evan Crower time, but I'd like to see Ryan Burns get some snaps.
I'm not sure we will ever see that happen unless Crower gets hurt. Chryst will be the backup next season.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - fullmetal - 09-13-2014
Maybe Crower will follow Mason to Vandy. I hear the Commodores may need a QB...
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - stupac2 - 09-13-2014
I definitely thought we had a lackluster first half, but the second half looked like what we want to see from this team. If we can play like that the rest of the time, watch out.
Now we have two weeks to fix any lingering problems before heading to Washington.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - Rally - 09-13-2014
What I learned today.
The Oline is getting better but still aways to go. No holding penalties.
Hogan still stares down his receivers sometimes.
Seales is 4th string.
Cajuste is a beast (yes, he dropped a couple, but so did Ertz.)
Army has a very good place kicker.
Hooper is a future Ertz.
Cotton might be, too.
With the addition of Schultz next year this eill be an amazing TE corps.
Our defense hasn't missed a beat from last year.
Just Mho. Your thoughts?
[attachment deleted by admin]
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - fullmetal - 09-13-2014
Can't draw any conclusions on line blocking from this week as Stanford came into this game with a marked weight advantage. Until next week (assuming UW presents a fair challenge), I consider the OL play insufficient to beat U$C (which it was).
Hogan is still who he is. Made a couple of panic plays but generally didn't do anything bad...except for that near-interception by the Army defender. That could have been embarassing.
Cajuste is getting there--he's learning how to catch with defenders all over him (because Hogan can't consistenly lead receivers). If Hooper can use his speed to get open like he did today, we'll be in good shape.
Army converted a couple of fourth downs, didn't they? I would have hoped that the defense could have stopped all of those.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - JohnR34231 - 09-14-2014
Tough to read too much into this game because I really don't think Army is very good, a fact they will probably demonstrate as the season progresses. I think we have a good defense and an offense that needs to continue to improve if we are to challenge for the Pac-12 title.
Washington will be a tough test for us. Historically we have struggled in Seattle when the Huskies are decent, and I think they demonstrated yesterday that they are. The offense may have to exorcise its late fourth quarter demons.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - scorecard - 09-14-2014
The first half was a bit frustrating to watch at times (with the late turnover being the saving grace), but otherwise my only concern is that a successful fade route in the red zone will lead to more fade routes. Shaw's interview about Cajuste featured on ESPN's highlights suggests that we will. I hate that play, with the fade to Toilolo from Nunes at Washington on 4th down being the number one reason why. I hate that we would bring in Rollins Stallworth at times, all but telegraphing that we are going to throw the fade. I suppose when we pulled the greatest upset ever at USC, we ran 3 straight fade routes, the first 2 to Evan Moore before the winner to Bradford. But I still hate the fade. Don't hate the player, hate the fade.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - stupac2 - 09-14-2014
I'm hoping that they'll only throw fades when the defender is giving up 4 inches and 30 lbs to our receiver. The problem is that even then I still hate that play.
Has anyone ever charted it to see the success rate of fades vs all other offensive plays? My gut is that it's lower but I'd like to see something real.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - GoodGrief - 09-14-2014
(09-14-2014, 10:09 AM)garvin link Wrote:Quote:No game comments from garvin?
Sorry, had to go to a retirement party for an old friend. Watched the game later on my DVR.
I find it interesting that I feel like there's no official closure to a game (whether I've seen it on TV, seen it live, or missed it entirely) until after I've read the Garvincap. It's that weird, mentally itchy feeling like when you can't check your email when you want to. Nice job Garvin, making me a Pavlovian internet experiment.
Re: Open Comments on the Army Game - Stymie - 09-15-2014
zzzzzzzzzz.........
........just woke up from my Sep 13 snooze and see that we won the game decisively. Hooray!
As an inveterate critic of all the things that I love (Stanford, Stanford Football, Golf, Scotland, Burgundian wines, My Siblings, My Children and My Wife--not necessarily in that order....) I must say that I see rays of hope after parsing the available information of the 2nd half of the Army game, including:
--a relatively stable and competent Hogan
--more Sanders and McCaffrey
--a VERY solid defense, including the subs in garbage time
--Shaw keeping in many starters late in the game and closing the deal with a bang and not a whimper
--Continued development of the OL and TEs
An extra week of training and recuperation and a whupping of the Huskies might just make me a believer.....