Training Camp Thread 2017 - 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: Training Camp Thread 2017 (/thread-13980.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: Training Camp Thread 2017 (/thread-13980.html)
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - Hank 91 - 08-06-2017
Looking forward to all the reports!
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - Hank 91 - 08-06-2017
By the way, UCLA's practices have been open, but fans have to watch from the top of a nearby parking structure. Better than nothing, I suppose.
I've posted this here before, I think, but I remember being on campus during spring break in 1992. It was Bill Walsh's first spring practice of that tenure, and a friend and I decided to check it out. Not only was it open, you could walk on the field amongst the drills. Kind of mind-boggling to imagine that level of access in today's day and age.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - SF_Cardinal_Fan - 08-06-2017
(08-06-2017, 02:29 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:Looking forward to all the reports!
I was hoping my 16 year old son might want to drive down and check out the practice, but he did not.
He plays on his high school football team and I thought seeing a Stanford practice might be informative, or inspirational, or something good, but it was not to be. We ended up going bowling, which was a little bit fun.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - winflop - 08-06-2017
I was out on the Stanford GC playing a Club Championship match (which I won in sudden death :) ). Looking forward to hearing a report or two on how our boys look.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - Spiny_Norman - 08-07-2017
RJ Abeytia has posted an open report - http://scout.com/college/stanford/Article/Stanford-Closes-First-Week-of-Summer-Camp-In-Front-of-Fans-105859972
The headline to me is that none of the QBs distinguished themselves.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - OutsiderFan - 08-07-2017
- Connor Wedington getting first team reps in 3/4 wide sets
- Malik Antoine impressing at CB in place of Meeks
- Fanaika at RG, not Tucker
- Little & Foster with the young guys, but dominating
- QBs and OL struggling, but Hamilton looking good at LT in place of Bright with 1st unit
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - needle - 08-07-2017
From the Chronicle:
Quote: Dalton Schultz caught 23 passes for 222 yards last year, and Scooter Harrington and Kaden Smith have drawn so much attention during the first week of training camp that Shaw said the staff will find ways to get the backup tight ends on the field.
Its especially impressive that the offensive players have made those kinds of impacts, because theyve been going against a defense that appears to have more talent than positions to fill.
The competition among inside linebackers Joey Alfieri, Mustafa Branch, Bobby Okereke and Kevin Palma created must-watch action during Sundays live periods, and the loaded secondary, which could have starting safety and nickel spots decided on a game-by-game basis, accounted for many of the days highlights.
http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-finding-its-new-identity-during-Week-1-11738382.php
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - qwerty49 - 08-07-2017
I'd like to know if Philips is constantly drawing a double team - and how the other DL are doing when that happens.
The descriptions of our offense, especially since it depends so much on QB and OL play, are not very encouraging. But I'm expecting a few 17-14 and 14-10 games anyway -- I'm just hoping we come out on the winning end of them.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - needle - 08-08-2017
Everybody is pretty much always going to be great in the Stanford-produced practice reports, but this one does mention Connor Wedington so...I think he's pretty close to a lock to play this year.
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/8/7/football-notebook-flying-start.aspx
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - Langdude - 08-08-2017
(08-06-2017, 02:32 PM)Hank 91 link Wrote:By the way, UCLA's practices have been open, but fans have to watch from the top of a nearby parking structure. Better than nothing, I suppose.
I've posted this here before, I think, but I remember being on campus during spring break in 1992. It was Bill Walsh's first spring practice of that tenure, and a friend and I decided to check it out. Not only was it open, you could walk on the field amongst the drills. Kind of mind-boggling to imagine that level of access in today's day and age.
Funny! We must have met. I was a regular at the rail during that time, watching all the new coaches trying to teach the team. I remember noticing how good "The Lynch Mob" was; it was such a rarity to have a good defense at Stanford in those days.
-m.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - 82lsju - 08-09-2017
Stanford will host its annual football open house Aug. 13.
Activities begin with an open practice at the Elliott Practice Fields beginning at 2:45 p.m. PT (start time subject to change).
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/7/6/football-open-house.aspx?path=football
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - OutsiderFan - 08-09-2017
Is there any word on Dalyn Wade-Perry, or on if Little and Sarell are moving up at all?
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 -- biggest weaknesses? - ADPATERSON - 08-09-2017
At end of 2nd week, what are the biggest uncertainties? Process of elimination:
1)Â TEs -- NO a BIG strength
2)Â WRs -- NO, enough talent back, new talent is good.
3) Speciaal Teams -- NO, Kickers look good, Bailey on punts. Coach Alamar is unsung genius.Â
4)Â QB -- if Chryst is back, then in decent shape
5)Â RBs --Â OK, lost Houdini McCaff, but running deep here.
6) OLine -- Concerns but solid talent in house. How soon does this TWU gel ?
7) DLine -- NO. Despite the grousing, this coild be a strong group.
8)Â LBs -- NO looking 8 deep, lot of talent.
9)Â DBs --Â NO, rated topsnin Pac12..
A lot of teams don't want to play us.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - donkey687 - 08-10-2017
The reality is that we have decent experience everywhere just less depth in certain areas.
The biggest risks to this team in my opinion are that we can't afford injury to Phillips or Love. There is a big drop-off between those two and their replacements. Over the rest of the roster, I think we have Pac12 quality replacements if someone else gets injured.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - fullmetal - 08-10-2017
I'm not yet bullish on QB and OL play. Agreed that Phillips and Love must stay healthy. The team is looking more solid everywhere else. Hope Turley's got the functional training regimen installed to ward off injury bugs.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - OutsiderFan - 08-10-2017
(08-10-2017, 06:02 AM)donkey687 link Wrote:The reality is that we have decent experience everywhere just less depth in certain areas.
The biggest risks to this team in my opinion are that we can't afford injury to Phillips or Love. There is a big drop-off between those two and their replacements. Over the rest of the roster, I think we have Pac12 quality replacements if someone else gets injured.
Disagree with Love being that important. Behind Love are Scarlett, Speights, Maddox, and then even Lund and Wedington. All the RBs looked good in Spring, and Lund and Wedington are elite recruits at the easiest position in football to play early. Behind Phillips is maybe Peek and maybe Dalyn Wade-Perry? Williams and Swann aren't big enough to play NT, IMO.Â
Stanford could lose Love and still win big. Lose Phillips and championship possibilities likely end.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - murky - 08-10-2017
(08-10-2017, 09:14 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:...
Disagree with Love being that important. Behind Love are Scarlett, Speights, Maddox, and then even Lund and Wedington. All the RBs looked good in Spring, and Lund and Wedington are elite recruits at the easiest position in football to play early. Behind Phillips is maybe Peek and maybe Dalyn Wade-Perry? Williams and Swann aren't big enough to play NT, IMO.Â
Stanford could lose Love and still win big. Lose Phillips and championship possibilities likely end.
I disagree with your disagreement. Love is special. I feel much better about him going into his first year as "the guy" than I did about Tyler Gaffney or Stepfan Taylor, and they worked out okay.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - OutsiderFan - 08-10-2017
(08-10-2017, 09:45 AM)murky link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17081.msg196879#msg196879 date=1502381686]
...
Disagree with Love being that important. Behind Love are Scarlett, Speights, Maddox, and then even Lund and Wedington. All the RBs looked good in Spring, and Lund and Wedington are elite recruits at the easiest position in football to play early. Behind Phillips is maybe Peek and maybe Dalyn Wade-Perry? Williams and Swann aren't big enough to play NT, IMO.Â
Stanford could lose Love and still win big. Lose Phillips and championship possibilities likely end.
I disagree with your disagreement. Love is special. I feel much better about him going into his first year as "the guy" than I did about Tyler Gaffney or Stepfan Taylor, and they worked out okay.
[/quote]
You honestly believe Stanford is more likely to win a championship if it has Love playing and Phillips not playing, than it is to have Phillips playing and Love not playing? Really? Seriously?
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - donkey687 - 08-10-2017
(08-10-2017, 09:50 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:[quote author=murky link=topic=17081.msg196884#msg196884 date=1502383522]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17081.msg196879#msg196879 date=1502381686]
...
Disagree with Love being that important. Behind Love are Scarlett, Speights, Maddox, and then even Lund and Wedington. All the RBs looked good in Spring, and Lund and Wedington are elite recruits at the easiest position in football to play early. Behind Phillips is maybe Peek and maybe Dalyn Wade-Perry? Williams and Swann aren't big enough to play NT, IMO.Â
Stanford could lose Love and still win big. Lose Phillips and championship possibilities likely end.
I disagree with your disagreement. Love is special. I feel much better about him going into his first year as "the guy" than I did about Tyler Gaffney or Stepfan Taylor, and they worked out okay.
[/quote]
You honestly believe Stanford is more likely to win a championship if it has Love playing and Phillips not playing, than it is to have Phillips playing and Love not playing? Really? Seriously?
[/quote]
I think the drop-off between Love and Speights/Scarlett may be just as big between drop-off from Phillips to Williams/Swan. It is a big drop-off in my opinion, and I think a stud running back is more important than a single stud DL. Loss of either would be very detrimental but I think the loss of Love would possibly be even bigger. I hope I am wrong and Scarlett is much improved from last year or new RB is much more productive than Scarlett, but I think Love is on a far different level than the rest.
Re: Training Camp Thread 2017 - murky - 08-10-2017
(08-10-2017, 09:50 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:[quote author=murky link=topic=17081.msg196884#msg196884 date=1502383522]
[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=17081.msg196879#msg196879 date=1502381686]
...
Disagree with Love being that important. Behind Love are Scarlett, Speights, Maddox, and then even Lund and Wedington. All the RBs looked good in Spring, and Lund and Wedington are elite recruits at the easiest position in football to play early. Behind Phillips is maybe Peek and maybe Dalyn Wade-Perry? Williams and Swann aren't big enough to play NT, IMO.Â
Stanford could lose Love and still win big. Lose Phillips and championship possibilities likely end.
I disagree with your disagreement. Love is special. I feel much better about him going into his first year as "the guy" than I did about Tyler Gaffney or Stepfan Taylor, and they worked out okay.
[/quote]
You honestly believe Stanford is more likely to win a championship if it has Love playing and Phillips not playing, than it is to have Phillips playing and Love not playing? Really? Seriously?
[/quote]
I did not say that. You disagreed with Love and Philips being placed above others at their respective positions. I believe that love fits into that class, of being more important than others, Like Philips. I in no way implied that Love is more important than Philips, or even that the gap is of equal magnitude.
Love has demonstrated obvious, game-changing plays in real games to go along with exceptional stats. That can't be said for our other options at running back.