The CardBoard
ESPN insider article - 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: ESPN insider article (/thread-10228.html)


ESPN insider article - stupac2 - 10-14-2015

This is a pretty good article if you have insider: http://espn.go.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/13887873/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-leading-college-football-playoff-contender-heading-matchup-ucla-bruins

There are a couple quotes from opposing coaches that are kind of throwing shade, such as, "They just have that one guy who can run, Cajuste. The rest of the guys are more like possession guys. So you play man against them, you've got a chance to get up the field." I'm not sure that's true, but whatever. Also called our OL "Not overly physical". It was weird that both of those were thrown in as positive comments.

Re: ESPN insider article - terry - 10-14-2015

Rector and Brandt-Sims both have the speed to get deep.

Re: ESPN insider article - CTcard - 10-14-2015

Well, I cannot read the article, I don't know what "you've got a chance to get up the field" means in terms of playing defense against us, and it would kind of seem that the guy transposed Cajuste for Rector; but I do think that if you have decent corners you want to play man against us and probably single cover. That would allow you to bring more guys into the box against our run game and maybe even have some help if the tight ends release.
Among the QB, RBs, TEs, WRs, and OLine, I do think that WRs are the weakest unit - and usually not used a ton.

Re: ESPN insider article - CompSci87 - 10-14-2015

I would guess "get up the field" is a misquote that should have read "get off the field". That's a current phrase that means the defense has stopped the opposing offense: the defense gets off the field, having gotten the ball back for their own offense. Getting off the field by letting the opposition get a touchdown apparently doesn't count.


Re: ESPN insider article - OutsiderFan - 10-15-2015

I'm very confident in my belief Rector is faster than Cajuste. Owusu can't be much if any slower than him either. 

Re: ESPN insider article - socalstanfan1 - 10-15-2015

(10-14-2015, 08:23 PM)CTcard link Wrote:Well, I cannot read the article, I don't know what "you've got a chance to get up the field" means in terms of playing defense against us, and it would kind of seem that the guy transposed Cajuste for Rector; but I do think that if you have decent corners you want to play man against us and probably single cover. That would allow you to bring more guys into the box against our run game and maybe even have some help if the tight ends release.
Among the QB, RBs, TEs, WRs, and OLine, I do think that WRs are the weakest unit - and usually not used a ton.

I guess you can bring safeties into the box against the run, if you just want to put LBs on the TEs.  And, frankly, if that's the way they want to play us, I'd be pretty happy with that.  Hooper and Schultz against LBs?  I like the chances. And with safeties playing up against the run...

Re: ESPN insider article - fullmetal - 10-16-2015

I guess the OL heard that talk about "not being overly physical."  They did quite a number on the UCLA front seven last night. 

Re: ESPN insider article - BostonCard - 10-16-2015

(10-16-2015, 02:15 PM)fullmetal link Wrote:I guess the OL heard that talk about "not being overly physical."  They did quite a number on the UCLA front seven last night.

Ummm yeah.  Meant to give the offensive line some much deserved.  On a lot of those plays, the UCLA linemen were getting pushed back four, five, and even more yards down the field.  The reluctant praise we got from USC and Cal boards (even though it was meant to be damning with faint praise) is telling.  They were truly dominant last week.  And, oh-by-the-way, they had a couple visitors at the game...

https://twitter.com/StanfordFball/status/655102722400632832

TWU is alive and well.

BC

Re: ESPN insider article - fullmetal - 10-18-2015

What do we call this year's installment of the OL?

Re: ESPN insider article - PalmTree - 10-18-2015

(10-18-2015, 06:20 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:What do we call this year's installment of the OL?

The ©Mac Trucks?

Re: ESPN insider article - winflop - 10-18-2015

(10-14-2015, 06:47 PM)stupac2 link Wrote:This is a pretty good article if you have insider: http://espn.go.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/13887873/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-leading-college-football-playoff-contender-heading-matchup-ucla-bruins

There are a couple quotes from opposing coaches that are kind of throwing shade, such as, "They just have that one guy who can run, Cajuste. The rest of the guys are more like possession guys. So you play man against them, you've got a chance to get up the field." I'm not sure that's true, but whatever. Also called our OL "Not overly physical". It was weird that both of those were thrown in as positive comments.

I think the facts speak otherwise.  How many catches of 20+ does Stanford have and who has them?

And what is Stanford's YPC rushing?  That's not all due to the skill of the RBs.