Husak - Printable Version

Husak - 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: Husak (/thread-18348.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

Husak - Phogge - 10-18-2019

I got cold and bored last night plus I had a 2.5 hour drive to make. Left in the 3rdQ. At the midway point in the Fourth Q Husak said, "Stanford quit." Holy moly. When Platz interviewed Shaw the coach got riled and said that he had done Ok at Stanford and he knew what to do. Obviously a small crack in his armor.

RE: Husak - winflop - 10-18-2019

Shaw was salty in the postgame press conference too. He's clearly not happy but I'm sick of him throwing his players under the bus and not putting enough responsibility on himself and his staff.

RE: Husak - Goose - 10-18-2019

I went back and listened again to Shaw's remarks. While he didn't take enough responsibility in the introductory remarks IMHO, he did later on point out the coach's responsibilities and failures to do so. I don't see him as throwing the team under the bus at all. Note that he always says "we" when he described a problem. He doesn't use the third person. That is an important point. I hear him describing what happened, which is just being honest. We didn't play well. All of us. I actually respect that. Other coaches say "It is on me." when you know that they don't mean it. They then refuse to enumerate what was actually done wrong, hiding under generalizations. Shaw says "We didn't do X well". That is just the truth.

Leach OTOH makes third-person criticism of his players actions and attitudes. That is throwing the players under the bus. They failed and are soft. Shaw simply states what "We" didn't do. He doesn't make pejorative remarks about individual's performance or character.

Did Stanford quit? I don't know. What do others think? We played so badly, I am not sure how you tell the difference.

RE: Husak - cardcrimson - 10-18-2019

Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

RE: Husak - PAsportsfan - 10-18-2019

Stanford quit with that punt from the 30? with 8:00? remaining.

I wish UCLA back in 2005? in the old stadium down 15/16? with 8:00? remaining would have quit. They didn't quit and won the game in OT.

UCLA was down 24-3 with 8 minutes left.

QUARTERBACK DREW OLSON
On the comeback victory
"That's just finding a way to win. We played horrible football for three, really three and a half quarters there was no doubt. You go down 24-3 with eight minutes left and you think it's over. These guys I tell you what, they fight. There's more heart in this team than I've ever seen."

RE: Husak - chrisk - 10-18-2019

Northwestern went up against Ohio State tonight with its 3rd string QB and got crushed 52-3.
Good thing Stanford did not play Ohio State last night and that there is no team like it in the Pac-12.

RE: Husak - winflop - 10-19-2019

(10-18-2019, 05:10 PM)Goose Wrote: I went back and listened again to Shaw's remarks. While he didn't take enough responsibility in the introductory remarks IMHO, he did later on point out the coach's responsibilities and failures to do so. I don't see him as throwing the team under the bus at all.

And every example he gave was players not making plays. No mention of failures in preparation, gameplan, playcalling, etc. Sorry I'm not cutting him any slack. He has a track record of being too damn stubborn and not willing to look in the mirror. I know he's frustrated with this year but I think he's putting way too much blame on the players and I'm really unhappy about it

RE: Husak - GK3 - 10-19-2019

(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

RE: Husak - Goose - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote: Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Totally agree. UW also has a slower DL than UCLA. We were having trouble with their quickness. That has been a recurring theme for awhile. WSU has successfully used lighter players that move around a lot to create situations where we have offensive linemen that end up blocking nobody at all. That for sure creates a mismatch. UCLA did that, and we will see more of it until we demonstrate we can overcome it. It is certain that West reacted more slowly to situations than a more experienced QB would have. That didn't help, but it wasn't the main problem. Arizona has a small but quick DL. We need to fix this fast, no matter who the QB is next week.

RE: Husak - cardcrimson - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote:
(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Alabama has 4 frosh starting on the front 7. They're not getting pushed around.

RE: Husak - 76lsjumb - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 11:43 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:
(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote:
(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Alabama has 4 frosh starting on the front 7. They're not getting pushed around.

And how many of them were admitted to Stanford?

RE: Husak - PAsportsfan - 10-19-2019

[/quote]

And how many of them were admitted to Stanford?
[/quote]

The real question is how many of those were offered?

Need to recruit with EUTM...

RE: Husak - cardcrimson - 10-19-2019

And what exactly is your point?

(10-19-2019, 12:00 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:
(10-19-2019, 11:43 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:
(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote:
(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Alabama has 4 frosh starting on the front 7. They're not getting pushed around.

And how many of them were admitted to Stanford?

RE: Husak - SamuelMcF - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 12:54 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: And what exactly is your point?

Finding academically-qualified 4/5* defensive linemen is really, really hard?

Not to mention when we DO see them, we slow play and ND usually gets them because their track record with DL is so much better...

RE: Husak - CornFed - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 12:54 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: And what exactly is your point?

(10-19-2019, 12:00 PM)76lsjumb Wrote:
(10-19-2019, 11:43 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:
(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote:
(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Alabama has 4 frosh starting on the front 7. They're not getting pushed around.

And how many of them were admitted to Stanford?

I find it hard to believe you don't understand the point. A Solomon Thomas comes around to Stanford about once every five or ten years. Alabama recruits two of him every year.

lex24 - lex24 - 10-19-2019

Alabama? Give me a flipping break. They have the No 1 recruiting class in the country every year. Their second team would win the Pac 12.

quote="cardcrimson" pid='258435' dateline='1571510602']

(10-19-2019, 08:14 AM)GK3 Wrote:
(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

Not sure they were resting on their press clippings, more playing the level one would expect where 3 or 4 players on your offensive line were playing high school ball last year. Their strength and technique is a long ways from where it will be in the future ( I hope). We saw what we should have seen the week before. For whatever reason, Washington didn't sell out on every play to rush the passer. UCLA did and basically West seldom had any real time to find his receivers and throw the ball. My guess is that we saw what we will see every game from here on out and teams will stick with it until we show we can make them play for doing it.

I am not sure there is any system we could have run that would have enabled us to fare better.

Alabama has 4 frosh starting on the front 7. They're not getting pushed around.
[/quote]

The main difference in Wash and UCLA is not very darn hard to pinpoint. Mills vs West. Capice?
That coupled with the fact that they ran well against Wash but couldn’t versus UCLA. See point 1.

As for Husak, hes a damn good analyst when he wants to be. The rest of the time he spews sarcasm. And whines. It got old a while ago.
Maybe it’s time for him to get out of the booth and coach. He could be very good. And I mean that.

Wow. And you know this how? You compared pre Wash practices with Post Wash practices? Sat in on team meetings?

Maybe you are right. Maybe they kicked back after that game and lighten up practices etc. Maybe they sat around discussing how great they were smoked a bunch of fine cigars while sipping Don Perignon. Gawd knows Shaw has a big head. Has no idea how to handle success. Such arrogance.

BTW, Mills didn’t play.

(10-18-2019, 06:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Did Stanford quit. No. They rested on the press clippings after the "monumental" win over the Huskies. Shaw was reaffirmed as brilliant, as was the staff. The O'Line was amazing, especially as they were so young. The D was once again stellar. Mills development was confirmed. Wrong-O Mary Lou.

lex24 - lex24 - 10-19-2019

Oh, and then there’s the “he doesn’t take responsibility” bit. Hear it after damn near every loss. I guess Sepuku is in order.

Folks, maybe it’s cause I went to The University of California at Berkeley. (I spell it out so that absurd childish spelling thing doesn’t happen.). Some of my college buddies would give their left nut to have a coach that led them to one much less than three Rose Bowls.

The lack of respect for a guy that has only been the most successful coach in Stanford history is amazing. Hell even the good comments about Shaw are usually damning with faint praise. You know the bit: “I like Shaw, he’s a great representative of the University”.

If only he could coach....

RE: Husak - Phogge - 10-19-2019

Bob, Alzheimer’s happens. There is also coaching dementia. It has extended to QB development and recruiting. Other than that, well.... Shaw is a great rep of the U.

LOL.

RE: Husak - Mick - 10-19-2019

I think one of the five starting freshmen could have made Stanford's team:

DE, DJ Dale. Has to be pushed to make grades. Offers from Clemson, Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Tennessee State. His HS was 203rd ranked in Alabama, 56% of students below poverty line. Early entry in spring.

NG, Justin Egoigbe. A's and B's in HS. offers from Mississippi State, Kentucky, Georgia, Alabama. Interest from Auburn & Florida. interest in Tennessee, Oklahoma and Notre Dame. Lots of family in Alabama.

MLB, Shane Lee. Straight A's, member National Honor Society. Mom has three college degrees, cybersecurity expert.

WLB, Christian Harris, HS ranked 11th in Louisiana. Interest from 28 high schools, no "academic" schools except Texas, interest from Arizona and ASU in Pac 12.

Also, Evan Neal, LG is a frosh. Alabama, Florida State, Georgia, Miami and Oklahoma.

RE: lex24 - winflop - 10-19-2019

(10-19-2019, 02:06 PM)lex24 Wrote: Oh, and then there’s the “he doesn’t take responsibility” bit. Hear it after damn near every loss. I guess Sepuku is in order.

I didn't hear it until this season, and it's happened in three of the four losses.

Shaw has been a great coach, but I'm not convinced he still is one. He needs to adapt to changes in the game, and he desperately needs some fresh ideas injected into the program that won't come if he keeps promoting from within.