The CardBoard
SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - 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: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford (/thread-3964.html)

Pages: 1 2

SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - fullmetal - 10-05-2012

It's a trap when an opponent springs new tactics against you and you're not prepared.

http://www.mercurynews.com/peninsula-sports/ci_21704761/stanford-football-notes-game-film-not-reliable-tool

Quote:"I don't really know who our backup quarterback is," Shaw said. "It depends on what we want to do. ... Who our backup is, it's inconsequential right now."

Coach Shaw, you had better know who your backup is in case of disastrous injury.  Just saying...there are better ways to phrase what you wanted to say.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - washingtonismoney - 10-05-2012

When I read those comments--the whole of the Kevin Hogan comments, that is--my immediate thought was, "Hogan's passed Nottingham on the depth chart." (Kevin Gemmell hinted as much in a chat this week, saying something like, "If they do make a change, Kevin Hogan will definitely be in the mix.")

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - fullmetal - 10-05-2012

We've seen Hogan already on the field this season.  But we'll only see him if Nunes struggles, I think.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - oman - 10-05-2012

It does seem odd.

"Well, it might depend on the situation.  All our quarterbacks brings something to the table.  Nottingham is solid and strong all around, Hogan brings some physicality that meshes with our overall team mentality, and Dallas Lloyd is a whirling dervish."

Make some lemonade, coach, if you are still undecided.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - Hank 91 - 10-05-2012

This might be a way for Shaw to make a change without making an announcement. This morning I was thinking that I'd like to see Hogan in the wildcat five times in the first half, with at least one passing play thrown in to keep the defense honest. Now, let's say those plays are successful? What if he decided to run five more in the second half and those were successful? Depending upon how Nunes did the rest of the time, that might be enough to light the fuse on a quarterback controversy, but it would be a non-threatening way to get a look at how the team might perform with a different quarterback without actually making the change. At that point, the decision would then probably take care of itself.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - StannyBoy - 10-05-2012

Shaw is just BSing the media. He knows damn well how he feels about every QB on his roster and what they can do. And I doubt Hogan would get the nod over Nottingham if Nunes went down with an injury. Last week they put him for one wildcat play so i wouldn't consider that to mean Hogan has passed Nottingham on the depth chart.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - OutsiderFan - 10-05-2012

That "it's inconsequential" comment does nothing to assuage the concern over Shaw's view of the QB situation.

As John Madden used to say, if you have three QBs you really don't have any.  Frankly, IMO, Dallas Lloyd is in reality Stanford's best QB right now.  He may not have a full grasp of the offense, but he's got playmaking ability, and it's hard to imagine the offense performing any worse with anyone else. 

Simplify the playbook and play your best guys.  It baffles me why so many coaches insist on playing the more experienced guys who know more plays better.  Plays don't matter.  Play makers do.

Chip Kelly certainly understands this.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - StannyBoy - 10-05-2012

I totally agree, simplify the playbook and play the most talented QB. And it isn't like we're running a ton of complex plays when we run Power 50% of the time.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - oman - 10-05-2012

(10-05-2012, 09:59 AM)Hank 91 link Wrote:This might be a way for Shaw to make a change without making an announcement. This morning I was thinking that I'd like to see Hogan in the wildcat five times in the first half, with at least one passing play thrown in to keep the defense honest. Now, let's say those plays are successful? What if he decided to run five more in the second half and those were successful? Depending upon how Nunes did the rest of the time, that might be enough to light the fuse on a quarterback controversy, but it would be a non-threatening way to get a look at how the team might perform with a different quarterback without actually making the change. At that point, the decision would then probably take care of itself.

Wise counsel.

Hey Outsider Fan - Extra Point - 10-05-2012

"Frankly, IMO, Dallas Lloyd is in reality Stanford's best QB right now."

What is your opinion based upon?

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - yvonne - 10-05-2012

That's what I as wondering. People have been cautioning those of us who have been judging Brett to be the better quarterback based on our. Views of limited open practices and the spring game. This view doesn't come from even observations of him in even those situations.

Re: Hey Outsider Fan - OutsiderFan - 10-05-2012

(10-05-2012, 01:21 PM)Extra Point link Wrote:"Frankly, IMO, Dallas Lloyd is in reality Stanford's best QB right now."

What is your opinion based upon?

Lloyd's H.S. highlight video is impressive.  He can run and throw, and he's a great athlete.  He has that 'it' factor in that he can make individually great plays.  It seems Lloyd is even bigger now than he was in High School, and he frankly seems better than every other Stanford QB.

My assessment from what I can gather:

Nunes knows the offense and makes good decisions, but is a terrible passer and not real athletic.
Nottingham supposedly is a good passer with bad judgement and average running skills.
Hogan is a good athlete but not a good passer.
Crower has no chance of ever playing at Stanford.
Picazo has no chance of ever playing at Stanford.
Lloyd can throw, run, and make plays out of nothing.

Re: Hey Outsider Fan - yvonne - 10-05-2012

(10-05-2012, 07:42 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Lloyd can throw, run, and make plays out of nothing.

against high school competition

Re: Hey Outsider Fan - washingtonismoney - 10-05-2012

(10-05-2012, 07:42 PM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Lloyd's H.S. highlight video is impressive.  He can run and throw, and he's a great athlete.  He has that 'it' factor in that he can make individually great plays.  It seems Lloyd is even bigger now than he was in High School, and he frankly seems better than every other Stanford QB.

Think you underestimate the mission effect. According to this article he actually lost 15 pounds on mission (http://www.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Stanford-QB-set-to-compete-after-mission-3777365.php), and he's listed at 199 on gostanford, versus 205 as a recruit. Of course the weight is secondary to the problem of not taking competitive snaps for two years. Can't find the article at the moment, but Shaw said after the previously-linked story that he felt Lloyd had some catching-up to do in that respect.

Not sure why Harbaugh liked Crower so much, offering him so early. (If rumors of his lukewarm reaction to Brett Hundley are accurate, it's downright bizarre. But a subject for another time...not that I'm bitter or anything.)

(10-05-2012, 09:59 AM)Hank 91 link Wrote:This might be a way for Shaw to make a change without making an announcement. This morning I was thinking that I'd like to see Hogan in the wildcat five times in the first half, with at least one passing play thrown in to keep the defense honest. Now, let's say those plays are successful? What if he decided to run five more in the second half and those were successful? Depending upon how Nunes did the rest of the time, that might be enough to light the fuse on a quarterback controversy, but it would be a non-threatening way to get a look at how the team might perform with a different quarterback without actually making the change. At that point, the decision would then probably take care of itself.

Brian Kelly has largely pulled this off with N.otre D.ame. Helps that he's winning, of course.

Re: Hey Outsider Fan - socalstanfan1 - 10-05-2012

(10-05-2012, 08:13 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=6594.msg49038#msg49038 date=1349491373]
Lloyd can throw, run, and make plays out of nothing.

against high school competition
[/quote]

Absolutely.  I recall seeing HS film of Hogan and thinking, "damn, he looks like Andrew Luck going against these guys." 

That doesn't mean he will look that way against better competition.

I honestly think that, at this point, Shaw would rather stick with Nunes, even when the offense is totally anemic (and lose a game as a result), rather than put someone else in and start a QB controversy.  The admirable spin on this:  Shaw doesn't want to throw Nunes under the bus, wants to keep boosting his confiedence, and understands that what we are watching right now are just the growing pains of a young QB.  The less-than-noble view:  he's stubbornly sticking to his guns, even when it is obvious that he has made a mistake, and doing so runs the risk of severely damaging the overall season.  (I guess option 3 would be a combination of the two: he's honorably defending a young QB who he believes in, but he's made the wrong choice.) 

We get another glimpse of this drama on Saturday.  As much as I love the D, I'm pretty sure against this team we are going to need at least a couple of TDs from the offense to get a W.  And glancing ahead a week, Nunes better do a lot of learning (and the receivers better learn how to catch them) before we go against a really good defense at ND


Re: Hey Outsider Fan - OutsiderFan - 10-06-2012

(10-05-2012, 08:13 PM)Yvonne link Wrote:[quote author=OutsiderFan link=topic=6594.msg49038#msg49038 date=1349491373]
Lloyd can throw, run, and make plays out of nothing.

against high school competition
[/quote]

Did you see his H.S. video?  My point is even if he can't be a super accurate passer in the context of the offense, he can certainly make plays and matriculated the ball downfield.  He has considerable elusiveness.  If guys can play they can play.  The competition may not have been amazing, but there are far too many examples of players coming from lower levels of competition and doing just fine, to use this reasoning to discount a players's ability.

As for his size, I was considering his height.  Didn't look 6-3 in the video I saw, but seeing him on the sidelines in a uniform, he does look 6-3.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - fullmetal - 10-06-2012

I don't think we're at the point where we throw out any faith in our coaches out the window--surely they'd play Lloyd if he were the real deal and could show it in practice.  Right?

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - oman - 10-06-2012

Stanford, more than most schools, represents a place where the highest acheivers come to see how they can better themselves.  I need to avoid the tendency to care too much about what Shaw says in public.  I'd like him to say things that please me but in the end the only thing that matters is what his players understand.

I realize that QB is different from other positions, although when you don't have an Andrew Luck, I still think you should treat it like other players.

I'm willing to accept that in practice and meetings, Nunes makes his case for being the best quarterback.  I think we are going to have to see a much more epic meltdown, a virtual panic attack, for Shaw to make a game day switch, and that is unlikely given Nunes personality and his ability. 

If Hogan were a transfer from Oklahoma who led them to a Sun Bowl victory last year, or Lloyd just got back from being on the US 4 x 4 sprint relay team, we fans might have an argument. 

But as it is, the proof is just not out there. 

I do like the idea of running some of the other quarterbacks out there at least 5-10 times a game to mix things up.

Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - OutsiderFan - 10-06-2012

(10-06-2012, 02:54 AM)fullmetal link Wrote:I don't think we're at the point where we throw out any faith in our coaches out the window--surely they'd play Lloyd if he were the real deal and could show it in practice.  Right?

I've already seen enough from Shaw to be skeptical of his ability to keep the Stanford program at the 10+ win level consistently, which is what it takes to be Top 5 in football and academics, as is Shaw's stated goal.

That said, I'm not suggesting Lloyd should be playing just yet.  However, I also do not believe college coaches universally play the best players.  As a California fan, I've seen numerous examples, including several this season, of that coaching staff not playing the best players, so I never assume the coaches will make the right decisions on who plays.  It is all too common for coaches to play guys who know the plays the best, but can't really execute them, over guys who don't know the plays as well, but can make plays, even outside the design of a play. 

The best example I have of this dynamic is Lawrence Taylor as an NFL rookie.  He was on the field for plays that called for him to drop into coverage.  Instead, he rushed the passer, and forced a fumble that was returned for a touchdown.  Bill Parcells pulled Taylor aside and told him he didn't do what he was suppose to do.  Taylor replied, suggesting Parcells needed to change the defense.  The bottom line is winning the game.  It doesn't matter how it happens, even if it means plays break down and playmakers make things happen out of nothing.  Of course, most coaches are control freaks and they hate the idea of players not executing their brilliantly conceived schemes and plays.  Many would rather play a guy they believe will most be able to execute their plays, so they know what to expect, than they would throw a guy out on the field who they don't know what he is going to do, but the team always wins with him playing.

To me, playing time decisions are a lot like in-game decisions, like settling for a FG in the final seconds of the Fiesta Bowl, or not going for it on 4th and half a yard against Washington from your own 40 yd line when you have a dominant defense, but your offense has to maintain some possession so they don't get worn out.  Football coaches are notorious for making bad decisions, and erring on the side of what they believe is less risky, when the reality often is that what they think is safe is most risky.

Great example was Ron Rivera (Head Coach of the Carolina Panthers) last week.  His team had a 4th and 1 from the Atlanta 44 yd line, with a minute and a half to go in the game against the Atlanta Falcons.  The Falcons' head coach, and every Falcons fan watching was praying for the Panthers to punt, because they knew if the Panthers made the first down, the Panthers would secure victory.  Rivera decided to punt, and even thought Atlanta was pinned down at its own 1 yd line after the punt, they moved the ball down the field and won the game with a last second field goal. 

Coaches make bad decisions, based on thinking they are lessening risk, all the time, particularly when it comes to punting and field goals, but also with personnel decisions.









Re: SJMN: Game film not a reliable tool for Stanford - oman - 10-06-2012

Hmm.

For some strange reason I just had the urge to put some of my retirement cash in stock.