[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=CrazedZooChimp link=topic=15988.msg177159#msg177159 date=1477425116]
I don't think Chryst is going to solve anything. But as someone mentioned in a different thread (I think, or a buddy told me), people will think he's the solution when the level of defensive competition plummets for the 2nd half of the season. Our offense will look better, but I'm not sure it'll be because of any changes Stanford makes.

Most everything said in this thread, most particularly CZC, seems correct to me.

It is desperation.
We are desperate.
Burns looked slightly more specifically the problem vs Colorado than previously.
Chryst doesn't look like he is specifically the solution.
He'll look much better because the defenses we have yet to face seem to be the worst five defenses on our schedule. *


* with perhaps some quibbling about $C/WSU vs OSU.

For example, here are our opponents ranked by FEI defense
(from Football Outsiders)
KSU      #22
U$C      #66
UCLA    #18
UW      #10
WSU    #16
und      #57
Colo      #9
---------------------
Ariz      #98
OSU    #64
UO      #113
ןɐɔ      #103
Rice    #104

That's a pretty dramatic change.

[/quote]

Yes but you can't forget our first seven opponents have benefited from playing us.

Just kidding.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=CrazedZooChimp link=topic=15988.msg177159#msg177159 date=1477425116]
I don't think Chryst is going to solve anything. But as someone mentioned in a different thread (I think, or a buddy told me), people will think he's the solution when the level of defensive competition plummets for the 2nd half of the season. Our offense will look better, but I'm not sure it'll be because of any changes Stanford makes.

Most everything said in this thread, most particularly CZC, seems correct to me.

It is desperation.
We are desperate.
Burns looked slightly more specifically the problem vs Colorado than previously.
Chryst doesn't look like he is specifically the solution.
He'll look much better because the defenses we have yet to face seem to be the worst five defenses on our schedule. *


* with perhaps some quibbling about $C/WSU vs OSU.

For example, here are our opponents ranked by FEI defense
(from Football Outsiders)
KSU      #22
U$C      #66
UCLA    #18
UW      #10
WSU    #16
und      #57
Colo      #9
---------------------
Ariz      #98
OSU    #64
UO      #113
ןɐɔ      #103
Rice    #104

That's a pretty dramatic change.

[/quote]

Yes but you can't forget our first seven opponents have benefited from playing us.

Just kidding.

[CTcard]

Yes but you can't forget our first seven opponents have benefited from playing us.

Just kidding.

Even though you are kidding (which is appreciated), FEI is an opponent adjusted stat.

[CTcard]

Yes but you can't forget our first seven opponents have benefited from playing us.

Just kidding.

Even though you are kidding (which is appreciated), FEI is an opponent adjusted stat.

[Poly81]

It will be interesting to see if Shaw changes the QB AND the offense.  Chryst could look very good if the focus goes to a dink and dunk approach using McLovin and the tight ends.

[Poly81]

It will be interesting to see if Shaw changes the QB AND the offense.  Chryst could look very good if the focus goes to a dink and dunk approach using McLovin and the tight ends.

[washingtonismoney]

It will be interesting to see if Shaw changes the QB AND the offense.  Chryst could look very good if the focus goes to a dink and dunk approach using McLovin and the tight ends.

We haven't been using a dink and dunk approach already?

EDIT: the big difference that I can see between Chryst and Burns is Chryst's willingness to run in designed plays. But he doesn't look terribly effective at that either.

[washingtonismoney]

It will be interesting to see if Shaw changes the QB AND the offense.  Chryst could look very good if the focus goes to a dink and dunk approach using McLovin and the tight ends.

We haven't been using a dink and dunk approach already?

EDIT: the big difference that I can see between Chryst and Burns is Chryst's willingness to run in designed plays. But he doesn't look terribly effective at that either.

[Poly81]

An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

[Poly81]

An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

[washingtonismoney]

An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.

[washingtonismoney]

An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=Poly81 link=topic=15988.msg177192#msg177192 date=1477438702]
An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.
[/quote]

I'm more inclined to think limited YAC numbers across the board indicate a quarterback failing to put his receivers in position to run after the catch.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=Poly81 link=topic=15988.msg177192#msg177192 date=1477438702]
An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.
[/quote]

I'm more inclined to think limited YAC numbers across the board indicate a quarterback failing to put his receivers in position to run after the catch.

[French Rage]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=15988.msg177193#msg177193 date=1477438804]
[quote author=Poly81 link=topic=15988.msg177192#msg177192 date=1477438702]
An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.
[/quote]

I'm more inclined to think limited YAC numbers across the board indicate a quarterback failing to put his receivers in position to run after the catch.
[/quote]

Especially if they have to reach back for the pass, it doesn't give them any chance to hit the ground running.

That reminds me, in the second half there was a point where CMac got an open pass and looked like he almost had a chance to bust it open.  We don't seem to see that as much this year as last, I don't know if that's due to playcalling or more coverage on him specifically.  But he can do a lot more when we can fake out defenders one on one rather than having to do it through a wall of them.

[French Rage]

[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=15988.msg177193#msg177193 date=1477438804]
[quote author=Poly81 link=topic=15988.msg177192#msg177192 date=1477438702]
An excellent question.  I'm not sure what to call the current approach.

We were mentioning Husak in another thread, and he had an excellent observation: rarely any yards after catch for the receivers. To me this really suggests deficiencies in our WR group, which most had assumed would be at least good.
[/quote]

I'm more inclined to think limited YAC numbers across the board indicate a quarterback failing to put his receivers in position to run after the catch.
[/quote]

Especially if they have to reach back for the pass, it doesn't give them any chance to hit the ground running.

That reminds me, in the second half there was a point where CMac got an open pass and looked like he almost had a chance to bust it open.  We don't seem to see that as much this year as last, I don't know if that's due to playcalling or more coverage on him specifically.  But he can do a lot more when we can fake out defenders one on one rather than having to do it through a wall of them.

[Treebound]

Opposing teams have at least 1-2 players spying on CMac.  UofA will do this again to us this weekend.  Now that CMac and Love are reasonably healthy, I'm hopeful that Shaw and co are working in some plays where they are both on the field.  Faking to one and pitching or throwing to the other should cause some match-up issues and allow for some solid gains.    Play action should also help out, although Burns struggled with this last week as he couldn't find his receivers in time and seemed to jerk his head to locate them.    I'm glad we are trying Chryst and hope he does get into the flow and finds his confidence.  That first series will be a big one.  I'm thankful we are playing the MildCats as we should have a reasonable chance to score.  Ideally the defense scores yet again!

[Treebound]

Opposing teams have at least 1-2 players spying on CMac.  UofA will do this again to us this weekend.  Now that CMac and Love are reasonably healthy, I'm hopeful that Shaw and co are working in some plays where they are both on the field.  Faking to one and pitching or throwing to the other should cause some match-up issues and allow for some solid gains.    Play action should also help out, although Burns struggled with this last week as he couldn't find his receivers in time and seemed to jerk his head to locate them.    I'm glad we are trying Chryst and hope he does get into the flow and finds his confidence.  That first series will be a big one.  I'm thankful we are playing the MildCats as we should have a reasonable chance to score.  Ideally the defense scores yet again!

[needle]

I just hope Chryst gets the whole game. I don't want to see Burns at all.

Let Chryst get a full audition, then go from there.

BTW, I expect a very run-heavy gameplan.

[needle]

I just hope Chryst gets the whole game. I don't want to see Burns at all.

Let Chryst get a full audition, then go from there.

BTW, I expect a very run-heavy gameplan.

[cardcrimson]

I just hope Chryst gets the whole game. I don't want to see Burns at all.

Let Chryst get a full audition, then go from there.

BTW, I expect a very run-heavy gameplan.

I agree. Let him play the whole game. The first game of the season, Burns started 10 for 10 (IIRC), was pulled for Chryst for a couple of series, and hasn't been the same since. I wonder what would have happened if, well, never mind. . . .

[cardcrimson]

I just hope Chryst gets the whole game. I don't want to see Burns at all.

Let Chryst get a full audition, then go from there.

BTW, I expect a very run-heavy gameplan.

I agree. Let him play the whole game. The first game of the season, Burns started 10 for 10 (IIRC), was pulled for Chryst for a couple of series, and hasn't been the same since. I wonder what would have happened if, well, never mind. . . .

[fullmetal]

A good QB wouldn't be affected by that :p Sigh.

[fullmetal]

A good QB wouldn't be affected by that :p Sigh.

[CTcard]

EDIT: the big difference that I can see between Chryst and Burns is Chryst's willingness to run in designed plays. But he doesn't look terribly effective at that either.

Chryst throws a prettier ball with a shorter delivery.
Chryst does seem more likely to keep on the read-option, but not sure we have enough data points to be sure.
So far, Chryst looks more lost with the rush raining down.

Their PER ratings are Burns=122.6, Chryst=57.2.
Chryst has the worst PER of anyone who has completed a pass this season in the Pac 12 - but two WRs have gone 0-1 for PER=0.0.

[CTcard]

EDIT: the big difference that I can see between Chryst and Burns is Chryst's willingness to run in designed plays. But he doesn't look terribly effective at that either.

Chryst throws a prettier ball with a shorter delivery.
Chryst does seem more likely to keep on the read-option, but not sure we have enough data points to be sure.
So far, Chryst looks more lost with the rush raining down.

Their PER ratings are Burns=122.6, Chryst=57.2.
Chryst has the worst PER of anyone who has completed a pass this season in the Pac 12 - but two WRs have gone 0-1 for PER=0.0.

[82lsju]

email from the AD on the change

Inside The Cardinal: A New Starter Under Center

We have made a change at the quarterback position, and junior Keller Chryst will start under center Saturday for Stanford at Arizona. Our goal is to spark the offense to score more points, grow its consistency and protect the football.

It is folly to believe that the quarterback position is solely responsible for Stanford’s successes or shortcomings. Likewise, changing our starting quarterback is not a silver bullet.

We need better production from the quarterback position to help lead our offense. That boils down to a core set of responsibilities:

- Put us in the right play every down
- Make great decisions
- Throw the ball accurately and consistently
- Protect the football

Keller is a big, strong-armed passer who can throw accurately and make plays with his athleticism. The Stanford coaches and players are behind Keller, and that support is critical. Our offensive coaches are game planning this week to put Keller in a position where he can be successful. His mastery of the offense is not as advanced as that of Ryan Burns, so we are focusing the playbook to match Keller’s strengths. We also will leverage junior center Jesse Burkett’s high football IQ to help Keller make pre-snap reads at the line of scrimmage.

Playing better on offense and winning Saturday in Tucson will take a team effort. Offensive teammates also bea.r a tremendous amount of responsibility this week to improve their play. Receivers need to run their routes to perfection. Blockers need to protect the quarterback. The running game needs move the ball with consistency and put us in good down-and-distance situations.

The call this week is for everyone to tighten their belts and operate as cleanly as we can. The opportunity is exciting, and we are focused on what is in front of us.

[82lsju]

email from the AD on the change

Inside The Cardinal: A New Starter Under Center

We have made a change at the quarterback position, and junior Keller Chryst will start under center Saturday for Stanford at Arizona. Our goal is to spark the offense to score more points, grow its consistency and protect the football.

It is folly to believe that the quarterback position is solely responsible for Stanford’s successes or shortcomings. Likewise, changing our starting quarterback is not a silver bullet.

We need better production from the quarterback position to help lead our offense. That boils down to a core set of responsibilities:

- Put us in the right play every down
- Make great decisions
- Throw the ball accurately and consistently
- Protect the football

Keller is a big, strong-armed passer who can throw accurately and make plays with his athleticism. The Stanford coaches and players are behind Keller, and that support is critical. Our offensive coaches are game planning this week to put Keller in a position where he can be successful. His mastery of the offense is not as advanced as that of Ryan Burns, so we are focusing the playbook to match Keller’s strengths. We also will leverage junior center Jesse Burkett’s high football IQ to help Keller make pre-snap reads at the line of scrimmage.

Playing better on offense and winning Saturday in Tucson will take a team effort. Offensive teammates also bea.r a tremendous amount of responsibility this week to improve their play. Receivers need to run their routes to perfection. Blockers need to protect the quarterback. The running game needs move the ball with consistency and put us in good down-and-distance situations.

The call this week is for everyone to tighten their belts and operate as cleanly as we can. The opportunity is exciting, and we are focused on what is in front of us.

[HisKneeWasDown]

Seems like a desperation move.

Why? What wouldn't be a desperation move?

Two QBs were in a tight race for the starting job. One is struggling. So start the other. Seems like the safe move to me. Putting in a true freshman would be the desperate move.

The plays Shaw had called for Chryst this season have been terrible. Especially vs Colorado. Shaw's playbook is to have the "other" QB play a different kind of play. In Chryst's case Shaw was trying to make him some sort of option threat. But he's no Tim Tebow or Marcus Mariota. He's more Luck-like... More of a pocket passer first who can run (and block!) when needed.

[HisKneeWasDown]

Seems like a desperation move.

Why? What wouldn't be a desperation move?

Two QBs were in a tight race for the starting job. One is struggling. So start the other. Seems like the safe move to me. Putting in a true freshman would be the desperate move.

The plays Shaw had called for Chryst this season have been terrible. Especially vs Colorado. Shaw's playbook is to have the "other" QB play a different kind of play. In Chryst's case Shaw was trying to make him some sort of option threat. But he's no Tim Tebow or Marcus Mariota. He's more Luck-like... More of a pocket passer first who can run (and block!) when needed.

[dabigv13]

It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

[dabigv13]

It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.

[dabigv13]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15988.msg177223#msg177223 date=1477465104]
It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.
[/quote]
Understanding of the offense being limited versus understanding not as advanced is pretty much the same thing right?

[dabigv13]

[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15988.msg177223#msg177223 date=1477465104]
It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.
[/quote]
Understanding of the offense being limited versus understanding not as advanced is pretty much the same thing right?

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15988.msg177225#msg177225 date=1477470227]
[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15988.msg177223#msg177223 date=1477465104]
It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.
[/quote]
Understanding of the offense being limited versus understanding not as advanced is pretty much the same thing right?
[/quote]

His understanding being limited would seem to imply that it's not where it should be, independent of anyone else's understanding. Considering you specified "in his 3rd year," it's pretty apparent that was your implication. The email, on the other hand, simply said it's not where Burns's is. And considering Burns is in his fourth year, that's to be expected.

[ThePassionOfTheChryst]

[quote author=ThePOC link=topic=15988.msg177225#msg177225 date=1477470227]
[quote author=dabigv link=topic=15988.msg177223#msg177223 date=1477465104]
It's pretty damning that a player in his 3rd year with the program is described as having a limited understanding of the playbook. Damning of who or what I am not precisely sure, but that shouldn't be the case.

Are you referring to the email eric posted? If so, I don't see where it refers to his understanding of the playbook as "limited." It says that his understanding is not as advanced as that of Burns -- which is to be expected, considering Burns has had an extra year in the program.
[/quote]
Understanding of the offense being limited versus understanding not as advanced is pretty much the same thing right?
[/quote]

His understanding being limited would seem to imply that it's not where it should be, independent of anyone else's understanding. Considering you specified "in his 3rd year," it's pretty apparent that was your implication. The email, on the other hand, simply said it's not where Burns's is. And considering Burns is in his fourth year, that's to be expected.

[ATLCard]

Mastery of the offense is more than knowing the playbook.  In this offense multiple plays are called and the quarterback chooses the right play based on the pre-snap reads.  One would expect seven games as starter (plus the extra year in the program) would give Burns greater mastery than Chryst.  I recall the same dynamic of simplying/focusing the playbook when Hogan was named the new starter; worked out okay that year.

[ATLCard]

Mastery of the offense is more than knowing the playbook.  In this offense multiple plays are called and the quarterback chooses the right play based on the pre-snap reads.  One would expect seven games as starter (plus the extra year in the program) would give Burns greater mastery than Chryst.  I recall the same dynamic of simplying/focusing the playbook when Hogan was named the new starter; worked out okay that year.