08-31-2018, 09:55 PM
Did Swann ever go back in after getting shaken up?
SDSU Game Thread
Just back from biking to the game.
SDSU just gave USC and anyone else a blueprint for stopping Love. SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover. USC's secondary will not be terrible. We cannot be one dimensional against them the way SDSU made us one dimensional.
Our defensive line made some good plays, but broke down badly on numerous others. That inconsistency won't work against better teams.
SDSU's defense reminded me of WSU's last year in Pullman. They held Love to 69 yards and we lost. This was an even greater debacle--18 rushes for 29 yards. I credit Shaw for opening it up in response. I thought SDSU would back off and defend the pass eventually, but even when Costello was torching them they refused to budge. Shutting down Love was their moral victory, I guess.
There are some good things in this game, but I am less optimistic about this year's team than I was before the game. The O-line looked pretty good when pass blocking but seems to have forgotten how to run-block. It almost seemed as if they spent the whole summer improving their pass blocking technique but forgot to work on run blocking.
And all the chatter about SDSU selling out to stop the run--remember Shaw doesn't care. He thinks he has the personnel to run even against stacked boxes. Well, it didn't work at all today.
SDSU just gave USC and anyone else a blueprint for stopping Love. SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover. USC's secondary will not be terrible. We cannot be one dimensional against them the way SDSU made us one dimensional.
Our defensive line made some good plays, but broke down badly on numerous others. That inconsistency won't work against better teams.
SDSU's defense reminded me of WSU's last year in Pullman. They held Love to 69 yards and we lost. This was an even greater debacle--18 rushes for 29 yards. I credit Shaw for opening it up in response. I thought SDSU would back off and defend the pass eventually, but even when Costello was torching them they refused to budge. Shutting down Love was their moral victory, I guess.
There are some good things in this game, but I am less optimistic about this year's team than I was before the game. The O-line looked pretty good when pass blocking but seems to have forgotten how to run-block. It almost seemed as if they spent the whole summer improving their pass blocking technique but forgot to work on run blocking.
And all the chatter about SDSU selling out to stop the run--remember Shaw doesn't care. He thinks he has the personnel to run even against stacked boxes. Well, it didn't work at all today.
Just back from biking to the game.
SDSU just gave USC and anyone else a blueprint for stopping Love. SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover. USC's secondary will not be terrible. We cannot be one dimensional against them the way SDSU made us one dimensional.
Our defensive line made some good plays, but broke down badly on numerous others. That inconsistency won't work against better teams.
SDSU's defense reminded me of WSU's last year in Pullman. They held Love to 69 yards and we lost. This was an even greater debacle--18 rushes for 29 yards. I credit Shaw for opening it up in response. I thought SDSU would back off and defend the pass eventually, but even when Costello was torching them they refused to budge. Shutting down Love was their moral victory, I guess.
There are some good things in this game, but I am less optimistic about this year's team than I was before the game. The O-line looked pretty good when pass blocking but seems to have forgotten how to run-block. It almost seemed as if they spent the whole summer improving their pass blocking technique but forgot to work on run blocking.
And all the chatter about SDSU selling out to stop the run--remember Shaw doesn't care. He thinks he has the personnel to run even against stacked boxes. Well, it didn't work at all today.
SDSU just gave USC and anyone else a blueprint for stopping Love. SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover. USC's secondary will not be terrible. We cannot be one dimensional against them the way SDSU made us one dimensional.
Our defensive line made some good plays, but broke down badly on numerous others. That inconsistency won't work against better teams.
SDSU's defense reminded me of WSU's last year in Pullman. They held Love to 69 yards and we lost. This was an even greater debacle--18 rushes for 29 yards. I credit Shaw for opening it up in response. I thought SDSU would back off and defend the pass eventually, but even when Costello was torching them they refused to budge. Shutting down Love was their moral victory, I guess.
There are some good things in this game, but I am less optimistic about this year's team than I was before the game. The O-line looked pretty good when pass blocking but seems to have forgotten how to run-block. It almost seemed as if they spent the whole summer improving their pass blocking technique but forgot to work on run blocking.
And all the chatter about SDSU selling out to stop the run--remember Shaw doesn't care. He thinks he has the personnel to run even against stacked boxes. Well, it didn't work at all today.
08-31-2018, 10:22 PM
(08-31-2018, 09:36 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Not feeling all that great. It took two and a half quarters to realize the Aztecs we're selling out to stop the run. Still, how many play action passes did we call? As much as I want to see Love do really well, I was pleading with the TV for us to throw the ball. Every play.
Aside from the one drive, the D played great. Adepo (sp?) played lights out and was a surprise. . . .
Congrats on the win, but. . . .
I think Shawvita knew early on what the Aztecs were doing. It was pretty obvious when there are all eleven guys within 7-8 yards of the line of scrimmage. I think they wanted to get the running game reps, as part of using this game as a developmental game for SC. However, they stuck to that (too long in my opinion, as you point out), until it got to the point where they risked letting the game slip away if they didn't start exploiting the mismatches in the secondary (which I cannot recall a bigger physical mismatch in a college football game than I saw tonight between our WR's and SDSU's secondary. I almost felt bad for the Aztec DB's. Almost.) If I criticize Shawvita for anything, it is for not exploiting these mismatches earlier, while still not showing future opponents much (like having JJ run more go routes). Surely, that is a basic route, that doesn't show USC or anyone later in the schedule anything. JJ had the secondary beat for a TD on a go route in the first quarter, but Costello missed him. They still should have kept going to it regardless.
If the playcalling is still vanilla next week against USC, then the people criticizing the playcalling will have greater credence. But let's wait and see. I counted only one counter (run) the entire game (in the fourth quarter), and it was our best run the entire night (15+ yards). The plays were there if we were willing to show more, with SDSU's LB's crashing so aggressively. But when JJ and TE's are just bullying the DB's, why show much of anything?
(08-31-2018, 09:36 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Not feeling all that great. It took two and a half quarters to realize the Aztecs we're selling out to stop the run. Still, how many play action passes did we call? As much as I want to see Love do really well, I was pleading with the TV for us to throw the ball. Every play.
Aside from the one drive, the D played great. Adepo (sp?) played lights out and was a surprise. . . .
Congrats on the win, but. . . .
I think Shawvita knew early on what the Aztecs were doing. It was pretty obvious when there are all eleven guys within 7-8 yards of the line of scrimmage. I think they wanted to get the running game reps, as part of using this game as a developmental game for SC. However, they stuck to that (too long in my opinion, as you point out), until it got to the point where they risked letting the game slip away if they didn't start exploiting the mismatches in the secondary (which I cannot recall a bigger physical mismatch in a college football game than I saw tonight between our WR's and SDSU's secondary. I almost felt bad for the Aztec DB's. Almost.) If I criticize Shawvita for anything, it is for not exploiting these mismatches earlier, while still not showing future opponents much (like having JJ run more go routes). Surely, that is a basic route, that doesn't show USC or anyone later in the schedule anything. JJ had the secondary beat for a TD on a go route in the first quarter, but Costello missed him. They still should have kept going to it regardless.
If the playcalling is still vanilla next week against USC, then the people criticizing the playcalling will have greater credence. But let's wait and see. I counted only one counter (run) the entire game (in the fourth quarter), and it was our best run the entire night (15+ yards). The plays were there if we were willing to show more, with SDSU's LB's crashing so aggressively. But when JJ and TE's are just bullying the DB's, why show much of anything?
08-31-2018, 10:24 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2018, 10:41 PM by CardinalSagehen.)
(08-31-2018, 09:55 PM)CowboyIndianRedux Wrote: Did Swann ever go back in after getting shaken up?
Yes, Swann was back for the very next series.
However, at the very end of the game, I thought I saw Wedington in street clothes with a knee brace immobilizing his left leg. This probably explains why we didn’t see him on the field in the 2nd half. Didn’t look good. Can anyone else confirm?
As for the game, I was mostly encouraged in the end. We know that Love is great and the run game will be fine even though it stunk tonight. But we didn’t know that our DL would be able to stuff the run (eventually) and apply pressure to the QB against a very good OL. And we didn’t know how KJ would come out this season. People can say he was a little off, but in many cases he was under significant pressure and stepped up in the pocket at just the right times. He’s never afraid to let it fly, too, unlike our last two QBs. He continues to strike me as a gamer.
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2018, 10:41 PM by CardinalSagehen.)
(08-31-2018, 09:55 PM)CowboyIndianRedux Wrote: Did Swann ever go back in after getting shaken up?
Yes, Swann was back for the very next series.
However, at the very end of the game, I thought I saw Wedington in street clothes with a knee brace immobilizing his left leg. This probably explains why we didn’t see him on the field in the 2nd half. Didn’t look good. Can anyone else confirm?
As for the game, I was mostly encouraged in the end. We know that Love is great and the run game will be fine even though it stunk tonight. But we didn’t know that our DL would be able to stuff the run (eventually) and apply pressure to the QB against a very good OL. And we didn’t know how KJ would come out this season. People can say he was a little off, but in many cases he was under significant pressure and stepped up in the pocket at just the right times. He’s never afraid to let it fly, too, unlike our last two QBs. He continues to strike me as a gamer.
08-31-2018, 10:30 PM
(08-31-2018, 10:24 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:(08-31-2018, 09:55 PM)CowboyIndianRedux Wrote: Did Swann ever go back in after getting shaken up?
Yes, Swann was back for the very next series.
However, at the very end of the game, I thought I saw Wedington in street clothes with a knee brace immobilizing his left leg. This probably explains why we didn’t see him on the field in the 2nd half. Didn’t look good. Can anyone else confirm?
Don't know what the injury was, but yes, it was mentioned in the post-game that Weddington was in street clothes in the second half. No details on what he is "working on".
BC
(08-31-2018, 10:24 PM)CardinalSagehen Wrote:(08-31-2018, 09:55 PM)CowboyIndianRedux Wrote: Did Swann ever go back in after getting shaken up?
Yes, Swann was back for the very next series.
However, at the very end of the game, I thought I saw Wedington in street clothes with a knee brace immobilizing his left leg. This probably explains why we didn’t see him on the field in the 2nd half. Didn’t look good. Can anyone else confirm?
Don't know what the injury was, but yes, it was mentioned in the post-game that Weddington was in street clothes in the second half. No details on what he is "working on".
BC
08-31-2018, 10:37 PM
I also feel differently than some of the people that are concerned about the DL. I thought, for the most part, they set the tone in this game. When they were good, occupying blocks, we were good, and when they missed tackles (like on the disastrous TD drive that SDSU had), we weren't good. I think Mike Williams deserves a lot of credit at NT. Harrison was certainly the better all-around player, but I think Harrison was almost playing out-of-position out of necessity (i.e. I think he could have been even better than he was if we hadn't hit some lean years in terms of DL depth). Mike may not post gaudy tackle numbers like Harrison, but he occupies blocks and clogs lanes very well. He totally wrecked SDSU's 4th down and 1 attempt in our end in the fourth quarter to snuff out the Aztecs last chance.
Really glad to see him come back strong after the cardiac issues in the offseason.
Perhaps I wasn't paying enough attention to Paulson Adebo, but the secondary seemed untested most of the night. Alferi and Toohill seemed to keep making plays, along with Okereke on that absurd play to convert the safety.
Really glad to see him come back strong after the cardiac issues in the offseason.
Perhaps I wasn't paying enough attention to Paulson Adebo, but the secondary seemed untested most of the night. Alferi and Toohill seemed to keep making plays, along with Okereke on that absurd play to convert the safety.
I also feel differently than some of the people that are concerned about the DL. I thought, for the most part, they set the tone in this game. When they were good, occupying blocks, we were good, and when they missed tackles (like on the disastrous TD drive that SDSU had), we weren't good. I think Mike Williams deserves a lot of credit at NT. Harrison was certainly the better all-around player, but I think Harrison was almost playing out-of-position out of necessity (i.e. I think he could have been even better than he was if we hadn't hit some lean years in terms of DL depth). Mike may not post gaudy tackle numbers like Harrison, but he occupies blocks and clogs lanes very well. He totally wrecked SDSU's 4th down and 1 attempt in our end in the fourth quarter to snuff out the Aztecs last chance.
Really glad to see him come back strong after the cardiac issues in the offseason.
Perhaps I wasn't paying enough attention to Paulson Adebo, but the secondary seemed untested most of the night. Alferi and Toohill seemed to keep making plays, along with Okereke on that absurd play to convert the safety.
Really glad to see him come back strong after the cardiac issues in the offseason.
Perhaps I wasn't paying enough attention to Paulson Adebo, but the secondary seemed untested most of the night. Alferi and Toohill seemed to keep making plays, along with Okereke on that absurd play to convert the safety.
08-31-2018, 10:57 PM
(08-31-2018, 09:28 PM)pcgoode Wrote: Touch wood, but this is the best I’ve felt about the team after the first game of the season in many years. I saw positive things from every part of our game save the run game, and I’m not too worried about that...
This is funny, because I'm not sure I've ever felt worse about a 21-point win. I just don't understand how, against a clearly overmatched opponent, we could run so badly and stall on offense so many times. We also got bailed out a few times, what happens if Irwin doesn't force that fumble before half? We could have been staring at a 14-2 deficit at halftime...
I really hope Love and the run game can get going, because if that showing is anything even close to what we see going down the road we're in some big trouble.
(08-31-2018, 09:28 PM)pcgoode Wrote: Touch wood, but this is the best I’ve felt about the team after the first game of the season in many years. I saw positive things from every part of our game save the run game, and I’m not too worried about that...
This is funny, because I'm not sure I've ever felt worse about a 21-point win. I just don't understand how, against a clearly overmatched opponent, we could run so badly and stall on offense so many times. We also got bailed out a few times, what happens if Irwin doesn't force that fumble before half? We could have been staring at a 14-2 deficit at halftime...
I really hope Love and the run game can get going, because if that showing is anything even close to what we see going down the road we're in some big trouble.
08-31-2018, 11:23 PM
A few thoughts before going to sleep, that I may be perfectly willing to disavow by tomorrow.
1. Fanaika may have won himself a job by not playing.
-------
Actually Hamilton wasn't terrible (Sarrel had some struggles) and one of the biggest problems was SDSU simply bringing two more guys to the LOS than we had blockers. But the run blocking simply has to be better - much better. To keep some optimism I will assume that getting back two guys along the OL will help out.
2. Less extreme, but also thought Malik Antoine may have won himself a starting job by not playing.
3. While I am not sure what kind of offense SDSU has, I was tremendously encouraged by the defense, particularly the DL.
There was the one disastrous drive, but SDSU got little outside of that. That drive seemed to be more missing fits than being blown off the ball.
SDSU had 84 yds rushing that drive, 66 yards net the rest of the game.
4. The passing game worries me.
Even against single coverage, don't think we can crush many other secondaries with nothing but jump balls and back shoulder box outs.
But I have seen Costello hit receivers in stride, so hope he will be able to do so again.
5. JJAW is a man among boys.
That was ridiculous.
6. I see the promise in Adebo, if also a few frosh mistakes.
1. Fanaika may have won himself a job by not playing.
-------
Actually Hamilton wasn't terrible (Sarrel had some struggles) and one of the biggest problems was SDSU simply bringing two more guys to the LOS than we had blockers. But the run blocking simply has to be better - much better. To keep some optimism I will assume that getting back two guys along the OL will help out.
2. Less extreme, but also thought Malik Antoine may have won himself a starting job by not playing.
3. While I am not sure what kind of offense SDSU has, I was tremendously encouraged by the defense, particularly the DL.
There was the one disastrous drive, but SDSU got little outside of that. That drive seemed to be more missing fits than being blown off the ball.
SDSU had 84 yds rushing that drive, 66 yards net the rest of the game.
4. The passing game worries me.
Even against single coverage, don't think we can crush many other secondaries with nothing but jump balls and back shoulder box outs.
But I have seen Costello hit receivers in stride, so hope he will be able to do so again.
5. JJAW is a man among boys.
That was ridiculous.
6. I see the promise in Adebo, if also a few frosh mistakes.
A few thoughts before going to sleep, that I may be perfectly willing to disavow by tomorrow.
1. Fanaika may have won himself a job by not playing.
-------
Actually Hamilton wasn't terrible (Sarrel had some struggles) and one of the biggest problems was SDSU simply bringing two more guys to the LOS than we had blockers. But the run blocking simply has to be better - much better. To keep some optimism I will assume that getting back two guys along the OL will help out.
2. Less extreme, but also thought Malik Antoine may have won himself a starting job by not playing.
3. While I am not sure what kind of offense SDSU has, I was tremendously encouraged by the defense, particularly the DL.
There was the one disastrous drive, but SDSU got little outside of that. That drive seemed to be more missing fits than being blown off the ball.
SDSU had 84 yds rushing that drive, 66 yards net the rest of the game.
4. The passing game worries me.
Even against single coverage, don't think we can crush many other secondaries with nothing but jump balls and back shoulder box outs.
But I have seen Costello hit receivers in stride, so hope he will be able to do so again.
5. JJAW is a man among boys.
That was ridiculous.
6. I see the promise in Adebo, if also a few frosh mistakes.
1. Fanaika may have won himself a job by not playing.
-------
Actually Hamilton wasn't terrible (Sarrel had some struggles) and one of the biggest problems was SDSU simply bringing two more guys to the LOS than we had blockers. But the run blocking simply has to be better - much better. To keep some optimism I will assume that getting back two guys along the OL will help out.
2. Less extreme, but also thought Malik Antoine may have won himself a starting job by not playing.
3. While I am not sure what kind of offense SDSU has, I was tremendously encouraged by the defense, particularly the DL.
There was the one disastrous drive, but SDSU got little outside of that. That drive seemed to be more missing fits than being blown off the ball.
SDSU had 84 yds rushing that drive, 66 yards net the rest of the game.
4. The passing game worries me.
Even against single coverage, don't think we can crush many other secondaries with nothing but jump balls and back shoulder box outs.
But I have seen Costello hit receivers in stride, so hope he will be able to do so again.
5. JJAW is a man among boys.
That was ridiculous.
6. I see the promise in Adebo, if also a few frosh mistakes.
08-31-2018, 11:43 PM
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2018, 11:52 PM by CardinalSagehen.)
(08-31-2018, 10:57 PM)stupac2 Wrote: ... against a clearly overmatched opponent...
I would not minimize what a great and difficult win this was. SDSU has won 11, 11 and 10 games over the last three years, winning its conference twice. They beat us last year and finished ranked #25. They have a fantastic and highly tenured coaching staff. They have a massive and seasoned OL, mostly 300-320 pounders. They're crafty and unconventional in their defensive schemes.
This is a very good win against one of the better teams that we will face. We should put it in the category of games we should just be happy to chalk up as a W, without worrying so much about how it looked at times.
(This post was last modified: 08-31-2018, 11:52 PM by CardinalSagehen.)
(08-31-2018, 10:57 PM)stupac2 Wrote: ... against a clearly overmatched opponent...
I would not minimize what a great and difficult win this was. SDSU has won 11, 11 and 10 games over the last three years, winning its conference twice. They beat us last year and finished ranked #25. They have a fantastic and highly tenured coaching staff. They have a massive and seasoned OL, mostly 300-320 pounders. They're crafty and unconventional in their defensive schemes.
This is a very good win against one of the better teams that we will face. We should put it in the category of games we should just be happy to chalk up as a W, without worrying so much about how it looked at times.
09-01-2018, 05:11 AM
Pretty simple really. If a defense is dedicating eight to eleven players to stopping the run, it’s going to be really hard to run the ball. Shaw said the same thing in the post game press conference - he said he hadn’t seen anything like it in a long time. He then said something to the effect of as soon as he stopped be “stubborn” and started taking what the defense was giving them (the passing game), we started moving the ball pretty easily. From the POV of SDSU, it made some sense to try this, as last year we passed for something like 8-20, 80 yards.
(08-31-2018, 10:57 PM)stupac2 Wrote:(08-31-2018, 09:28 PM)pcgoode Wrote: Touch wood, but this is the best I’ve felt about the team after the first game of the season in many years. I saw positive things from every part of our game save the run game, and I’m not too worried about that...
This is funny, because I'm not sure I've ever felt worse about a 21-point win. I just don't understand how, against a clearly overmatched opponent, we could run so badly and stall on offense so many times. We also got bailed out a few times, what happens if Irwin doesn't force that fumble before half? We could have been staring at a 14-2 deficit at halftime...
I really hope Love and the run game can get going, because if that showing is anything even close to what we see going down the road we're in some big trouble.
Pretty simple really. If a defense is dedicating eight to eleven players to stopping the run, it’s going to be really hard to run the ball. Shaw said the same thing in the post game press conference - he said he hadn’t seen anything like it in a long time. He then said something to the effect of as soon as he stopped be “stubborn” and started taking what the defense was giving them (the passing game), we started moving the ball pretty easily. From the POV of SDSU, it made some sense to try this, as last year we passed for something like 8-20, 80 yards.
(08-31-2018, 10:57 PM)stupac2 Wrote:(08-31-2018, 09:28 PM)pcgoode Wrote: Touch wood, but this is the best I’ve felt about the team after the first game of the season in many years. I saw positive things from every part of our game save the run game, and I’m not too worried about that...
This is funny, because I'm not sure I've ever felt worse about a 21-point win. I just don't understand how, against a clearly overmatched opponent, we could run so badly and stall on offense so many times. We also got bailed out a few times, what happens if Irwin doesn't force that fumble before half? We could have been staring at a 14-2 deficit at halftime...
I really hope Love and the run game can get going, because if that showing is anything even close to what we see going down the road we're in some big trouble.
While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Agree 100%.
Agree 100%.
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw ever say "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude is that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Agree 100%.
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw ever say "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude is that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Agree 100%.
Agree 100%.
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw ever say "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude is that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Agree 100%.
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw ever say "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude is that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
09-01-2018, 06:22 AM
I dunno, we know JJ can crush guys with box-outs and jump balls -- he piled up 800 yards while missing 3.5 games last year. And while the box-out/jump balls were the successful play last night, there were plenty of times where more conventional route-running would've worked (e.g. the first and second drives where it looked like KJ and Smith + JJAW were on entirely different pages). So I think it'll be fine in the passing game.
I dunno, we know JJ can crush guys with box-outs and jump balls -- he piled up 800 yards while missing 3.5 games last year. And while the box-out/jump balls were the successful play last night, there were plenty of times where more conventional route-running would've worked (e.g. the first and second drives where it looked like KJ and Smith + JJAW were on entirely different pages). So I think it'll be fine in the passing game.
09-01-2018, 06:53 AM
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Well that's certainly a positive development.
(09-01-2018, 05:34 AM)81alum Wrote: While I said above that I was a little less optimistic about the team following the game than I was before, I have to say that Shaw's press conference encouraged me:
https://247sports.com/college/stanford/A...121255760/
Reading between the lines, it was Tavita who convinced him to "stop being stubborn" and take advantage of the single coverage on JJAW. I don't think I've ever heard Shaw express this attitude: "If someone wants to take a way a part of our game, great, we shift our focus, and we find a way to take advantage of that." Instead, the attitude has been that it is all about our team, and if we execute properly we can run the ball against any scheme, any team, any time. That was part of the "impose our will" stubbornness that has been his trademark. This "take what they give you" attitude sounds a lot more like the Walsh era.
It sounds to me as if Tavita, unlike the former line coach Bloomgren, is bringing a different attitude to the offense. I know it is early, but Shaw-Pritchard already feels different to me than Shaw-Bloomgren.
Well that's certainly a positive development.
(08-31-2018, 10:13 PM)81alum Wrote: SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover.
I disagree. I don't think they were terrible at all. I think there are few, if any, secondary units that can take on our receiving corps in Cover-1/Cover-0 which is what putting 8 or 9 in the box forces you to do.
This offense has more weapons than last year, but last year the OL could steamroll even against 8 in the box. Last night the OL couldn't get that done at all.
(08-31-2018, 10:13 PM)81alum Wrote: SDSU's secondary was terrible, and they could not possibly cover our receivers adequately when in single cover.
I disagree. I don't think they were terrible at all. I think there are few, if any, secondary units that can take on our receiving corps in Cover-1/Cover-0 which is what putting 8 or 9 in the box forces you to do.
This offense has more weapons than last year, but last year the OL could steamroll even against 8 in the box. Last night the OL couldn't get that done at all.
09-01-2018, 09:54 AM
Oh, and we didn't have one delay of game penalty!
Put a glide in your stride and a dip in your hip.
09-01-2018, 11:17 AM
Since I was going to the game, I didn't pay attention to what network was carrying it. Pac 12 and ESPN always have ways of watching a game after-the-fact. I see now it was on Fox. Is there a "replay" option for games broadcast on Fox, as there is for ESPN? In other words, since I didn't record it, how can I watch it?
Since I was going to the game, I didn't pay attention to what network was carrying it. Pac 12 and ESPN always have ways of watching a game after-the-fact. I see now it was on Fox. Is there a "replay" option for games broadcast on Fox, as there is for ESPN? In other words, since I didn't record it, how can I watch it?
09-01-2018, 12:05 PM
(09-01-2018, 11:17 AM)81alum Wrote: Since I was going to the game, I didn't pay attention to what network was carrying it. Pac 12 and ESPN always have ways of watching a game after-the-fact. I see now it was on Fox. Is there a "replay" option for games broadcast on Fox, as there is for ESPN? In other words, since I didn't record it, how can I watch it?
Sorry, I posted earlier and needed to correct my response. One way is to use the Fox Sports GO app (not the Fox Sports app). The game replay is available for streaming there currently. You will need to authenticate with your TV provider credentials (e.g., Xfinity).
(09-01-2018, 11:17 AM)81alum Wrote: Since I was going to the game, I didn't pay attention to what network was carrying it. Pac 12 and ESPN always have ways of watching a game after-the-fact. I see now it was on Fox. Is there a "replay" option for games broadcast on Fox, as there is for ESPN? In other words, since I didn't record it, how can I watch it?
Sorry, I posted earlier and needed to correct my response. One way is to use the Fox Sports GO app (not the Fox Sports app). The game replay is available for streaming there currently. You will need to authenticate with your TV provider credentials (e.g., Xfinity).
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »