10-20-2013, 04:18 PM
From a Cal blog:Â http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/201...an-mannion
Oregon State Offense
pincemob
Unregistered
Unregistered
10-20-2013, 05:03 PM
This is going to be a tough game. If they make a FG and end up beating Eastern Washington, they are top-10 in the country and we would be underdogs. Mannion would be in the Voldemort race. They will be fighting for respect. It's a night game in Corvallis, a setting where their record is probably something like 30-3 in the past 10 years (total guess there, admittedly). We have never historically played well up there. I'd probably make the line Stanford -3.Â
This is going to be a tough game. If they make a FG and end up beating Eastern Washington, they are top-10 in the country and we would be underdogs. Mannion would be in the Voldemort race. They will be fighting for respect. It's a night game in Corvallis, a setting where their record is probably something like 30-3 in the past 10 years (total guess there, admittedly). We have never historically played well up there. I'd probably make the line Stanford -3.Â
10-21-2013, 11:34 AM
Oregon State cannot run, period. And Mannion can't scramble.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Cal, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Cal, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
Oregon State cannot run, period. And Mannion can't scramble.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Cal, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Cal, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
10-21-2013, 11:42 AM
(10-21-2013, 11:34 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:Oregon State cannot run, period. And Mannion can't scramble.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Low APR U, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
Nice to see a Stanford fan who isn't sheepish. You can't go more polar opposite than playing Cal one week and Stanford the next. I'd love to hear what UCLA players thought about the difference between playing those two teams.
Stanford played UCLA before Oregon State. Oregon State played Cal before playing Stanford. I don't know how Oregon State can possibly be ready for Stanford after playing such a marshmellow. If Stanford comes out and plays like they did against UCLA, this game won't be close.
(10-21-2013, 11:34 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:Oregon State cannot run, period. And Mannion can't scramble.
Their entire offense depends on Mannion finding Cooks or someone else open.
They've played Hawaii, Utah, San Diego State, Washington State, Colorado, Low APR U, and Eastern Washington, which must rank in the bottom five of toughest schedules in the BCS.
Is Stanford's defense can hold UCLA to ten points, they can shutout Oregon State.
Nice to see a Stanford fan who isn't sheepish. You can't go more polar opposite than playing Cal one week and Stanford the next. I'd love to hear what UCLA players thought about the difference between playing those two teams.
Stanford played UCLA before Oregon State. Oregon State played Cal before playing Stanford. I don't know how Oregon State can possibly be ready for Stanford after playing such a marshmellow. If Stanford comes out and plays like they did against UCLA, this game won't be close.
10-21-2013, 11:48 AM
The main schematic problem Oregon State presents are those blasted fly sweeps. While not exactly the same as the motions UW, Utah and UCLA have tested us with, some of the problems are similar. I could see that being an issue.
The main schematic problem Oregon State presents are those blasted fly sweeps. While not exactly the same as the motions UW, Utah and UCLA have tested us with, some of the problems are similar. I could see that being an issue.
ChicagoCard
Unregistered
Unregistered
10-21-2013, 12:21 PM
Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
10-21-2013, 12:34 PM
(10-21-2013, 12:21 PM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing Fitzgerald thinks Stanford needs to get a faster, quicker guy on the field to stop Oregon State's pass-oriented offense. He's probably right. Vaughters is a great run defender but doesn't bring much to the pass defense, either in coverage or as a pass rusher, though given Mannion is a statue compared to Hundley, Vaughters could potentially produce in that role. Still, Lueders is a better pass rusher. But Amanam, and not Hemschoot would seem more likley to replace Vaughters and Stanford will play base nickel against Oregon State since they can't run the ball.
(10-21-2013, 12:21 PM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing Fitzgerald thinks Stanford needs to get a faster, quicker guy on the field to stop Oregon State's pass-oriented offense. He's probably right. Vaughters is a great run defender but doesn't bring much to the pass defense, either in coverage or as a pass rusher, though given Mannion is a statue compared to Hundley, Vaughters could potentially produce in that role. Still, Lueders is a better pass rusher. But Amanam, and not Hemschoot would seem more likley to replace Vaughters and Stanford will play base nickel against Oregon State since they can't run the ball.
10-21-2013, 12:36 PM
(10-21-2013, 12:21 PM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
Hemschoot is more nickel back than 3-4 OLB in our defense so that won't ever happen. Vaughters just needs to cut down on the penalties. If he misses a tackle every once in awhile nothing you can do about that...
(10-21-2013, 12:21 PM)ChicagoOutsider link Wrote:Didn't want to start a new string so as this one is about OSU's offense, Tom FitzGerald suggests Stanford should bench Vaughters and replace him with Hemschoot (sp?). Does anybody take him seriously? It's on his game notes on sfgate.com. (If he'd said Lueders then maybe that'd be another thing.)
Hemschoot is more nickel back than 3-4 OLB in our defense so that won't ever happen. Vaughters just needs to cut down on the penalties. If he misses a tackle every once in awhile nothing you can do about that...
10-21-2013, 12:38 PM
The suggestion was that we were actually in the process of doing that, because Vaughters was a non-factor against UCLA, and actually may have been negative (since his penalty brought back Richards's TD). Here's what he said:
Quote:You have to wonder if outside linebacker James Vaughters is about to be replaced in the starting lineup by Joe Hemschoot. Vaughters missed a tackle on Hundley in the backfield, allowing him to escape for a 30-yard gain. Hundley isnt an easy fish to catch, to be sure. But Vaughters contributed just one assist on a tackle the whole day. Whats more, his holding call ruined Jordan Richards 55-yard TD runback of an interception. He grabbed guard Xavier Sua-Filo, who probably wouldnt have been able to stop Richards sprint down the sideline.
The suggestion was that we were actually in the process of doing that, because Vaughters was a non-factor against UCLA, and actually may have been negative (since his penalty brought back Richards's TD). Here's what he said:
Quote:You have to wonder if outside linebacker James Vaughters is about to be replaced in the starting lineup by Joe Hemschoot. Vaughters missed a tackle on Hundley in the backfield, allowing him to escape for a 30-yard gain. Hundley isnt an easy fish to catch, to be sure. But Vaughters contributed just one assist on a tackle the whole day. Whats more, his holding call ruined Jordan Richards 55-yard TD runback of an interception. He grabbed guard Xavier Sua-Filo, who probably wouldnt have been able to stop Richards sprint down the sideline.
10-22-2013, 07:36 AM
Feels to me like Vaughters is not living up to the potential that many of us think his physical gifts project. Continue to hope he develops more of the "instinct" to be a game changer (in positive ways . . . )
DIE LUFT DER FREIHEIT WEHT
Feels to me like Vaughters is not living up to the potential that many of us think his physical gifts project. Continue to hope he develops more of the "instinct" to be a game changer (in positive ways . . . )
DIE LUFT DER FREIHEIT WEHT
10-22-2013, 09:14 AM
(10-22-2013, 07:36 AM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:Feels to me like Vaughters is not living up to the potential that many of us think his physical gifts project. Continue to hope he develops more of the "instinct" to be a game changer (in positive ways . . . )
Based on the stats, Stanford's defense doesn't place a lot of tackling responsibility on the OLBs. Vaughters is averaging just about 3 tackles per game and Murphy only 3.5 tackles.Â
(10-22-2013, 07:36 AM)hurlburt88 link Wrote:Feels to me like Vaughters is not living up to the potential that many of us think his physical gifts project. Continue to hope he develops more of the "instinct" to be a game changer (in positive ways . . . )
Based on the stats, Stanford's defense doesn't place a lot of tackling responsibility on the OLBs. Vaughters is averaging just about 3 tackles per game and Murphy only 3.5 tackles.Â
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »